Headsup: Preparatory to some serious press releases, we are siphoning off some front-page content to new pages, on these lines. For example Netflix and Hachette (Malcolm Gladwell) each have their own page. See how the order of the posts is reversed to read like a book. More such pages and navigation to come.

Sunday, January 16, 2022

Correcting NY Times 18: How Jessica Bennett Lied By Omission About Knox’s Book #2

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


Knox’s 2013 book not only included myriad examples of her trademark demonizations, none of which Jessica Bennett was curious about. It also included several instances of diffamazione, such as this one, false accusations to throw an ongoing judicial process - as post 17 in the Bennett repudiation series explained, a repeat of Knox’s and Sollecito’s first appeal was just months away and the final Supreme Court still two years away. First posted here as a question for Knox back in 2013.

Yet Another Damning Question For Knox

Why exactly did you frame your kindly employer Patrick for the crime?

Even the hapless Judge Hellmann, who seemed to try so hard (at his own cost - he is now forcibly retired) to have things break your way, didn’t believe anyone ever forced or tricked you into framing Patrick for the crime.

Accordingly you served three years in Capanne Prison, and in March the Supreme Court threw out your final appeal over that. You now have a felony record for life, as well as a proven tendency to lie which every Italian knows about. 

And yet you head off down the exact-same slippery slope again in so many places in your obnoxiously self-aggrandizing book. Periodically, you make easily-nailed felonious claims, as here.

Quote From The Knox Book 2013

Here on pages 90-92 you describe word for word the questioning by Prosecutor Mignini at your first (witness) interview on the night of 5-6 Nov.

[This is the voluntary witness interview.] Eventually they told me the pubblico ministero would be coming in.

I didn’t know this translated as prosecutor, or that this was the magistrate that Rita Ficarra had been referring to a few days earlier when she said they’d have to wait to see what he said, to see if I could go to Germany.

I thought the “public minister” was the mayor or someone in a similarly high “public” position in the town and that somehow he would help me.

They said, “You need to talk to the pubblico ministero about what you remember.”

I told them, “I don’t feel like this is remembering. I’m really confused right now.” I even told them, “I don’t remember this. I can imagine this happening, and I’m not sure if it’s a memory or if I’m making this up, but this is what’s coming to mind and I don’t know. I just don’t know.”

They said, “Your memories will come back. It’s the truth. Just wait and your memories will come back.”

The pubblico ministero came in.

Before he started questioning me, I said, “Look, I’m really confused, and I don’t know what I’m remembering, and it doesn’t seem right.”

One of the other police officers said, “We’ll work through it.”

Despite the emotional sieve I’d just been squeezed through, it occurred to me that I was a witness and this was official testimony, that maybe I should have a lawyer. “Do I need a lawyer?” I asked.

He said, “No, no, that will only make it worse. It will make it seem like you don’t want to help us.”

It was a much more solemn, official affair than my earlier questioning had been, though the pubblico ministero was asking me the same questions as before: “What happened? What did you see?”

    I said, “I didn’t see anything.”

    “What do you mean you didn’t see anything? When did you meet him?”

    “I don’t know,” I said.

    “Where did you meet him?”

    “I think by the basketball court.” I had imagined the basketball court in Piazza Grimana, just across the street from the University for Foreigners.

    “I have an image of the basketball court in Piazza Grimana near my house.”

    “What was he wearing?”

    “I don’t know.”

    “Was he wearing a jacket?”

    “I think so.”

    “What color was it?”

    “I think it was brown.”

    “What did he do?”

    “I don’t know.”

    “What do you mean you don’t know?”

    “I’m confused!”

    “Are you scared of him?”

    “I guess.”

I felt as if I were almost in a trance. The pubblico ministero led me through the scenario, and I meekly agreed to his suggestions.

    “This is what happened, right? You met him?”

    “I guess so.”

    “Where did you meet?”

    “I don’t know. I guess at the basketball court.”

    “You went to the house?”

    “I guess so.”

    “Was Meredith in the house?”

    “I don’t remember.”

    “Did Patrick go in there?”

    “I don’t know, I guess so.”

    “Where were you?”

    “I don’t know. I guess in the kitchen.”

    “Did you hear Meredith screaming?”

    “I don’t know.”

    “How could you not hear Meredith screaming?”

    “I don’t know. Maybe I covered my ears. I don’t know, I don’t know if I’m just imagining this. I’m trying to remember, and you’re telling me I need to remember, but I don’t know. This doesn’t feel right.”

    He said, “No, remember. Remember what happened.”

    “I don’t know.”

At that moment, with the pubblico ministero raining questions down on me, I covered my ears so I could drown him out.

    He said, “Did you hear her scream?”

    I said, “I think so.”

My account was written up in Italian and he said, “This is what we wrote down. Sign it.”

Nailing Yet Another Knox Lie

So you choose to portray yourself as reluctant to talk at all? While Dr Mignini relentlessly edges you more and more into saddling Patrick with the blame? While you have no lawyer there?

In fact as you well know every word of that dialogue is made up. You invented all of it. Dr Mignini was not even there. Right then, he was asleep in bed.

Now we contrast this malicious figment of your imagination with the account of that night by many others who were present at various times. Even you yourself essentially agreed to this narrative at trial, with the one exception of an invented clip on the head.

1. You insist on being around in the central police station despite being grumpy and tired while Sollecito helps investigators to check a few claims.

2. After a while an investigator, Rita Ficarra, politely invites you to help build a list of names of men who might have known Meredith or the house. She is somewhat reluctantly as it was late and no interpreter was on hand. You quite eagerly begin. An interpreter is called from home. You calmly produce seven names and draw maps.

3. Sollecito breaks sudenly and unexpectedly early in his own recap/summary session when confronted with phone records which showed he had lied. He quickly points the finger at you as the one having made him lie. You are not told this but the investigators all know.

4. You share your phone, and break explosively when an outgoing text shows up on your phone after you had claimed you sent none. You yell out words to the effect that Patrick is the one, he killed Meredith. Police did not even know of the existence of Patrick before you identified the text as to him.

5. Thereafter you talk your head off, explaining how you had overheard Patrick attack Meredith at your house. The three ladies present and one man do what they can to calm you down. But you insist on a written statement, implicating him, and stating you went out from Sollecito’s alone.

6. This from about 2:00 am is the state of play. You are taken to the bar for refreshments and helped to sleep. You testify at trial that you were given refreshments, and everybody treated you well.

7. As you had admitted being at the scene of a crime you had not reported, you had in effect admitted to a crime, so a legal Miranda-type caution is required saying the signee understands they should not talk without a lawyer, and if they do talk that can be used as evidence in court.

8. Dr Mignini, the on-call duty prosecutor for that night, is by multiple accounts including your own at trial, not present at that list-building session with Rita Ficarra, and in fact knows nothing about it until Rita Ficarra closes it down. He comes from home.

9. Dr Mignini reads you your rights. You now sign acknowledging you know you should not talk unless your lawyer is there. Dr Mignini asks you no questions. He is anxious to get the session over so he can get on to the task of pulling Patrick in. You yourself insist on a new written statement and shrug off a lawyer. Though you are again warned, you push on.

10. Under Italian law that second statement could and should have been used against you, but the Supreme Court denied its use except against the false charges made about Patrick. Dr Mignini has said he think that was wrong in law but did not appeal.

Really a very simple chain of events, which was attested to at trial by all of those who had been present on the night, even including yourself.

There are no signs at all in anyone else’s description that you were leaned on by anybody, and nobody at the central police station had the slightest vested interest in making you into a target that night.

So where precisely does this new claim in your book of an illegal interrogation by Dr Mignini fit in? Now would be a good time to admit that you made it all up.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 01/16/22 at 10:44 AM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (2)

Monday, January 10, 2022

Correcting NY Times 17: How Jessica Bennett Lied By Omission About Knox’s Book #1

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



[Book managers Curt Knox, Ted Simon, Robert Barnett, and late David Marriott]

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.

This very detailed fact-checking of Knox’s April 2013 book is accessible via our left column. All posts were exclusively by Chimera, a Canadian legal expert, writing between 2014 and 2018.

These first excerpts focus on the book’s timing and legal context. Seemingly in uncritical thrall to the book Jessica Bennett made no mention of the intense factual dishonesties, self-aggrandizing, and trashing of others, weaponized against the looming repeat of the corrupted 2011 appeal.

1. Judicial Context Of Knox’s Book

Knox’s bizarrely-titled Waiting To Be Heard was released in the US in April 2013, right in the middle of her judicial process which was still alive. 

Curt Knox’s and David Marriott’s intention was to steamroll out this inflammatory work, only in English, long before (1) Italians could catch on, and (2) translations into English of court documents could reach critical mass.

And in particular (3) before the Knox and Sollecito appeal of 2011 they helped corrupt could be repeated, honestly and legally this time around. 

Perfectly obviously to any watching Italian and to objective members of the foreign press, and complained about publicly by prosecutors, Knox’s and Sollecito’s first-level appeal in 2011 was bent.

It was bent via (1) illegal judge shopping by defense teams for an ill-qualified renegade judge, (2) illegally expanded scope of the appeal, (3) illegal appointment of external DNA consultants, in theory neutral but with illegal ties to defense teams and a pro-Knox American academic, and (4) frequent flouting of judicial law.

In such contexts of illegalities, Italian law requires that chief prosecutors file a complaint with the Rome Supreme Court. This was done in February 2012. From then on, the two appellants and their families and legal teams absolutely knew a complete reversal was in the cards.

So with the very obvious intention of bending opinion against a rerun of their first-level appeal, the Sollecito (late 2012) and Knox (early 2013) teams raced two inflammatory books into print.

Sollecito’s book is analyzed by others here on another TJMK page. Sollecito & Gumbel were taken to court in Florence by prosecutors for diffamazione. [They later lost.]

The Knox book was written in Seattle in 2012, ostensibly by Knox, with Linda Kulman as shadow-writer. Several of the Knox PR hoaxers were heavily involved. As this series will show, their work is riddled with false claims, more than one on every page.

The Knox publication sale, for a price up to $4 million, was organized by Knox’s US lawyers Robert Barnett and Ted Simon. We see no sign either they or the publishers did due diligence.  Waiting To Be Heard was published (and reissued in 2015) only in English, and initially only in the US. Very few Italians are aware of the lies that Knox has published about them, even now.

The book seems to have received zero editorial or legal vetting by anyone in Italy, not least by Knox’s own lawyers in Perugia. The extended version in 2015 received not one correction of the myriad wrong claims, and all of the demonizations remained intact.

Bear in mind Knox was found guilty of criminal lying by all courts, and rightly served three years for framing an innocent man. She is a felon for life.

Bear in mind throughout the judicial process Knox was monitored by (1) her lawyers, (2) her family, (3) the US Rome Embassy, (4) the Italian Member of Parliament Rocco Girlanda, and (5) media insiders weaponized by the Knox public relations.

Bear in mind not ONE complaint was ever put before a judge - a felony by the lawyers if they were hiding abuse claims. In fact in contrast Knox’s own lawyers instead publicly complained that Knox was lying all the time, and requested that she be stopped.

“Lies” in this series refer to any attempt by Knox in her book to deceive the reader or the court, ranging from the very frequent embellishments of Knox herself to the very frequent denigration of others, and to statements of evidence and timelines that are shown to be incorrect. 

All dialogue in the book, of which there is a lot, is simply invented by Linda Kulman and bears little resemblance to how Knox herself spoke or those around her spoke. Typically the real Knox was brasher and more unpleasant, and those around her smarter and more classy.

In numerous places the book and afterword contradicts what Knox has said previously, including on the stand at trial in mid-2009.

Numerous people were demonized by Knox throughout, often in proximity to utterances of how amazing Knox thinks she is. These demonizations have only ever been published in English and even now are often unknown to Knox’s targets in Italy.

They include diffamazione false accusations - similar to the calunnia felony Knox served three years for, but intended to sway the judicial process still under way.  For example: Knox describes at length an illegal interrogation by Dr Mignini on 5-6 November 2007. He was actually at home in bed.

A key false claim in the 2015 Afterword was that Knox was “exonerated” or “found innocent” by the Supreme Court. That court, though provably bent, in fact ruled that Knox was present at the scene of the crime with blood on her hands. The ruling was a mere “insufficient evidence” (as that court ignored most of it) which can be appealed.

UK and Italy editions were withdrawn at the last moment for fear (correctly) that they were defamatory. The US edition was released again in 2015, unamended, with an equally untruthful Afterword (also analyzed in this series). It is available on Amazon Italia, significant for legal reasons.

Sollecito accepted that he had no choice but to admit publicly to diffamazione - that key passages are invented and defamatory. He wrote an apology, and paid a fine and court costs. The same is expected to happen for the Knox book, and the statute of limitations still has several years to run yet.

2. Dueling Screenplays

(a) Consider this screenplay for Star Wars III, Revenge of the Sith

Fiction: Anakin Skywalker is a hero of the Republic, Jedi Knight, and well respected warrior.  He fought for the forces of good, risking his life many times in the process.

Without much reason or plausibility he becomes the evil Sith Lord, Darth Vader.  He then departs from his good self, and goes on a homicidal rampage through his old home, slaughtering many, and helping destroy the Republic.

Reality: Skywalker had many emotional and anger issues, was power hungry, controlling, and had gone on a previous murderous rampage.

(b) Consider this screenplay for Waiting to be Heard by Amanda Knox.

Fiction: Amanda Knox is attending school in Seattle, with ambitions to travel, discover herself, and work professionally as a translator.  Without much reason or plausibility, she is convinced to start engaging in casual sex, throwing all her ambitions away for some thrills.

It ends with the coincidental murder of her roommate, and the misery and destruction it would bring down on her family, and Italians who would rather rely on prejudice than admit they were wrong.  And of course, there was never any evidence against her.

Reality: Knox was known in Seattle for a stormy childhood, casual sex, drugs and alcohol before going to Italy.  Knox could be controlling, narcissistic, and show a mean streak. 

She got arrested for a rock throwing riot, staged a prior break-in as a ‘‘prank’‘, and published a rape story on MySpace.

She went to Italy without a plan or direction and her drug use increased further. Police knew that she slept with one drug dealer in return for free drugs and because of her trail to him she caused his incarceration.

Her behaviour was not received well in Italy, especially by the women she lived with, and she felt herself shut out and isolated, with no real friends.  Knox was upstaged by a roommate who was far more serious, driven, and likeable.

In 2007 Knox floundered. She was clearly headed toward a confession or self-incrimination when her lawyers stopped the 17 December interview she herself requested with Dr Mignini.

Through 2008 Knox’s tendency to lie was increasing and her lawyers held her back and distanced themselves from certain statements.

In mid 2009 she seriously escalated. Adopting a hard sarcastic voice on the witness stand, she did not appear truthful to most of watching Italy, and Judge Massei bought into very little from her.

In 2010, 2011 and 2012 Knox’s dishonesties continued to escalate, even as the Hellmann appeal court refuted some of them, and the Supreme Court hit a new level of disbelief toward them.

In April 2013 in the book Waiting to be Heard the volume and scope and nastiness of Knox’s lies really peaked - even though prior to publication the book had nervously been slightly expurgated.

And ever since Knox has tried to sustain that peak, rendering her unable to face the Nencini appeal court, unlike Sollecito who was backpedalling.

I now give examples from the forthcoming series of just some of what Knox falsely claimed in the book and 2013 book interviews. Knox’s strident mainstay claim was “There is no evidence.”

3. Knox’s Endemic “There Is No Evidence” Claim

Examples Of Claim Made

In American TV book interviews Knox claims over, and over, and over, and over again that “there is no evidence against me”, rather than, as many note here, directly saying she did not kill Meredith.

    Click for Post:  1. The interview with Diane Sawyer, right when this book was released.

    Click for Post:  2. The first interview with Good Morning America, a book tour stop, listed here.

    Click for Post:  3. This interview with a radio station in New Zealand.

    Click for Post:  4. This interview with an Australian radio station.

    Click for Post:  5. This Canadian interview with Anna Tremonti of the CBC.

    Click for Post:  6. A family interview on Good Morning America.

    Click for Post:  7. The first Chris Cuomo interview, May 2013, listed here.

    Click for Post:  8. This promotional piece with Amazon editor Neal Thompson.

    Click for Post:  9. This one with Seattle journalist Linda Bryon.

    Click for Post:  10. This video that went on the air in Germany.

    Click for Post:  11. This piece on NPR with Jackie Lyden, here.

    Click for Post:  12. This live interview with the Today Show, Knox says she won’t return.

    Click for Post:  13. Her email to Judge Nencini.

    Click for Post:  14. This cringe-worthy appearance with Simon Hattenstone before appeal verdict.

    Click for Post:  15. This interview after the Florence Appeals Court confirms the 2009 trial verdict.

    Click for Post:  16. This one supposedly at UW, after Nencini confirmed Massei’s verdict.

    Click for Post:  17. This press release comes out after the Nencini Report is issued.

    Click for Post:  18. This May 2014 interview with Chris Cuomo on CNN.

    See also the British interviews with Knox here and here.
Zero evidence??? But Knox’s own words contradict

  • (Chapter 13, Page 112) you mention a LONG list of what you and Raffaele talked about, but don’t remember if you read or had sex?

  • (Chapter 17, Page 136) you reference the missing sweater (Filomena saw you wear that day), but it still was never found.

  • (Chapter 17, Page 139) you mentioned the writings (you said you would kill for a pizza).

  • (Chapter 18, Page 143) you claim the blood on the faucet was from your pierced ears.  (According to Barbie Nadeau, your mother said the blood was from your period).

  • (Chapter 18, Page 143) you acknowledge Raffaele took away your alibi.

  • (Chapter 19, Page 151) you claim that Guede backs your alibi, but refutes Sollecito, which doesn’t make sense if you were together.

  • (Chapter 19, Page 152) you acknowledge the knife with your DNA on the handle, Meredith’s on the blade—the infamous double DNA knife.

  • (Chapter 20, Page 155) you say you were there. (You claim it meant RS apartment), yet you let PL remain in prison.

  • (Chapter 20, Page 156) you admit writing a letter (you claim it was misinterpreted), claiming that Raffaele killed Meredith and planted your fingerprints.

  • (Chapter 21, Page 164) you reference RS DNA on the bra clasp but saying it does not implicate you directly.

  • (Chapter 21, Page 165) you admit (and I believe this), that much of your knowledge comes from crime TV.

  • (Chapter 21, Page 165) you sarcastically admit you were the last person to wash up in a bloody bathroom.

  • (Chapter 21, Page 169)—the Matteini decision—you say that the prosecution had stacked so much evidence Guede’s testimony wouldn’t have mattered.

  • (Chapter 22. Page 173) you mention the police arresting the wrong people, but hypocritically, omit your false accusation of PL.

  • (Chapter 22, Page 178) you reference Meredith’s DNA on the knife (which RS claimed was during a cooking accident).

  • (Chapter 22, Page 178) you reference your bloody footprints, and mentioned Raffaele’s

  • (Chapter 23, Page 183) you reference the bra clasp having Raffaele’s DNA

  • (Chapter 23, Page 184) you acknowledge claims of a partial crime scene cleanup.

  • (Chapter 25, Page 209) you acknowledge Filomena testifies you brought other ‘‘friends’’ to the house.

  • (Chapter 25, Page 211) you acknowledge the cut on your neck, which you claim was a hickey.

  • (Chapter 25, Page 216) you acknowledge telling the police Meredith always locked her door, though you try to spin it.

  • (Chapter 25, Page 217) you acknowledge your cellphone and Raffaele’s were turned off, though you give different reasons why.

  • (Chapter 26, Page 220) you acknowledge Quintavalle claims he saw you in his store the morning after, looking pale, and checking out cleaning products.

  • (Chapter 26, Page 221) you acknowledge Nina Capezzali testifies she heard a scream at about 11:30pm, something you put in your statement.

  • (Chapter 26, Page 223) you acknowledge Curatolo saw you in the Piazza, but claim it provides you an alibi, whenever it happened.

  • (Chapter 26, Page 226) you acknowledge that phone records contradict your own account.

And we still haven’t really gotten to those three pesky statements you insisted on writing and signing framing Patrick and hinting at Sollecito.

So. Were you lying in all those media appearances? Or lying throughout your book? Or both?

4. Knox’s Trouble Keeping Details Straight

When Exactly Did Patrick Text You?

1.  (Chapter 5, Page 44, 45) Knox says she got text not to come to work BEFORE cooking dinner, washing dishes, having the pipe burst.

2.  (Chapter 13, Page 113) Knox wrote a letter to police, saying she got the text not to come in to work AFTER cooking dinner, washing the dishes, having the pipe burst.

Why Did you Turn Your Phones Off?

1.  (WTBH, Chapter 5, Page 44) Knox says she turned your phone off so Patrick couldn’t text her in case he changed his mind.

2.  (WTBH, Chapter 25, Page 217) Knox sarcastically says the phones were turned off so they could watch a movie undisturbed.

3.  (Honor Bound, Page 22) Sollecito says the phones were turned off so you two wouldn’t be disturbed doing ooh-la-la.

4.  (December 2007 Interview with Mignini) Knox says she turned the phone off because it only had a limited charge.  Knox also claims she doesn’t know if Raffaele turned off his phone.

5.  (At trial) Defence lawyers contested that the phones were never shut off.

The Pipe-Leak at Raffaele’s Apartment?

1.  (Chapter 5, Page 44) Knox says Raffaele had already had a plumber come once

2.  (December 2007 interview with Mignini) Knox claims it is the first time the leak ever happened.

Harry Potter in German?

1.  (Chapter 5, Page 44/45) You make dinner, wash dishes, have the pipe leak, then go read HP in German

2.  (Chapter 13, Page 113) You say you read HP in German to Raffy before Amelie, and before dinner

How Many Partners in Italy?

1.  (Chapter 2, Page 16) Cristiano, the man she met on a train (actually a drug dealer named Frederico).  The first.

2.  (Chapter 3, Page 23) Mirko, a man she met at a cafe.  The second.

3.  (Chapter 4, Page 35) Bobby, a man supposedly introduced by Laura and Filomena.  The third.

4.  (Chapter 5, Page 38) Raffaele, who she met at a music concert.  The fourth.

5.  (Chapter 18, Page 142) Knox claims of 3 partners in Italy (4 in Seattle, so 7 total).  This is her ‘‘HIV-hoax’‘.  Well, she lists 4 just in Italy in the book.

6.  Laura and Filomena complained of Knox bringing MANY strange men home.

A Hypocrite In Knox’s Own Words?

(Chapter 18, Page 142) Knox complains about being characterized as a sex obsessed slut.  She frequently complains about how she is perceived.

(Chapters 2, 3, 4) Sure sounds sex obsessed there. Read for yourself.

Meredith’s Time of Death?

(Chapter 26, Page 221) Stomach digestion analysis is not an accurate way to determine a person’s T.O.D.

(Chapter 26, Page 222) Stomach digestion analysis is an accurate way to determine a person’s T.O.D.

When Knox Becomes A Suspect?

(Chapter 7, Page 54) Knox claims that she and Raffaele were already suspected, and the police decided to tap their phones.

(Chapter 7, Page 54) Knox claims ALL the people in the house were detained: herself, Laura, Filomena, Giacomo. the other men downstairs.

(Chapter 8, Page 69) Knox says she is staying behind to help the police

(Chapter 8, Page 69) Knox thinks running away would be seen as a failure as an adult.

(Chapter 9, Page 76) Supposedly, British tabloids are reporting that one of Meredith’s female roommates was a suspect.

(Chapter 10, Page 81) Despite the ‘‘50 hour interrogation’’ Knox still finds time to attend class on Monday

(Chapter 10, Page 83) Knox says the police suspected them, and were trying to separate her and Raffaele.

(Chapter 10, Page 83) Knox says she had to beg the police to let her into the police station while Raffaele was being questioned.  Some suspect.

For some context please see this post.

5. Stuff That Is Outright Disturbing

(Chapter 2, Page 16) Knox meets a drug dealer on a train, and ditches her sister to be with him.

(Chapter 2, Page 20) Knox goes with her Grandma to get medications for her STD (and writes about it)

(Chapter 2, 3, 4) Knox has her ‘‘campaign for casual sex’’ and writes about it.

(Chapter 8, Page 73) Knox publishes personal details about Meredith, including questions about whether she like anal.

(Chapter 10, Page 82) Knox skips the memorial of her ‘‘friend’’ to go strum a ukulele, and is annoyed it paints her as cold.

(Chapter 12, Page 104) Knox seems to enjoy the false detail with which she describes being strip searched.

In fact disturbing that this book was ever written.  Hello?  Son of Sam?

For all the bad feelings Amanda claims to have about Lumumba’s false arrest, she still blames it on the police.  Either she can’t (or pretends she can’t) see that her statements are what caused it to happen.

6. More Very Obviously False Claims

(Chapter 6, Page 49) Knox claims that Raffaele reported the break in before the postal police came. This was proven false.

(Chapter 10, Page 80) Knox claims to be assaulted by Officer Ficarra.  Never happened.  She also claimed to not have an interpretor.  But see here and see here.

(Chapter 10, Page 89) The ‘‘interrogation’’ with Mignini.  Detailed, but total BS.  It never happened.

(Chapter 11, Page 95) Knox claims she was told she was being held for ‘‘bureaucratic’’ reasons.  She knew why she was arrested.

(Chapter 11, Page 96) Knox sends her 3rd statement.  Read it and tell me that this is not total junk.

(Chapter 11, Page 100) Knox describes a search that would qualify as sexual assault, if it were actually true.

(Chapter 18, Page 142) Knox herself released the positive HIV test, and used it to try to gain sympathy.

(Chapter 20, Page 155) Knox misrepresents the grilling from Mignini, and who her lawyers were. See the transcripts here and here and here and here.

(Chapter 22, Page 180) Knox supporters claim Guede got his sentence reduction to testify, but here Knox admits Guede went ‘‘short-form trial’’ for the 1/3 reductions.

Knox had another attorney, Giancarlo Costa., who was present with Luciano Ghirga at Knox’s December 2007 questioning from Mignini.  He left shortly after this, likely due to frustration.  In the book Knox lists Ghirga and Vedova (who was not yet retained).  In fact, Costa is not mentioned at all throughout the book.  Probably to his benefit, as Ghirga and Vedova are ‘‘quoted’’ as saying many false and insulting things, including being credited with helping to write this ‘‘memoir’‘.

Knox also adds stories about other people engaging in drug use and casual sex, but I disbelieve just about everything she says.

7. Examples Of Knox’s Tortured Logic

Myth: There is no evidence, and what there is, is unreliable (mantra of Knox US lawyer Ted Simon)

Fact:  For there to be unreliable evidence, there has to be evidence in the first place.  Is this moron really a lawyer?

Myth:  There is no evidence against Knox and Sollecito, and the evidence is only circumstantial.

Fact:  For evidence to be ‘‘merely’’ circumstantial, it still has to exist.  And different types of circumstantial evidence together can be very compelling.

Myth:  If the prosecution actually had a case, there would be no need to drag Knox’s personal and sex life into the spotlight.

Fact:  The prosecution actually has a very strong case, it is Knox who keeps bringing up her sex life (either as a diversion, or because she’s weird)

Myth:  There is no evidence against me (Sollecito interviews), and nothing very strong against Amanda.

Fact:  You just admitted there is something against Amanda.

Myth:  The evidence against Guede is rock solid.  The evidence against Knox and Sollecito is contaminated.

Fact:  The same CSI’s investigate the whole crime scene.  Either they did a good job, or they didn’t, you can’t have it both ways.

Myth:  There is nothing to place Amanda and Raffaele in Meredith’s bedroom.

Fact:  Aside from the autopsy wound pattern, making it a sure thing three were involved, check the other “non-existent” evidence listed here:
-There is RS’s DNA on bra-clasp, and AK’s shoeprint,
-There is Filomena’s room (alleged point of entry), with mixed DNA from Amanda/Meredith.  It was ransacked BEFORE with window was broken.
-There is no trace of Guede in Filomena’s room (even though he supposedly scaled the wall, and broke in through the window).
-There is Amanda’s bedroom (lamp taken for cleanup) and wiped of prints
-There is Amanda’s bathroom (used to washup), mixed DNA from Amanda/Meredith, RS’s footprint on mat.
-There is Laura/Filomena’s bathroom (Rudy used), which Knox deliberately avoided flushing the toilet.
-There is the hallway (access between the rooms) with Knox and Sollecito’s bloody footprints, wiped away, revealed with luminol..

(Actually as the entire house is considered a crime scene, elsewhere in the book Knox does attempt to explain some of this.)

Myth:  There is no forensic evidence Knox and Sollecito were involved.

Fact:  Again, aside from the autopsy wound pattern, making it a sure thing three were involved, check the other “non-existent” evidence listed here:
-Knox’s false accusation of Lumumba to divert attention from herself.
-Knox’s false accusations of police brutality to try to get off on the charges.
-Knox and Sollecito both turning off their cellphones (then denying it, then offering different justifications for it)
-Knox and Sollecito both gave numerous false alibis.
-Knox knew inside details, such as Meredith screaming, having her throat cut, and where she died.
-Testimony from witnesses such as Curatolo, Quintavalle
-Testimony from Laura, Filomena, and Meredith’s British friends.

To this day, Knox and Sollecito cannot provide a clear or consistent account of where they were, and what they were doing. They would likely have been convicted on these facts alone, and the book does address (but dismiss), many of these points.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 01/10/22 at 02:00 PM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (2)

Tuesday, January 04, 2022

Correcting NY Times 16: How Jessica Bennett Lied To Readers About The REAL Leaks

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Curt Knox spins the day in court; prosecutors cannot correct him or explain “their side”

Further rebuttal of this misreporting: “wild theories from the prosecution… it is common for police and lawyers to leak information to the press… a lot of it leaked straight from the prosecution… [Prosecution leaking] help explain the leak of Ms. Knox’s jailhouse journal”. First posted in January 2015.

1. When The Supposed Leaks Began

On 6 November 2007 investigators into Meredith’s death thought they had caught a big break.

That was when Knox herself snapped and claimed to be an eyewitness to Meredith’s killing on the night. From 1:30 am to about noon on 6 November Knox many times repeated that claim, and she emulated her huge fear of Patrick Lumumba again and again.

She proved hard to shut up, though police did repeatedly try gently, calmed her with refreshments, and encouraged her to sleep pending her Miranda-rights session.

Three times in those ten or so hours Knox herself insisted on writing her claims down, including a claim that she did go out alone and another claim that Sollecito might have been there. She was repeatedly warned she should have a lawyer present first, but pressed on.

False claims to have witnessed a murder are rare, but not entirely unknown - there can be fame and big bucks in it, played right.  But in Knox’s case, this did not seem to apply - she snapped explosively under no pressure, and she had already to some extent implicated herself - she had said she had seen a crime she did not try to stop and did not report.

This post reports on the arrest warrants of 6 November which reflect that; and the subsequent assessments by the supervising magistrate and by a double-checking senior judge (both sessions with defense counsel present and ready to complain about undue force; they didn’t) as summarized here below. 

On 8 November, supervising magistrate Claudia Matteini reviewed police and psychology reports and what Knox and Sollecito had claimed - including Sollecito’s memo to Dr Matteini that he never wanted to see Knox again.

Judge Matteini assessed them both to be seemingly bad news. She ordered them to remain locked up. Judge Ricciarelli then assessed Dr Matteini’s assessment, and confirmed that all was correct.

It was the arc created by Knox herself which inspired the more voracious of the UK media and the relatively mild Italian media to get their paid snoops to Perugia fast. All of them were lobbying to get an edge.

Police and prosecutors had zero reason to inflame the media further. In fact, investigators had some difficulty performing their tasks, because they were getting so many calls and were being crowded-around in the streets.

For the first few days, while the situation was murky, the media coverage of Knox and Sollecito was pretty sympathetic.

What caused it to to turn increasingly against them were (1) reports of the pair’s uncaring callousness; and (2) an ever-growing perception that the two had committed a torture-murder, with a sex-crime element.

Add to that after two weeks news of (3) Knox’s framing of Patrick, (4) the arrest of Rudy Guede, (6) Knox’s close relationship with a drug dealer (who she later caused to be put away), and (7) Knox not even being in Perugia for serious study and only enrolled in a walk-in language school which offered no credits toward a degree.

2. Did The Police Or Prosecution Ever Leak?

The Italian rules are quite clear. Unlike the US, cases for and against the accused must be fought only in court, and when the prosecutor or judge speaks, it will mostly be in a document that has been cleared.

How many proven examples do you think there are of police and prosecutors slipping reporters leaks and tips and inside tracks to advance their case?

In fact NONE. Not one.

Among the frustrations we picked up from the excellent Italian-speaking foreign reporters who were actually there was how under Italian rules there was so little that police and prosecutors were allowed to share.

In the UK it is also a bit like this. But in contrast in the US there would typically be daily press conferences and prosecutors (85% of them are elected in the US) appearing on the cable-news crime shows like that of Nancy Grace.

And Dr Mignini himself famously never leaks. The few things he ever says are on the record and they always prove accurate, low-key, and very fair. From 2007 right up to today he continues to maintain that Knox had no advance intention to kill. A softer line than some of the judges settled upon.

3. Did The Defenses And Families Leak?

Sure. This case must have broken all records for defense-biased leaks. Finding themselves in a vacuum of police and prosecution information and pushback, the Knox PR grew to an angry and often abusive and dishonest roar.

The sharp-elbowed Knox-Mellas presence was constantly “available” in Perugia and Burleigh and Dempsey among others got totally taken in. Ann Bremner and Judge Heavey and Paul Ciolino became more and more shrill. Heavey wrote to the president of the Italian Republic on his official letterhead. Senator Cantwell issued many unfounded claims. 

And through 2008 and 2009 one can spot increasing leaks from each defense team, often to try to advantage their client against the other two. We were offered some of those leaks, among others “the truth” about the autopsy and “the knife”.

The Perugia Shock blog by PR shill Francesco Sfarzo (now on trial in Florence for making things up, and wanted by police in the US) came to be a main conduit for defense lies and misleading information, possibly some from a disgruntled cop. 

Here is one easily proven leak from the Knox defense that was intended to hurt the police and prosecution in the case.

But putting police so overtly on the spot was a dangerous game. More often each perp and their defense team took whacks at the other two as a Rome lawyer showed here and we showed here.  In the past few posts we have been showing how many things about Rudy Guede were made up (more to come).

4. Fabricating Things For Fame And Profit

In 2007 and 2008 various unsavory characters surfaced in Perugia, to try to win fame and make a buck (though the Knox PR campaign soon surpassed them in money-grubbing; see Part 5 below). This quote is from our post directly below.

Christian Tramontano, who had claimed someone threatened him in his house in the dark with a knife who looked like a shot of Guede in the papers two months later, was not even called, perhaps because at a hearing in October 2008 Judge Micheli denounced him as having made things up.

Tramontano is right now a jobless bouncer, as the mafia was found to have some involvement in his club. Judge Micheli scathingly repudiated his tale as it simply did not ring true. For dubious reasons he made no police report about it at the time, admitted he got no good look at the claimed intruder, could not explain why the doors and windows were locked and intact, and had seen Guede’s image in a paper.

But worse, he looked like one of quite a few around Perugia (and later in the US) who were seeking global fame and big bucks from the media for “inside knowledge” and claimed close connections to one or other of the alleged perps.

Despite this Tramontano’s self-serving claims are repeated as gospel by the PR shills all over the place. Those claims appear as gospel in every one of their books; we will have another post on them.

This about another opportunist is from Tom Kington of the Guardian in a report posted 27 September 2008:

The trial in Italy of Rudy Guede, one of the three suspects accused of sexually assaulting and murdering British student Meredith Kercher, was thrown into disarray yesterday when a judge stopped proceedings after learning that one of the main character witnesses had allegedly tried to sell his story to Italian television.

Abuker Barro, known as Momi, a Somalian acquaintance of Guede, was due in court in Perugia yesterday to repeat claims made to investigators that he had seen Guede rifling through women’s handbags in clubs in Perugia and making aggressive advances to women when drunk.

But the judge, Paolo Micheli, blocked him from completing his testimony after lawyers for Guede showed a video of Barro meeting journalists to allegedly negotiate payment of E2,000 (£1,588) for revealing his testimony on Italian television. Micheli will ask magistrates to decide whether Barro should be prosecuted for abusing his role as a witness, which could exclude his testimony.

The incident, described by Guede’s lawyer, Walter Biscotti, as ‘an assault by the media’, follows a series of leaks to the press of evidence and even jail diaries by suspects [eg teams] during the investigation into the brutal slaying of Kercher… [bold added]

We have many posts elsewhere on ways in which the media and their reporters divided. Few real reporters were unethical enough or incompetent enough to accept and report such biased and unconfirmed claims as Tramontano’s or Barro’s.

But you can find these false claims hyped pervasively throughout the flood of pro-Knox books as if they were gospel.  Among others: Dempsey’s, Burleigh’s, Moore’s, Preston’s, Hendry’s, Waterbury’s, and of course Fischer’s.

5 Role Of The Money-Grubbing Public Relations

[As posted January 2015] We dont yet have a handle on all of the money that changed hands. But it was clearly at world-record levels.

A lot of greedy hands were outstretched, and not only in Perugia - Ergon turned up proof of the greedy hands of Sforza and Fisher, and there were the astronomic sums paid for the RS and AK books

Media who had no interest in special access to RS or AK have told us that for those who did have interest a greedy hand would be outstretched every time.

In US media one can see real demonization of perps (and even ex-perps like Casey Anthony who was found not guilty) for hours a day on the cable-news crime shows.

Knox supporters have worked hard to come up with examples of demonization of Knox but have only a tiny handful of 2007 reports in UK tabloids to show for this.

These had zero effect on the 2009 trial. Knox’s showing-off at trial and her two arrogant, callous days on the stand are what hurt her. Sollecito was always disliked in Italy, and his remaining semi-chained to Knox proved the foolish place to be.

Elements of the US TV networks ABC and NBC (breakfast show) and CBS (20/20) all tilted heavily pro-Knox as did CNN until recently; all seem a lot less eager now though, and Marriott’s tips and offers of access seem to have lost most of their traction.

A number of reporters are way better informed and believe it or not are actually reading the Nencini Report and other documents that the PMF team has translated.

We have reason to believe that in 2007 and 2008 both defense teams wanted to go the way the prosecution hinted: plead limited responsibility because of drugs and impaired mental capacity and an unpremeditated homicide.

But neither team was allowed by families to do so, and so the 2009 trial sentences were much stiffer.

Maybe just as well Marriot is retiring. Hard to believe there will ever again be a long line of those accused of murder wanting his services.

But ultimately though. it was Curt Knox and the Mellases who made all the wrong calls, blinded by hubris.

Some in the Knox forces say all in the families have chilled a bit on Amanda.

The much smarter Dr Francesco Sollecito tried to play a better game. But his leaking of a photo of Meredith’s body to Telenorba was nasty, and anyway his loose-cannon son kept disrupting him. There were half a dozen examples where he was openly frustrated. See this one.

Here is perhaps the most extreme example of Raffaele acting dopey, though his book which accused police and prosecution of crimes and his attempts to answer questions about it on TV probably equal it and had his father separating from him.

Of course for their excesses and lie-telling Curt and Edda, Sollecito, Sforza, and others have trials ahead of them. Amanda Knox faces at least two more trials, both for calunnia, hardly smart as that was what she served three years for.

Italy is not a vengeful place, far from it, but ignoring or over-ruling the best advice of defense lawyers about pushing the system too far has not proved fruitful.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 01/04/22 at 01:04 PM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (2)

Tuesday, December 28, 2021

Correcting NY Times 15: How Jessica Bennett Lied To Readers About Real-World Italian Justice

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Supreme Court Rome

Long Post. Click here to go straight to Comments

1. False Depictions Of The Case

These examples below of Jessica Bennett ridiculing Italian justice were (surprise surprise) only published in English, and only in the United States.

Not one claim is true. None were checked with anyone in Italy. None were put into the Italian language so that Italians could make sure they were right. Pretty obviously, none were run past the New York Times lawyers.

The Italian system is supremely fair, but had Bennett published some of these wild, ungrounded claims to try to affect the outcome of a trial, she herself might have faced an Italian court. All foreign reporters based in Italy respect this and such dirty tricks in reporting are normally unknown.

By the time she was definitively acquitted, in 2015, Ms. Knox had been convicted, imprisoned, acquitted and released on an appeal, retried and convicted again, then ultimately exonerated by Italy’s Supreme Court.

There was no “retried and convicted again” or “ultimately exonerated by Italy’s Supreme Court”. There was one automatic first appeal by Sollecito & Knox. This was provably bent by Knox and Sollecito forces (Bennett left that out) and so it had to be held again. They lost. The outcome was weirdly promoted for final verdict to a small-crimes chamber of the Supreme Court which, even though also provably bent, did not “exonerate” the pair. Many American cases with local and Supreme Court appeals take years longer than this.

For nearly four years, Ms. Knox existed in a kind of legal purgatory… She and her mother were also tried and acquitted of slandering the Italian police. (In Italy, it is a crime to insult or damage the reputation of public officials.)

Three of those years were rightfully spent in prison. Knox had framed an innocent man and had never set that right, either in the numerous hearings in 2007-08 or via defense counsel. And it is a crime, an anti-mafia measure, to try to affect the outcome of a trial via misleading statements in the media. That is what Knox’s parents were doing. They knew full well that Knox had not been forcefully interrogated - Knox herself had told them that she had framed Patrick (which by the way they kept silent about), but for years they made this inflammatory claim to the American media again and again. 

In Britain, once a suspect has been charged, the law forbids journalists from speculating on their guilt or innocence until a verdict is reached… that rule [of discussing guilt] did not apply.

Why is Britain being referred to here? This is weird. Within the international bodies, Italy’s justice system is generally regarded as a much more transparent, precise and reliable model. Britain has black-box juries and, unlike in Italy, their verdicts do not have to be written out or explained. Discussion of guilt here was no more over-the-top than we get to see in the US dozens of times a year. “Susan Anthony” or “Jodi Arias” might ring a bell. And journalists cannot just write anything they like during a judicial process, see above.

But after an all-night interrogation… [Knox] did not have a lawyer or interpreter present… Ms. Knox signed a confession, written in Italian… Ms. Knox recanted within hours… [Knox] confession was later ruled inadmissible in court

There was no all-night interrogation, and no confession. These PR mantras were totally discredited at trial way back in 2009. Knox had an interpreter for two brief and quite mundane sessions. She framed Patrick in both sessions, waived a lawyer both times, and herself twice insisted on a document to sign. Knox did not recant anything within hours. All courts found that she made false accusations while under no pressure at all. One of those statements led to her calunnia conviction. Both were irrelevant to the main trial. 

wild theories from the prosecution… it is common for police and lawyers to leak information to the press… a lot of it leaked straight from the prosecution… [Prosecution leaking] help explain the leak of Ms. Knox’s jailhouse journal

All Bennett’s claims here are pretty defamatory; this is especially so. It is absolutely not common for career-path police and prosecution to leak anything at all. They have zero reason to. The mere one or two who did leak minor details (under enormous pressure) were taken off the case. The two defense teams in contrast leaked prolifically and misleadingly - we have proof that the leak about Knox’s HIV result came from them, and the prosecution was not remotely involved. [See more on this in Comments.]

2. Omissions Re The Real Justice System

Here are 20 of the main characteristics of the Italian system, qualities of “fairness” and “balance” and “transparency” and “truth”, all lost on Jessica Bennett, as first posted here in September 2016. 

They include (1) a large and visible national and local police presence with excellent forensics labs, (2) a low crime rate even by European standards, and even more-so by American standards, and (3) a very low rate of incarceration that is only 1/6 the rate of the US.

The system is immensely careful and with two AUTOMATIC rights of appeal for convictions for serious crimes the chances of a false conviction standing are zero. Compare this with thousands uncovered in the US. The vast wave of appeals has clogged the courts and right now Parliament is trying to reverse this. 

Appellants have a huge advantage which makes it easy for them to game this system: the prosecution presents their case ONLY at trial. Then seasoned defences can game bewildered prosecutors at higher levels.

Officially the US knows all of this. It has much to gain politically from Italian co-operation and works very hard on their functional relationships. The FBI and the Italian equivalent embed one another’s officers in Rome and Washington, aid one another’s labs, share huge amounts of information, mutually take down mafia, and organize dozens of extraditions annually.

Almost all prosecutors are highly-trained by career-path; the only three who were not in this case (Judges Hellmann, Marasca and Bruno) and sprung Knox and Sollecito are all believed to have been corrupted.

Finally, the mafias and fellow-travelers work hard to smear police and prosecutors (as well as assassinating them, over 100 now). In this respect the Knox PR has wittingly or unwittingly been functioning as an arm of the mafias. Bongiorno, substituted for the hapless Sollecito PR which cost Vanessa her Carabinieri post, became famous for mafia defenses.

The 20 posts we link to below go deeper. You might read at least the headlines and the quotes below. That Italy’s is a pretty good system should be compelling.


1. Click here for post: How Italian Justice REALLY Works

Comparing the US and UK common law system - a model founded on non-written laws and developed through judicial proceedings - with this system which arose from the Roman Law model - based on a written civil code - is really like comparing apples to oranges.

They were both conceived to protect individual’s rights at a maximum level, while seeking justice for the victims. But with entirely different processes.

One is not necessarily better or worse. But there are legal experts who think the Italian system is distinctly fairer - much more weighted toward the defendants. In the US and the UK the prosecutor usually has to make it through only one pre-trial hoop. In Italy the prosecutor has to make it through a whole row of pre-trial hoops…

2. Click here for post:  Why The Prosecutors In Italy Are Relatively Popular

Italy’s a tough country with, albeit dwindling now, a legacy of violent crime, and many brave prosecutors over the years have been assassinated.

And the Italian legal system is not particularly weighted in their direction, with a large number of hurdles they have to climb over before a case ever gets to trial.

And the Italian prison system is relatively lenient, heavily pro-prisoner-remediation and early release, and proportionally only 1/10 the size of the US’s.

So the endemic attempts to undermine Prosecutor Mignini have invariably won only MORE popular support for him and his case in Perugia and Italy in general.

3. Click here for post:  Why The Italian Judiciary’s Probably Less Prone to Pressure Than Any Other In The World

Italian magistrates enjoy an extraordinary level of autonomy from the other powers of government (executive and legislative) and the point of this post is to explain why. This autonomy is above all due to the Italian constitutional framework.

That framework is intended to guarantee such an exceptional level of independence so as to avoid the abuses that occurred during Mussolini’s fascist regime, when Italian magistrates were forced by the executive to prosecute (and persecute) political opponents to the fascist dictator…

4. Click here for post:  Explaining How The Italian Appeals Process Works And Why It Consumes So Much Time 

The extraordinary broad appeal rights awarded by the Italian system are all part of the 1989 reform, which intended to add even more guarantees to the right of the accused. This has resulted in an incredible increase in pending cases in the overburdened Italian justice system….

This situation is exacerbated by the broad appeal rights guaranteed also on the 2nd level of appeal, at the Supreme Court of Cassation. Like other supreme courts around the world, such court does not re-examine the entire body of evidence, but only “̃errores in iudicando’ and “̃errores in procedendo’ (errors in procedure or application of the law).

However, unlike its American or English counterparts, the Italian Supreme Court cannot refuse to review a case, and defendants have unlimited appeal rights to the Supreme Court of Cassation. They don’t even have to wait for the Appeal Court. You can in fact appeal to the Supreme Court directly after the first trial. ...

5. Click here for post:  Barbara Benedettelli: Campaigner For Victims And Families Says Italian System Denies Them Justice

There are proportionally very few perpetrators in Italians prison by global standards, and when there in prison they are given quite a nice time, trained to perform usefully when released, and very often get out of prison early.

Seemingly very humane. But this does carry very high costs. There are often almost unbearable pressures on victims’ families, as Meredith’s father John Kercher has several times described. On top of all this, there is the growing western fascination with perps, and in many cases their elevating to popular cult-worship status.

Barbara Benedettelli is a writer and columnist and the editor of the popular “Top Secret”  program on Rete4 TV…  Her latest book (only in Italian) is called “Victims Forever” . She talks of various prominent perps and the enormous and unrequiting pressures on victims’ families. In polls a large majority of Italians detest this. They want much less stress on “fairness” and MUCH more compassion for victims families and, if still alive, for the victims.

6. Click here for post:  Harvard Political Review Writer Alex Koenig Reproaches The Sliming of Italy’s Justice System 

The fact of the matter is, those that immediately claim that Knox was wrongly accused and jailed by a corrupt justice system make two extremely arrogant assumptions that reveal perverse American exceptionalism.

1) It is assumed that, as an American ““ an American woman no less ““ Knox is incapable of murder. This case differs, of course, from the 1,176 domestic murders committed by women because, well, who knows?

2) It is assumed that not only is the Italian justice system incapable of fulfilling its legal duties, but that the intentions of the court were swayed by anti-Americanism.

This is not merely an abstract sentiment, but was actually articulated by Senator Maria Cantwell (D) of my home state of Washington.

7. Click here for post:  Interesting Tilts Of Marcia Clark And Alan Dershowitz Toward Educated, Informed Italian-type Juries 

“[American] jury instructions are so numerous and complex, it’s a wonder jurors ever wade through them. And so it should come as no surprise that they can sometimes get stuck along the way. The instruction on circumstantial evidence is confusing even to lawyers. And reasonable doubt? That’s the hardest, most elusive one of all. And I think it’s where even the most fair-minded jurors can get derailed.”

“Well, if you want justice, don’t look to the criminal law system. That’s not its job. Its job is not to produce a just result. Its job is to produce a legally correct result…”

“We’ve opted for a much more democratic system, and it means that in the end you’re going to be dissatisfied with a lot of verdicts. Just don’t expect too much from our legal system. Don’t expect truth. Don’t expect justice, because that’s not what it’s supposed to give you.”

8. Click here for post:  The Chief Enforcer Of The Constitution And The Rule Of Law is Wildly Popular Throughout Italy 

He is said to receive dozens of petitions a day and in certain cases he does act to get things done. Significantly, two that he chose to ignore recently concerned the ongoing Sollecito-Knox appeal process.

Of two pretty blatant attempts to bias the Perugia process, one came from Joel Simon of the US-based Committee to Protect Journalists, and one came from the junior Berlusconi-party MP Rocco Girlanda.

President Giorgio Napolitano simply ignored both of them.

9. Click here for post:  Compared To Italy, Say, Precisely How Wicked Is The United States? 

We have often remarked that Italy’s crime rate is low, the three mafia families (Sicily, Calabria and Naples) are on the rocks, and the justice system is one of the most cautious - conviction rates are infuriatingly low for the suffering families of victims, but in a forgiving Catholic nation rates of incarceration are unlikely to jump any time soon.

The American incarceration rate in sharp contrast has for a decade led the rest of the world, and it increased every year for nearly 30 straight years from the arrival of President Reagan to the departure of President GW Bush. Its prison rate is ahead of Russia’s, with its mafias and corruption and poverty, and ahead of China’s, with its large population of political prisoners.

10. Click here for post:  Involvement Of The Formidable Carabinieri Shows How Italian Justice Will Not Be Leaned Upon 

Judge Nencini may have invoked the help of the Carabinieri for reasons going beyond simply very good science.

Italy has among the world’s lowest crime-rates, murder-rates and incarceration-rates. Unusually low criminal and anti-social tendencies among native-born Italians, and strong family pride, explains a large part of this.

But another main reason is the high-profile and exceptionally smart police presence. Deliberately a cool presence rather than a hot and intimidating presence, and in fact a very popular one

11. Click here for post:  Italy’s Unpopular Politicians And Mafia Fellow Travelers Against Italy’s Popular Justice System 

For comparison, in 2011 the percentage of Italians who declared they trust the justice system “a lot”  or “enough”  was 53.3%. By comparison, the percentage of Italians who declared they trust the government “a lot”  or “enough”  were 14.7%, and those who trust the parliament were only 15%.

In 2012, the percentage of Italians who trust the parliament is now only 9.5%, and those who trust the Mario Monti administration are only 21.1%.

Over the eight years from 2004 to 2012 the percentage of Italians who trust the justice system was always bigger than those who trust parliament or government by at least ten points, and in some years we can see a spread of 20, 30, even 39 percentage points achieved by the judiciary over the parliament and government.

12. Click here for post:  Italy’s Advanced, Effective, Humane Law & Order System Also Adopted By City Of New York

New York is now the safest big city in America. It is following a route that is not only almost identical to Italy’s - it is being watched and emulated elsewhere across the US….

Now that the United States has the world’s highest reported rate of incarceration, many criminologists are contemplating another strategy. What if America reverted to the penal policies of the 1980s? What if the prison population shrank drastically? What if money now spent guarding cellblocks was instead used for policing the streets?

13. Click here for post:  Italian Prime Minister Renzi Will Push Measures To Speed Up Justice 

In a move popular not least among those who are part of it Mr Renzi announces moves to speed up Italian justice.

Italian justice and those who work in it are widely trusted and respected in Italy. But a very humane system designed post WWII to give those accused a level of rights unique in the world has been even further tilted over the years by politicians passing laws to aid political and business colleagues in legal trouble.

14. Click here for post:  Why Numerous American JUDGES Favor The Supremely Neutral Italian Kind Of System 

See that above at the bottom of the YouTube screen? Some $280 million has been spent since the year 2000. Can you guess what the $280 million was for?

In fact the $280 million is funds raised and spent for judges’ election campaigns in the roughly 3/4 of all American states where such judges’ elections are held - the original intention of which was good: to get judicial choices out of smoke-filled rooms.

15. Click here for post:  Meredith May Not See Justice (Yet) But She Will Leave At Least Three Legacies 

Knox behaved grossly irresponsibly in heading to Perugia under-funded, intent on drug-doing, and with zero intention of seriously studying.

The University of Washington and many others realised they could have huge liabilities if they did not distance themselves a lot from such loose cannons in future.

In October 2009 we reposted this report by Andrea Vogt which described the initiation of measures many American universities have now come to implement….

16. Click here for post:  Counterterrorism: Another Way Italian Law Enforcement Is An Effective Model For Everywhere Else 

A leading military analyst is citing Italy as a model of counterterrorism done right, pointing out that despite many factors going against it, Islamic terrorists have failed to kill a single person on Italian soil.

17. Click here for post:  Italian Justice & The Telling Status Of Extraditions To And From Italy 

If countries agree to extradite to other countries, that suggests a high degree of trust in justice at both ends. They are in effect voting confidence in each other’s justice systems.

Italy achieves an exceptionally high rate of extraditions in both directions and continues to sign more bilateral treaties.

It is clearly trusted almost worldwide as a destination where those charged will receive a fair shake. And it is very no-nonsense about sending back fleeing felons who try to go to ground there.

18. Click here for post:  Knox’s Nasty-Prisons Hoax: NY Times Describes How Italy Leads The World In Rehabilitation 

Around five years ago, largely because of immigrant crimes, the prison population (previously below 100,000 - in the US, California prisons alone hold almost twice that) began to balloon.

New prisons were built, with no expenses spared, and in these images you can see the result.

Stories of extreme over-crowding have gone away, and the New York Times profiles the new prisons and their programs of today.

19. Click here for post:  How The Italian “Justice Tortoise”  Is The Likely Winner Compared To For Example the US System 

Italy is working to try to update its justice system right now and we will report on that shortly. At least in theory, it has one of the easiest tasks in the world, because post WWII its legal system was redesigned from the ground up. It had already junked bad aspects, some going back centuries.

Italy already has some of the world’s smartest juries - jury service is compulsory, so smart people cannot dodge them. And the system already has some other very positive things going for it.

Mainly what is needed is some weeding. And such reforms are made easier in Italy because (1) judges and prosecutors all follow career paths and so they are not politically competing with one another;  and (2) there is the Council of Magistrates (CSM) which can be very progressive in the reforms it pushes at its level.

20. Click here for post:  So Where Would YOU Want To Go On Trial? In Italy Or In The U.S.?

We have still not seen even ONE American lawyer claim that after the first trial in 2009 which found RS and AK guilty that there were strong grounds for an appeal.

In the US, back in 2009, full prison terms would have been begun.

And in fact virtually nothing at the 2009 trial was challenged in the appeal. But the defenses subversively organized to get Civil Judge Hellmann instead of Criminal Judge Chiari to preside, and in 2011 a farcical “not guilty”  outcome was the result.

Then there was a THIRD jury trial, in 2013-14, which (as so often in Italy) threw out the not guilty outcome of the previous appeal trial.

And finally, in 2015, due to more subversive defense machinations with a little mafia help, the final Supreme Court appeal was assigned to the FIFTH Chambers, for the first murder appeal that Chambers has ever heard.

A second farcical “not guilty”  outcome was the result.

Say what you like about the American system, there is not remotely any parallel in its judicial history to all of that.  Quite the opposite in fact. We have had various posts pointing to an increasingly hard line in the US.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 12/28/21 at 01:59 PM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (3)

Tuesday, December 21, 2021

Correcting NY Times 14: No, Jessica Bennett, Nasty Men Were NOT Why Knox Went On Trial #2

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Victoria Brownworth, distinguished feminist (see 2nd quote)

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.

1. Post Overview

This is the second of two posts that take issue with Jessica Bennett’s repeated insinuations that nasty tabloids and nasty men were the entire causes of Knox going on trial.

As we mentioned in the first post, Jessica Bennett gave the real victim, Meredith, a remarkable woman with a huge career up ahead, barely a passing nod. She never actually suggests apart from a mischaracterized Dr Mignini who the nasty men were. And Bennett omitted, amazingly, that there was an equality or majority of women in all aspects of the case.

Here now BY FEMINISTS wading in powerfully on the case are three of our previous posts.

1. Posted 2009 by Miss Represented

Why Inflammatory Attempts To Militate Well-Intentioned Feminists Must Be Denied

In this post, without implying that the case against Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede are in any way less important to the overall outcome of the case or justice for Meredith and her family, I would like to focus on the case against Amanda Knox. I believe it is extremely important for a number of reasons, most crucially in helping us to unlock secrets about the female gender, the crimes they commit and the reasons they may have for doing do.

I recently began thinking about Amanda in more detail as well as the society that created, unleashed and ultimately unraveled her.

I would like to point out at this stage that Amanda Knox is not the first female to be accused of such a heinous and brutal act against a fellow human being (nor will she be the last). But surprisingly this is the first real international case to be so publicly (and brutally) critical of a female defendant in a way that has become normal and totally acceptable when trying male defendants for similarly violent crimes. I believe the overwhelming fascination with Amanda Knox is that she has defied a feminist stereotype about the kinds of women that commit crime and the reasons they have for doing so and by doing this, people are more willing to be critical of her.

The idea of the feminist movement was to liberate women, give them access to better jobs, better rates of pay, a platform in important social and political matters as well equal rights and privileges alongside men in society. But feminism is a bit like communism, it only really works on paper and this is because there are still a great number of women who demand the perks of being treated equally without also taking equal responsibility.  Amanda Knox is a case in point. It makes me furious that other women are vocally (despite all the evidence so far) defending and hence condoning her actions simply because she is female. The victim was female too. She no longer has a voice; and Amanda doesn’t need two! Amanda has a voice of her own and has already used it to tell an astronomical amount of malicious lies.

While we are on the subject of malicious, aggravated and astonishing lies, what was the tactless, omnipresent voice of the FOA saying last week? Apparently: ‘All you need is love.’ How charming,  I’m sure the family of the young woman Amanda Knox is on trial for killing will bear that in mind *sighs*

The problem with feminism, coupled with the new and equally unworkable socialist idea that anyone can do anything they want, whenever they want and without thinking about the consequences, is that is has falsely encouraged young people (particularly women like Amanda) in the notion that they are invincible and that no matter what happens somebody will always be there to pick up the pieces and clean up the mess (even murder). Young women like Amanda are born underneath an idealistic umbrella and brought up safe in the knowledge that they can be anything they want to be or have anything they want to have just by demanding it (go look at Cosmopolitan and Teen Vogue if you don’t believe me).

Sexual liberation is another contentious issue (Amanda again is a case in point), nobody is saying you can’t be sexually liberated , it’s just that some people don’t want to have a pink rampant rabbit vibrator practically shoved in their face in order to let everyone know how absolutely wonderful is it to be able to have random sex on a train with whoever they like and all in the name of being sexually liberated. So childish and unnecessary.

Feminism has formed the dangerous and uncontrollable principle that all women are equal because they say they are and anyone that disagrees is anti-women, even if you point out how they refuse to accept responsibility for bad things they have done. You cannot condone behaviour for women that would simply be unacceptable for men. I condone equality amongst both sexes but wish more women would take responsibility too! That’s feminism.

Kids are brought up to believe they can do anything they like, why then are we surprised when someone gets hurt or killed?

Kids like Amanda, Raffaele and Rudy were brought up around these ideas, believing that other people exist to parasite off and to clean up their mess when they go out into the world and leave in their wake absolute havoc, mayhem and destruction.

I’ve noticed that most feminists who are reading or writing about this case are squealing about the ‘total injustice being done to Amanda-wa-wa-wa!’ by the horrible, horrible, nasty Italian men, seemingly forgetting that it would be these same men that would be in charge of ensuring justice was served had it been Amanda Knox who’d been brutally killed that night.

So to the people that have been using gender as an excuse for why Amanda should be given a slap on the wrist and promptly flown back to Seattle on a private jet with a hand-written note of apology from prosecutor Mignini, I’d like to say this: the victim is still a victim and the perpetrator is still a perpetrator, regardless of who the victim happens to be and regardless of the gender of said perpetrator. This is called “justice” and you can find it in the dictionary, under ‘J’. You can also find the word “gender” under ‘G’, I hope you’ve noticed they are separate words, start with separate letters, and are should be completely and utterly unrelated.

Luckily, it seems the idea of ‘selective justice’ (i.e. one rule for me and another for my male friend here) is not very popular in Italy, where Amanda is currently being held equally responsible with two male counterparts for murder and sexual violence. As we all knew it would, the truth is gradually coming out, ugly as it is, and remember it’s only just begun. The case is unique and important, not because of what she did, but because of the equal way she is being prosecuted.

I urge you all to put aside your preconceptions, and look at the evidence closely, justice for Meredith depends on it.

2. Repost of Victoria Brownworth 2014

On Knox As Ice-Cold And Media’s Hit & Miss Performance

They called her “Foxy Knoxy” almost from the start. The pretty, young American student living in Perugia, Italy, working at a bar in the evenings and attending classes by day. Amanda Knox had fallen in love with Perugia on a trip to Italy when she was 15. Five years later, she was living there–on her own, free from the constraints of family and chaperones, involved with a young Italian man, Raffaele Sollecito, a few years older than she.

In 2007, she was sharing an apartment with two Italian women students and a British exchange student, Meredith Kercher, who, like Knox, had fallen in love with Italy at 15. By all accounts Kercher was a lovely young woman. Smart, pretty, funny and fun-loving. She was immensely popular, and like Knox, working and studying while enjoying the freedom of being far from home. Knox and Kercher were roommates, but not necessarily friends. Kercher spent time with British friends, while Knox spent more time with Italians.

It was All Soul’s Day, Nov. 2, 2007 when Kercher was found dead in hers and Knox’s apartment, stabbed to death after having been beaten and sexually assaulted. An autopsy report concluded she had died from the three cuts to her throat, but that she had died slowly, as the artery had not been slashed. Hand-prints on her face and neck allegedly matched Knox’s as did a bloody footprint. Two months-long trials would later posit that Knox had held Kercher down in a sex game/menage that went awry with Kercher, Knox, Sollecito and Rudy Guede, an acquaintance of other students living in the apartment building.

Knox told police she had come home from Sollecito’s apartment to find Kercher’s door locked. She allegedly found drops of blood on the floor of their shared bathroom and feces in their toilet. She took a shower and left the apartment. Some time later she and Sollecito called the police. The door to Kercher’s room was broken in and her bloody body was found under a duvet.

Knox and Sollecito were taken in for questioning. The Italian roommates were out of town. On Nov. 5, both Knox and Sollecito were arrested and charged with sexual assault, staging a burglary and murder, among other charges.

Knox asserted that her boss, Patrick Lumumba, a Congolese native and single father, was the murderer and that she had heard Kercher scream while Kercher was with Lumumba, but had done nothing.

No evidence that Lumumba had ever been near the apartment was found and Knox later admitted she had lied about Lumumba. She was sentenced to an additional four years in prison for false incrimination. She was ordered to pay 32,000Euros in restitution and 40,000Euros in court fees Lumumba incurred in the first trial. Lumumba has asserted that Knox is guilty and that she “destroyed my life” with the false accusation that kept him in prison awaiting trial.

After the Jan. 31 conviction was announced, Lumumba told London’s Channel 5 News,
“I’d like to tell Amanda that she’s completely destroyed my life. She made me, my family, my friends suffer. She should be writing to me to apologize.”

Lumumba also said, “I think Amanda blamed me because she wanted to protect herself. She chose me because it would be much easier for everyone to think that a black guy had done it. It was her strategy and she almost succeeded.”

Knox told police she had “covered her ears as he [Lumumba] killed” Kercher and her screams pierced the apartment.

I’ve covered a number of murders, including several high-profile cases, in my journalistic career. One of my earliest major assignments was covering the murder of Eigel Vesti, a young, gay fashion model in New York City who was murdered at the height of the club scene in a grisly S/M killing. I was contracted by Simon & Schuster to write a book about another high-visibility killing–that of Steven Redman, a high school senior, by his classmate and former friend, Robert Rosenkrantz. Redman had allegedly outed Rosenkrantz, so Rosenkrantz shot him the night of their graduation.

But it was the so-called Trial of the Century that I wrote about when I was at the Philadelphia Daily News that is most like the case of Amanda Knox. The first Knox trial lasted nearly as long as that of O.J. Simpson and similar controversy swirled around it. There was no Johnnie Cochran to assert, “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit,” but there were many similarities to that well-known trial of the former NFL star.

Except unlike Simpson, Knox was convicted. Twice. First in 2009 after an 11-month trial and again January 31, after a second, four-months-long trial. In 2011, the 2009 verdict was overturned on appeal, citing procedural issues. But the second trial was succinct: blood and DNA evidence, false alibis, witness reports all put Knox, Sollecito and Guede at the scene of the crime. Guede, who is black and who has also asserted his innocence like Knox and Sollecito, has remained in prison since 2007 and is scheduled for release soon. He was convicted in a separate trial and was sentenced to 16 years in prison.

Both Knox and Sollecito spent four years in prison.

The Italian court ruled Jan. 31 that Knox, now 26, and her ex-boyfriend, Sollecito, now 29, did indeed kill the 21-year-old London student in Perugia in 2007. Their 2011 acquittal of the 2009 conviction was itself overturned last year, after Italy’s highest court ruled the appeals process had not been handled properly.

On Jan. 31, Knox was sentenced to 28-and-a-half years in jail while Sollecito was given 25 years in jail. Meredith Kercher’s sister Stephanie and brother Lyle could be seen smiling after the verdict. The Kercher family has urged the U.S. to “allow justice to be served” and “extradite Knox immediately to serve her sentence.” Knox refused to appear in Italy for the trial, saying she could not afford the trip, although she received a $4 million book advance in 2011. The U.S. has an extradition treaty with Italy. It would be highly unusual for the U.S. to refuse to extradite a convicted defendant.

Knox and Sollecito are both appealing the Jan. 31 verdict, which could take as long as a year. Knox has vowed to fight the verdict. Sollecito told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Feb. 4 that he was only convicted the second time because the court presumed he had to be guilty since he was Knox’s boyfriend. He once again asserted his innocence.

The most common response to the murder of Meredith Kercher is, “We’ll never know what happened.” Similar to what has been said of victims Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman in the O.J. Simpson trial.

Is Knox guilty? Two long, complicated trials have said yes. Knox’s massive PR machine–much like Simpson’s–says no. That PR machine also ignores the fact that Knox falsely accused a black man of the murder and that he spent time in prison solely because of her accusation that she saw him take Kercher into the bedroom and heard her scream—while she, Knox, did nothing.

Angelina Antoinetti, Knox’s personal prison guard, told reporters after the conviction on Jan. 31 that Knox has reinvented herself for the media.

“Now she’s become this TV star, who cares passionately about what happened to her ‘friend’ Meredith Kercher, and wants the truth to come out. She’s painting herself as a warm, loving human being, but the Amanda I knew was so composed, I never saw her suffering and other prisoners and staff called her the Ice Maiden.”

Antoinetti said Knox “never, ever talked of Meredith or expressed emotion about her death. Whenever Meredith’s face came on TV she didn’t want to know and didn’t respond. She was impenetrable. Underneath the veneers she remains the same controlled woman I knew well in Capanne prison. She was so composed, I never saw her suffering.”

Antoinetti said that Knox “became attached to me. I opened her cell each morning and shut her in at night. She liked English music like the Beatles and always sang. She had guitar lessons, too.”

Knox was “unlike any other prisoner,” Antoinetti said. “I’ve never seen another girl like her, especially so young. She’s magnetic and manipulative. She had no emotions for people, only books. She never talked to other prisoners, she was only concerned about her world. Even when they freed her after the appeal, she didn’t speak to a single person she had just spent four years with, just walked out. That’s not human, is it?”

And that is the question for many: Who is the real Amanda Knox?

As with the Simpson trial, the media has played a huge role in the Knox case. The U.K. papers labeled Knox “Foxy Knoxy” while the Italian papers played up Knox’s sexual history and the more lurid sexual elements of the case–the assertion that the murder was a drug-fueled sex game gone wrong.

In the U.S. ABC News has been a virtual PR firm for Knox, devoting hours of time on both 20/20 and Good Morning America as well as the actual ABC Nightly News promoting Knox’s innocence. Diane Sawyer did a heavily promoted hour-long interview with Knox when she was released from prison in 2011. And when the Jan. 31 conviction came in, on her ABC Nightly News broadcast, Sawyer led with “the American girl” Amanda Knox–even though Knox is 26. A full six minutes of broadcast time was devoted to Knox–including video of her singing and playing guitar. When has a national news network treated a twice-convicted murderer in such a manner?

The two media portraits of Knox–the sex-obsessed sexual manipulator she’s been portrayed as being by the European media and the pristine girl-next-door innocent-abroad the U.S. media has presented conflict, obviously. But what has been lost in the emphasis on Knox as the victim of the story is the actual murder victim, Meredith Kercher.

There’s no question sexism and misogyny have played a major role in the case. Were Knox not young and beautiful, it’s unlikely there would be as much fascination with her. There is also the American-centric position that only American courts could give a defendant a fair trial–even though the Italian process is not only much like that of the U.S., but offers a defendant a two-tiered chance at redemption, both of which Knox’s case failed. Twice.

Imagine if Knox had been brought to trial in the U.S. –accused of the sex-torture murder of a young woman of color (Kercher’s mother is Indian) yet accusing a black man of the crime and alleging she was there when he murdered the victim.

Do we think the U.S. media would be as kind to Knox under thosecircumstances, or would she be a reviled perpetrator like Susan Smith, pretending a black man had kidnapped her two children when in fact she had driven them to their deaths herself?

Would Knox have been given a $4 million advance to write her prison memoir–or would that have fallen under the “can’t profit from a crime” dictate in the U.S.?

The Knox case is all about what we perceive as “other.” In this case the villain is the Italian justice system which has to be wrong, because Knox is young and pretty and most importantly, American. And the victim is, in U.K. and European parlance, black.

In none of the media blitz surrounding Knox as victim in the U.S. has the real victim, Kercher, been a part of the story. Her bruised and cut, torn and slashed body has not been discussed. Instead we have seen Knox, her blue eyes staring into the middle distance, her dark blonde hair falling over her eyes as she plays guitar or sits at a computer writing (she’s pursuing a degree in creative writing).

There are no photos or video of Kercher, always smiling or laughing, her dark hair thrown back or falling around her shoulders. There are no photos of her very dark-skinned mother, weeping. Or her anguished journalist father, who wrote a book himself about her and the case.

Why are we so invested in Knox being innocent? Is it the perception that Americans are never guilty? Is it her good looks? Is it her “normal” background, while Guede has been portrayed in American media as a “drifter” (he wasn’t)?

Why doesn’t the American media ever mentioned what Knox did to Patrick Lumumba? Or that the Italian police also charged her with two false and slanderous claims against police–garnering six-year terms in prison each?

On Feb. 6 acclaimed British director Michael Winterbottom released a clip of his soon-to-be-released film based on the Knox case. Winterbottom bought the rights to American journalist Barbie Latza Nadeau’s book Angel Face: Sex, Murder, and the Inside Story of Amanda Knox. Winterbottom asserts his film just uses the case as a foundation for a different story, but the clip looks just like Knox.

There are no answers in the Knox case, just as there weren’t in the O.J. Simpson trial. A young woman is still dead, another convicted at two separate trials of her murder.

But what is clear, is that the media has not served justice well. American media has completely ignored facts of the case–and Knox’s indictment of Lumumba–and Kercher has been lost entirely in the emphasis on Knox as victim.

There’s no question sexism has played a major role in this case. What has been ignored, however, is how large a role racism has played–from the ignoring of Knox indicting a black man to the ignoring of the victim, herself a woman of color.

We may never know what happened on the night of November 1, 2007. But what we do know is that when young, attractive women come before the criminal justice system, they are treated differently from men. To the detriment of all–most especially the victims.

3. Repost of Selene Nelson 2014

Why Feminists Owe Amanda Knox Nothing

In May the Huffington Post published an article titled Where Are All The Feminists? Why Amanda Knox’s Story Is About More Than Murder. Lisa Marie Basile begins her piece: “Amanda Knox is innocent of murder,” before going on to suggest that Knox was targeted only because she was “sexually active and good looking”. The reason Basile cares? Because she is “a human and a feminist.”

I am also a human and a feminist. I too believe that Knox suffered inexcusably sexist treatment by the media. I also happen to believe that she is unequivocally guilty. As someone who has followed this case for many years, I take offence to the misinformation that riddles Basile’s article. Where, Basile wonders as she laments Knox’s fate, are all the feminists?

We’re right here, Lisa. Basile’s implication - that those convinced of Knox’s guilt do so because of gender prejudice - is laughable. Not only does it demonstrate astonishing ignorance of the facts of this case, but Basile’s entire article is suggestive of the role her own prejudice plays in forming her opinion of guilt or innocence.

Basile is correct that the issue of sexism towards Knox should be addressed. Continually portrayed as a sexual object by the media, the fact that Knox deigned to enjoy casual sex was held up as an indication of her deviancy, and when the press discovered that she kept a vibrator in full view in the bathroom, you could almost hear the collective intake of breath.

The media’s unwavering determination to paint Kercher and Knox as Madonna/Whore figures is also troubling. While Knox has been portrayed as manipulative and sadistic, Kercher has become virginal, passive, saint-like. This is unsettling. Would Kercher’s death be any less tragic had she shared Knox’s penchant for casual sex? Does a woman’s sexuality make her guilty? Does her presumed virginity redeem her? Kercher was an innocent victim, regardless of her sexuality; she does not need to be canonised for this murder case to be any more tragic than it already is.

However, as shameful as the prejudiced handling of the “Foxy Knoxy” persona was, it has no bearing on the evidence against her. The vast majority of people who believe Knox is guilty do not figure her sexuality into their reasoning. Her sex life has zero bearing on my belief of her guilt, nor, I doubt, the opinion of the 20+ judges who have found her guilty. Her two convictions have nothing to do with vibrators, Satanism, cartwheels or kisses, but the mountain of evidence against her. Evidence Basile simply ignores.

To claim, “There is no credible evidence” against Knox is absurd. It is actually ludicrous. Basile dismisses 10,000 pages of it as neither credible nor realistic without even acknowledging it, imparting a string of passionate pro-Knox statements that are criminally unsubstantiated.

What Basile misses is the point that were Knox unattractive, let alone a minority or male, she would have a fraction of the support she has. People want to explain the evidence away, or ignore it completely as Basile does, precisely because they don’t want to think a nice pretty white girl could commit a crime like this. Basile has conveniently neglected the fact that Knox’s femininity and attractiveness have helped her far more than hindered her, because in order to believe Amanda Knox, you have to overlook the following:

Her DNA mixed with Kercher’s blood in five spots; Knox’s fresh blood, and Kercher’s blood, smeared in the bathroom; Sollecito’s DNA on Kercher’s bra; Knox’s DNA on the handle of the murder weapon, Kercher’s on the blade; the footprints matching the bare feet of Knox that contain her DNA mixed with Kercher’s; the staged crime scene with glass on TOP of the clothes and a near impossible window entry point; Knox’s false accusation of her employer; her total lack of alibi and multiple lies; the phone and computer records that prove dishonesty; her utterly implausible account of the morning after the murder; the frantic call she made to her mother in the middle of the night that she “forgets” making; her email home; the witness testimony; the fact Knox knew multiple details about the murder she couldn’t possibly have known; the evidence suggesting Kercher’s body was moved and the scene staged hours after her death when Rudy Guede, the third person convicted of the murder, was long gone.

This is by no means an exhaustive list of evidence but is just an indication of how embarrassing these “no evidence” claims are. Blind ignorance of the subtleties of this case seems to have spread across a great deal of America like some kind of mental epidemic. What has prompted this trust of Knox, so entirely out of place considering she is a convicted liar and slanderer? Even the 2011 appeal that acquitted her (and was subsequently thrown out by the Supreme Court for being inaccurate, illogical and biased) increased her sentence in this respect. The urge to believe the Italian courts have now twice convicted two young people without evidence is shocking and reeks of xenophobia.

Basile then tries to defend Knox’s “false confession”: “We should remember that Knox was interrogated for many hours without food or water [and] slapped and screamed at in Italian,” she writes sympathetically. What nonsense. It is a fact that Knox’s interview was at most two hours long; minimal research would have told Basile that the torturous, lengthy interrogation story was utterly fabricated. So fabricated that her parents face criminal defamation charges for claiming otherwise.

More importantly, this wasn’t a false confession now was it; it was the flagrant false accusation of an innocent man. As soon as Knox learned of Sollecito’s alibi withdrawal for her (another fact conveniently ignored by her supporters and Basile), out came the finger of blame, the same finger she kept pointed at her employer for over two weeks while he languished in jail. Two weeks. This was not a “false confession” blurted out on impulse: Knox let an innocent man suffer for a fortnight.

Basile gives free pass after free pass to Knox, justifying her lies, excusing her behaviour, dismissing the evidence. Why? Why is Knox’s word enough?

She may argue this: “There was no hair, fibre, footprint, shoe print, handprint, palm print, fingerprint, sweat, saliva, DNA of Amanda Knox in the room where Meredith Kercher was killed,” as her attorney stated. “That tells you unassailably that she is innocent.”

Sounds compelling. That is until you realise that applying that logic to all the evidence, rather than just that which incriminates Knox, presents quite the conundrum:

“There was no hair, fibre, footprint, shoe print, handprint, palm print, fingerprint, sweat, saliva, DNA of Rudy Guede in the blood-stained bathroom where there is the blood and DNA of Knox. That tells you unassailably that Guede did not do the crime alone.”

Or this:

“There was no hair, fibre, footprint, shoe print, handprint, palm print, fingerprint, sweat, saliva, of Knox in the bedroom where she slept…That tells you unassailably that Knox never even lived in the cottage.”

Aside from the inaccuracies throughout, what grates most about Basile’s piece is the title, the suggestion that feminists have failed Knox. What total short-sightedness; what utter blindness to the sensitivities of this case. Feminists owe Knox nothing and to suggest we do is ignorant and insulting. She had a hard time in the press, yes, but frankly it’s not the point. I too have been angered by what the media too often chooses to focus on, but for entirely opposing reasoning: it allows her supporters to deflect the actual issue. It allows them to gloss over the unequivocally incriminating evidence that Amanda Knox either murdered Meredith Kercher herself or, at the very least, played a devastating part.

Her “Foxy Knoxy” status is an irrelevance. No one has “failed” her. She has failed herself, and she fails the Kercher family each and every day she protests her innocence. There is only one female victim here - Meredith Kercher - and how dare Basile allow Knox’s PR spin, and her own wilful ignorance, to conceal that.

2. More, On a Similar Note

Excellent on American TV is the “super-lawyer” Wendy Murphy of Harvard and Boston University who runs a national women’s movement. To see her on CNN tying the absurd Knox groupie Anne Bremner in knots is really something.

Others in the top tier of opinion makers are Nancy Grace and Anne Coulter. Both continue to have not the slightest doubt but that Knox is guilty and her means of liberation thoroughly illegal.

The serial defamer David Marriott never dared to try to meddle with their pitches. But he ran a sleazy campaign against many other highly objective women reporters. Much of their fine reporting can be found on TJMK here.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 12/21/21 at 07:30 PM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (18)

Friday, December 17, 2021

Correcting NY Times 13: No, Jessica Bennett, Nasty Men Were NOT Why Knox Went On Trial #1

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Boiled-up Bennett almost failed to report that the victim was a woman

This is the thirteenth in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

Post Overview

Parts 1 to 7 below were first posted by Hopeful back in 2014. It is the first of two posts that take issue with Jessica Bennett’s repeated insinuations that nasty tabloids and nasty men were the entire causes of Knox going on trial.

Jessica Bennett gave the real victim, Meredith, a remarkable woman with a huge career up ahead, barely a passing nod. Not one of the justice officials was fairly described. And omitted entirely by Jessica Bennett, amazingly, is all of this.

1. In all respects Sollecito, a man, was treated in the exact same way; his prison was mostly worse.

2. Sollecito has attacked Knox maybe 50 times; he was the ONLY man ever to really take her to task. 

3. The male lead prosecutor handled Knox very kindly, and very unusually even gave her this break.

3. The many Perugia police and Rome investigators on the case were at least 50 percent women.

5. The supervising magistrate in the evidence-collection and pre-trial period was a woman.

6. Women were on all panels of judges that because of mushrooming evidence refused Knox bail.

7. The co-prosecutor at trial who presented more than half the evidence was a woman.

8. Many of the witnesses at the trial were women, as were the co-judge, and half of the jury.

9. The most comprehensive and objective English reporting from Perugia was mostly filed by women.

10. Knox’s women prison companions and women guards were all or almost all very caring of her.   

1. Late Joiner Of The Dwindling Knox Parade

A week ago in the Huffington Post Lisa Marie Basile asked why feminists are not storming the barricades for Knox.

The gullible Lisa Marie Basile had obviously swallowed whole Knox’s avid self-promotion and serial demonizing to create a muddled article at best, confused about feminism, poorly researched on the case, nasty to good Italians who are in no easy position to defend themselves, and hugely disrespectful to the real victim. 

I want to explain what real feminists are seeing that the faux feminist Lisa Marie Basile has managed to miss. Above all feminism means justice to women, and the many women who post on and support sites like TJMK are upholding justice, for the only woman who counts in this case.

2. An Attack With Indisputable Sex Aspects

Remember, Meredith is the innocent woman who was slain by an undeniably jealous and unhinged fellow female who used two males as her henchmen. No Italian court disagrees with that, and Italian courts (except when hijacked as with Hellmann) are extremely careful. .

The victim was left partly nude and in a staged position on the floor to suggest to whoever found the body that it was a sexual attack. Has Ms. Basile forgotten this actually was a sex crime for which all three were charged and sentenced? This surely opened the door for examination of the sexual behavior of the former suspects.

There was no “gendered expectation” among Italians investigating this crime, only a ” truth expectation.”

Articles like “We Are All Amanda Knox” which Basile mentioned try to normalize and even exult in Amanda’s behavior as a wild woman, but she is not at all the norm there.

Raffaele had led a more restrained sexual lifestyle, actually more typical of a coy young woman than a randy man. Raffaele, in keeping perhaps with the church doctrines in which he had been reared, had not taken any sexual partners except possibly for one, other than in his extensive fantasy life.

Guede’s sex act on Meredith was never in question, as he left behind his DNA to prove he had no boundaries. His nuisance behavior hitting on girls in nightclubs in Perugia was fully discussed, and he got no breaks from anyone on any front.

Knox herself bragged about her liberation ethics and fast work with men. Nobody else turned her into a “filthy, sex-obsessed slut” but herself. The media mostly rather neutrally reported the facts, and even when her track record of casual sex became clearly documented, it was never made a focal point of the trial at all.

What was focused on was Knox’s alibi, her lies that her boss had killed her “friend” and her phone records. Knox was under the microscope for her DNA being found mixed with Meredith’s blood in five locations of the cottage.

Knox was not questioned in court about how many boyfriends she had, or her one-night stands. She was never ever questioned about her sex partners or asked to list them, simply about what males had visited the house who might have had an interest in Meredith.

Again, this after all was staged to look like a sex crime, and had signs of sexual activity on the body. The Italians were hardly rushing off on detours for false reasons of prurient interests.

3. Morphing Into A New Knox Persona

For several years starting in Seattle Knox had adopted a dangerous and very irresponsible lifestyle, which she first bragged about but has tried to back away from since she left Italy. She pretends now to have a monogamous relationship with James Terrano.

Now Amanda manages to visit the television studios in a somber manner without cartwheels or doing splits and laughing. Amazing how serious she has become about her own tragedy while telling it to microphones for the world to hear after giggling about Meredith’s death and sticking her tongue out sitting on a male lap in the police station, making fun of it all when it wasn’t her death involved.

Amanda’s “offness” as Ms. Basile refers to it raised a red flag of disrespect for the victim, which was why it was significant.  Her lack of dramatic weeping outside of the cottage was never an issue.

Italians are very savvy. They are hardly the logic challenged numbskulls that Ms. Basile seems to fear they’ve been painted. Her hints that a godfearing Mignini is somehow inept shows her own bias to the godless and ruleless, the lawless and the stupid. I won’t even go into issues of spiritual faith, it is too divisive. Surely we can all agree with the mandate “Thou shalt not kill.”

4. There Was No Witch Hunt Or Inquisition

Sadly Ms. Basile has bought into Knox’s warren of lies about “forced confessions” (in actuality accusations of an innocent man!), and the cleanup that was somehow “impossible” and a “tortured five days of brutal interrogation”.

All have again and again been proven false and didnt stop her serving a three year sentence. Amanda Knox was challenged on her alibi, the presence of her blood at the scene, and her ownership of a key to the non-broken-into cottage.

She herself brought forward her alcohol and drug use, and blamed it for intoxication and lost memory for the night in question.

To rid herself of her most fundamental misconception about Amanda Knox, Lisa Marie Basile should read this series on the interrogation hoax which Knox still pushes and Basile gullibly swallowed.

5. Why Respect The Virtues Of Sexual Purity?

Modern Italian women are more fast, colorful, liberal and worldly than Americans may realize. They certainly dress a lot better. Naturally they try to live out their Catholic faith as best they can, even if we all fail to meet our highest ideals.

At the same time Italians tend to arrive at very close loving enduring families. How women prepare themselves is a very big component of this success - a success which Americans could use a lot more of. 

Here are some practical reasons why Italians value sexual responsibility, which have nothing to do with faith, religion, or patriarchy, but only the safety of innocent children.

Italians as all cultures do, prefer women who are cautious and circumspect with their sexuality, as a sign of the woman’s self-discipline, a natural caution toward males as a survival instinct which she will pass on to her offspring.

A female’s self-discipline in sexual matters is a hallmark of her personal self-respect and a sign she is able to envision her larger future as the wife of a dignified man.

Most such men hope to marry a woman clean of physical disease who also carries little emotional baggage from multiple sexual affairs and heartbreaks with multiple men.

The fewer of those encounters before marriage, the better chance the children she bears him will be in no doubt of their parentage.

This is supremely important to the man, who will be working to pass on his entire life’s work and heritage to the children he feels he has truly engendered and who carry his genes and his bloodline.

The children will more likely have a safe lifestyle of similar circumspect behavior and self-discipline inculcated by their mother who will be a large influence on their morals.

The mother’s reputation can add or detract from her children’s social position and can expand their opportunities as people of trustworthy background or its opposite.

There can be a safety aspect. A woman who has had a raunchy past may have unfinished business with various men who may possibly come back into the area, begin to harass, taunt, spread rumors, or even physically threaten and cause difficulty for a new husband’s family, suspicious that perhaps one of the offspring is his own.

In this day of twitter, instagram, Facebook, email, and YouTube, sordid rumors that were once easily squelched now become known worldwide on digital media.

It is simple logic that if a woman while in the heyday of her youth and good looks in the full bloom of health and optimism, could not make attachments or command loyalty and devotion despite going all the way to sleeping with a man, that this person somehow has her radar broken or uses poor judgment.

Perhaps she simply prefers the lust for pleasure over saving herself for marriage to the man who would one day do her the most good and with whom she would develop a lifetime relationship. At any rate, she may have a sex drive that overwhelms her judgment. It may motivate her even after marriage, to break the ties of marriage.

The husband of such a woman will also inherit her personal history and may grow to resent behaviors in her past that might tarnish his future and their children’s.

This is merely a common sense outlook on why it is smart to abstain from sexual intimacies with lots of strangers who have no ongoing goodwill toward the person whose body they use, nor any commitment to the offspring of such union financially or physically.

A woman’s body at any time could conceive despite using birth control.

In each normal sex act she takes the risk of facing the horrendous consequences of pregnancy without emotional support, finances, and then she faces 15 to 20 years of her life required to raise the child while trying to introduce him to various father figures who may never feel the natural bond to the child that a married father would.

Talk to single moms anywhere, their path is no piece of cake.  To choose this hard path by one’s own lack of self-discipline and lack of insight is a foolish act. Society is left buying the diapers and formula and helping the exhausted young mother survive her day job and come home to night feedings.

In other words, all the hard duties of childcare are foisted upon those who didn’t ask for them, who may be tired from raising their own legitimate offspring, a hard enough job with two parents committed and working on the children’s behalf.

Social services are stretched hard enough when emergencies, accidents, death or desertion of the male parent leave women and children stranded and abandoned in financial straits.

To jump over this cliff by choice or lack of foresight is foolish of a woman who knows a child needs two devoted parents. It’s self-absorbed, pleasure loving behavior with refusal to delay gratification.

It is selfish to the community.

Governments have to chase down these fathers for non-support of their own children.

Taxpayers and others who had no joy of the sex act or the union however brief it was, are forced for decades by welfare agencies (and basic compassion) to fork out child support dollars for strangers, rather than see the infant starve.

The child of these hasty and ill-fated unions already may face for a lifetime the hardship of feeling unwanted by his father. He or she may suffer embarrassment at his mom’s unwise youthful choices that were predicated on her lack of logic or poor self-control and willful betrayal of her children’s best future for one of difficulty and poverty.

Where is the love? It was love for self, not others.

An aside: Thank goodness God in heaven does love us all, no matter what our parents made a mess of. All can be resolved in peace and love, but the path of natural life will be much tougher and more limited when the child will not learn problem solving skills from two parents of the opposite sex nor have the benefit of the greater security. “Two are better than one, for they have more reward for their labor.”

6. Precisely WHO Are Today’s Feminists?

There are many forms of feminism. Oddly Ms. Basile is determined to argue for the imparting of partiality and favoritism to a woman who has been found to have killed another woman using two males as proxies. Ms. Basile’s biased view is based on Amanda Knox being wrongfully condemned because Basile thinks she is attractive and sexually free.

But this never happened. There was hard proof against her in DNA in three rooms and a corridor in the house and on a knife handle and upper blade..

Where are all the feminists? Those who have their facts right are allowing justice to take its course, that’s where. Justice is blind, and does not favor the pretty over the ugly or the rich over the poor. Yet all these things may be factors in the cause of any crime.

There are as many flavors of feminist as there are ideologies in the world. Consider this list.

  • Liberal feminism
  • Radical feminism
  • Conservative feminism
  • Ecofeminists
  • Separatist feminism
  • Materialist feminism
  • Socialist feminism
  • Marxist feminism
  • Anarcha-feminists
  • Feminist punk movement
  • Feminism as a social construction
  • Lipstick feminism

There are dozens and dozens.  There are Christian feminists (I am one). All are equal before God, Mary is the mother of the Church, she was allowed to usher in the Savior of mankind. God uses women to restore what women through Eve lost.

Look at Meredith’s heel being exposed under the duvet. (see Genesis 3:15 prophecy from God that the seed of the woman would crush Satan’s head, but Satan would bruise his heel.)

Meredith was even worried she’d packed no socks when she first came to Perugia, and she told friends she hoped her dad would bring some, revealing concern about uncovered feet. .

There are the early feminist suffragettes who worked for women’s right to vote and birth control.  The second wave campaigned for legal and social and political equality for women. Equal work for equal pay. The second wave feminists declared, “The personal is political”.

The second wave in about 30 years splintered off into various feminist camps divided on the issues of pornography *is it exploitative of women or a celebration of sexuality?, male equality versus misandry, homosexuality, the racial issues of women of color, the cultural (some Islamic, some Jewish, some WASP, etc.) women in developed countries versus poverty stricken nations.

Feminism is not a monolithic entity. Arguments abound whether we’re now living in a postfeminist society, whether gender equality has been achieved.

Then there’s third wave feminism.

7. Feminism In The Case Of Meredith’s Murder

The truth of whether a person committed a crime rises above all of these feminist ideologies. All of them. It is not a traditional role problem, it is a problem of no respect for Meredith’s particular life.

If she had been male, the bullies who killed her would not have dared.

So it was her femaleness that made her a target. Ironically her vulnerability was caused by another female’s envy and anger management issues and extremely irresponsible lifestyle.

Final word. Knox is a VERY misguided cause for every smart feminist.

Comments Under 2014 Post

Worth a read. You can find them here.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 12/17/21 at 07:36 PM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (1)

Friday, December 10, 2021

Correcting NY Times 12: It Was Not The ITALIAN Media That Massively Hoaxed And Inflamed #3

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


This is the twelfth in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

1. Strong Bias In US & UK Media

This chart shows where we place the most influential US & UK media on a bias curve.

It is where the main US and UK media positioned themselves for much or most of the time from 2007 to the end of 2015 (after which we had the deluge: the pro-Knox Netflix, VICE Media, Innocence Project, NY Times, and other propagandists).

But there are two big qualifiers.

    First, regarding the UK media, take a look at where they are on the chart. Though the thuggish Curt Knox/David Marriot PR worked really hard on UK media, and for a while fully captured the Guardian, Independent, and Daily Express, they did not capture the commanding heights of the UK media: the BBC, Sky News, London Times, or the Reuters and UPI press services. 

    Second, regarding the United States, the Associated Press and the NY Times are not merely single outlets with small audiences. The Associated Press is a New-York-based news co-operative which channels reports from Italy to 2000 or so owner/clients. The NY Times is also a news service with its reporting appearing on many other news websites.

So a single biased AP report or NY Times report (and there were many) could reach Americans up in the many millions. In sharp contrast, it was almost impossible for most Americans to learn about the truths of the case from the tiny number of media outlets carrying the objective reporting of the Rome-based foreign press pool that was under incessant pressure from the PR.

2. Birdseye View Of US & UK Media

Quite contrary to the misleading Knox PR messaging, it was the pro-Knox-bias across US media outlets that was really enormous.

This is bait-and-switch on an extreme scale. The evidence collection took a full eight months, and though this partial list of 400 points is formidable, it is still not the totality of what Italians saw live on TV or read in the documents or their own media (more on Italy coming up).

But both the Knox PR campaign and Knox herself, and thus the beholden part of the US and UK media, instead focus fiercely on a very few points, such as the DNA, and the “interrogation hoax”, and motive, and then thoroughly misrepresent that tiny bunch.

They purposely omit maybe 95% of the damning hard facts, such as: (1) Knox never a well-funded and supervised exchange student; (2) Knox shacking up with her drug dealer; (3) Sollecito & Knox incessantly fighting from time of arrest; (4) the 2007-08 pro-bail hearing failures, (5) the huge body of evidence at trial; (6) the prosecution’s major success of a unanimous verdict; (7) the obviously despondent defense’s obvious failures such as Lone Wolf; (8) the interrogation hoax and 34 other hoaxes; (9) the bending obvious to Italians and then annulling of the Hellman appeal court; (10) Knox being found guilty of criminal defamation by all courts; (11) even a bent Supreme Court chamber confirming strong proof of Knox at the murder scene, and (12) Knox not being exonerated or ever suing for wrongful imprisonment.

These are some of our birds-eye-view takes on overall US and UK media performance, noting dishonest commissions and omissions, starting from when the bias was first becoming blatant.

Click for Post:  How The Media Should Approach The Case If Justice Is To Be Done And SEEN To Be Done

Click for Post:  How The Strongarm Public Relations Resulted in Most Of The Media Getting It Wrong

Click for Post:  Why UK Media Deniers Like The Independent’s Amy Jenkins Come Across As Bigoted And Nasty

Click for Post:  Why The Media Are Wrong To Rely On Amanda Knox’s Family For Impartial and Accurate Information

Click for Post:  The Toxic Pro-Knox PR Campaign And Media Circus That John Kercher So Rightly Complained About

Click for Post:  Now France Is Ticked At The American Main Media For Mindless Assumptions About Another Case

Click for Post:  Million Dollar Campaign And American Media Come Under Intense Ridicule By An Influential Italian

Click for Post:  US And UK Media: Make RS & AK Answer The HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS Of Open Questions

Click for Post:  Tip For The Media: Getting Up To Speed With The Hard Facts Of This Complex Case

Click for Post:  The Defenses’ Dishonest, Distinctly Ill-Conceived War Of Aggression Against Perugia

Click for Post:  Admired Feminist On Knox As Ice-Cold And Media’s Hit & Miss Performance On The Case

Click for Post:  Why Did The Mainstream Media Enable A Takeover By The Conspiracy Nuts?

Click for Post:  Knox’s War Of Aggression Against Italy: Questions For Media To Nail Her Once And For All

3. Pinpointing Of Specific Bias

These are our posts on a dozen of the main US and UK media outlets. Some carried very good reports; but all twelve carried bad reports which the posts took to task. 

1. Associated Press

Reporting by Trisha Thomas was excellent back in 2009 but all the other AP reporters and especially Colleen Barry were wildly pro-Knox. The damage Colleen Barry caused with her huge platform as described in Part 4 above was enormous. 

Click for Post:  Slanted Associated Press Paroting Of Knox PR Campaign Release Achieves Over 800 Google Hits

Click for Post:  Perhaps Associated Press Should Try Reporting The Odds?!

Click for Post:  Inaccurate Report By The Associated Press Carried By Over 2,000 Media Sites

Click for Post:  Dear CEO Gary Pruitt: Could The Associated Press Please Report Much More Accurately?

Click for Post:  Another Highly Misleading Associated Press Report By Colleen Barry Shows Up On 700 Media Websites

2. CBS News/48 Hours

This group aired some of the worst reports and featured a very self-serving Doug Preston. The producer headed off to prison for a blackmail attempt, which is pretty telling.

Click for Post:  Why CBS Should Report Better - Way Better - On This Case

Click for Post:  Rumors In Manhattan About Ludicrously Bad CBS Report

Click for Post:  CBS Reporter’s Bizarre Claims About Prosecutor And Reporters

Click for Post:  CBS Report Sets New Record For Trashing Of Meredith, Xenophobia, Multi-Inaccuracies, Libels

Click for Post:  Producer Of CBS Reports On The Case “Crazy, Desperate, Stupid, And/Or Unscrupulous” ?

3. CNN News

Paul Callan, Nancy Grace, Wendy Murphy, Andrew Cuomo, Lisa Bloom, and Hada Messia were all well-informed and impartial. But Jane Velez-Mitchell, Ann Bremner, Joey Jackson, and Drew Griffen were truly terrible.

Click for Post:  Now CNN Gets It All Wrong - What Will They Make of THIS In Italy?

Click for Post:  The Summations: Perenially Fact-Challenged CNN Reports Correctly For Once

Click for Post:  Drew Griffin Report This Sunday At 8:00 Intent On Sustaining CNN’s Extreme Bias

Click for Post:  Explaining Why CNN Is So Desperate For A Hit And Quaint Niceties Like “Truth” Be Damned

Click for Post:  Questions For Knox: 15 Questions That Drew Griffin On CNN Tonight SHOULD Have Asked

Click for Post:  Open Letter To CNN Head Ken Jautz: Reports As Terrible As Drew Griffin’s Risks All CNN’s Credibility

Click for Post:  Knox-Mellases And Candace Dempsey Display Extreme Contempt Of Court On CNN

4. Daily Express

The Express did little of its own reporting, but it ran a sleazy, abusive and dishonest “gotcha” interview by Bob Graham with Dr Mignini.

Click for Post:  Report By Bob Graham In The Daily Express Close To Breaking New Record For Inaccuracy

5. Fox News

Business reporter Lis Wiehl made some callous remarks, and after we posted she next showed up nervous. Geraldo Rivera was deeply in the tank for Knox and in many segments came across as stridently anti-Italy. 

Click for Post:  Fox News Analyst Lis Wiehl Seems to Think Meredith’s Murder Is One Terrific Great Joke

Click for Post:  Respected Journalist Carl Bernstein Criticizes “Murdochism” For Debasing News Reporting

6. The Guardian

Perugia reporter Tom Kington could be okay but…  Simon Hattenstone??? It seems David Marriott had a very strong connection to the editor there and for year the Guardian stridently bashed Italy and its justice officials.

Click for Post:  Did The State Department Offer Assurances To Knox She Never Would Be Extradited?

Click for Post:  Did The Bungling Guardian Check Sollecito Enabler Andrew Gumbel’s Myriad False Claims?

Click for Post:  Obstruction Of Justice? How The Guardian Poisons Public Opinion Against The Italian Courts

Click for Post:  The Guardian Publishes A Negative Take On Italian Justice Rather Poorly Researched

7. Huffpost

The Huffpost ran the ludicrous takes of the crackpot feminist Linda Marie Basile who seemed unaware that Sollecito even existed.

Click for Post:  Explaining Why Smart Feminists Have Rightly Been Extremely Wary Of Amanda Knox

Click for Post:  Why Smart Feminists Much Prefer To Keep Amanda Knox At Arms Length

8. The Independent

Rome-based reporter Peter Popham had an enormous chip on his shoulder about Italy. So apparently did Amy Jenkins. 

Click for Post:  Peter Popham Of The UK “Independent” Sure Has Drunk The Knox PR Kool-Aid

Click for Post:  Why UK Media Deniers Like The Independent’s Amy Jenkins Come Across As Bigoted And Nasty

9. New York Times

The New York Times was actually chastised by Italian media for some stridently anti-prosecution reporting. It never once did a good report on any aspect of the case. Two reviewers praised Knox’s appalling book. However, some unrelated takes on Italian justice were excellent work.

Click for Post:  The New York Times FINALLY Awakes To The Case

Click for Post:  How The New York Times Caused Unneccesary And Unhelpful Anger In Italy

Click for Post:  The Second Misleading New York Times Commentary On The Case

Click for Post:  Today’s New York Times Headline: Why Most US Main Media Should Be Disbelieved And Ignored

Click for Post:  Italy’s Advanced, Effective, Humane Law & Order System Also Adopted By City Of New York

Click for Post:  NY Times Describes How Italy Leads The World In Rehabilitation

10. Rolling Stone

Rolling Stone twice carried seething anti-Italy commentary by Nathaniel Rich. Later its reputation crashed when it very damagingly reported a fake US campus rape claim as genuine.

Click for Post:  A Deeply Ugly, Inaccurate And Callous Piece Of Junk By Nathaniel Rich In “Rolling Stone”

11. Seattle PI

The extensive reporting by Andrea Vogt was the very best. We quoted from it dozens of times. But it also carried inflammatory prejudice in an unpaid blog by the agenda-driven Candace Dempsey whose family is from Calabria. 

Click for Post:  Hearst’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Is The Editor Banning Truthseekers From Website?

Click for Post:  Hearst’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Now On The Defensive?

Click for Post:  Looks Like Seattle Post Intelligencer Could Be On The Rocks

Click for Post:  Is Seattle Case Coverage STILL In Cloud-Cuckooland?

12. Time Weekly

“Reporter” Nine Burleigh’s posts from Italy (she spoke no Italian and had zero justice-related expertise) became increasingly poisonous against Italy, the prosecution, and the Catholic church, as she reputedly fell for Knox and sought to wedge Edda Mellas away.

Click for Post:  Knox Groupie Nina Burleigh Posting The Nastiest And Least Accurate Reports

Click for Post:  Nina Burleigh: View From A Broad Who Doesn’t Seem To Like Broads Or Being Abroad

Click for Post:  Media Starting To Take A Closer Look At The Knox PR Shills With Nina Burleigh Exhibit One

Click for Post:  What’s Nina Burleigh Got Against Women? A Bizarre Time Report Suggests Deep Problems In Her Psyche

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

4. Comments Under Original Post

The original of this post ran in August 2019 and comments can be seen here.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 12/10/21 at 06:00 PM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (1)

Tuesday, December 07, 2021

Correcting NY Times 11: It Was Not The ITALIAN Media That Massively Hoaxed And Inflamed (2)

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



How Seattle is misinformed. Exoneration? Riiiight….

This is the eleventh in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

Explanatory Note

There’s a new PR strategy evident here to claim that “the media” almost 100% caused Knox’s plight.

The exact same media, as the previous post showed, that inflamed their vast audiences with reports that Knox was “a victim” of an unfair “retrial” or “second trial” and had been “found guilty twice”.

Confused?! This excellent post by the Machine four years ago explained how the actual huge media bias the NY Times reflects, pro “I-am-the-real-victim” Knox, was engineered. 

1. Rampant Conspiracies

This condemnation is written in light of the ever-growing wave of translated transcripts.

They show how extremely good the investigation and case at trial really were. And how extremely wrong were too much of the press. Why did mainstream media organisations allow so many conspiracy nuts to spout their unsubstantiated and ridiculously far-fetched claims?

Mainstream media organisations have known for a while that the general public has an insatiable appetite for documentaries about allegedly innocent people who have been convicted of murders they didn’t commit.

A cursory glance at the selection of true crime documentaries on Netflix provides evidence of the appeal of this specific genre. Amanda Knox, West of Memphis and Making of a Murderer are all hugely popular.

The Serial podcast about the Adnan Syed/Hae Mine Lee case is one the most downloaded podcast of all time. Sarah Koenig presented the case from the defence’s perspective and concluded there isn’t enough evidence to convict Adnan Syed of Hae Min Lee’s murder. 

The juries in the respective cases above listened to the prosecution and defence present their cases in court.

They weighed the testimonies of the experts and witnesses for both sides and they were all convinced that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, Damian Echols, Jesse Misskelley and Jason Baldwin and Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey and Adnan Syed were all involved in exceptionally brutal murders.

There is damning evidence against all the people mentioned above. But many journalists don’t want the facts to get in the way of a good story.

2. Worst Of The Strong-Armers

Paul Ciolino admitted in a question-and-answer session about the Meredith Kercher case at Seattle University that CBS News didn’t care whether someone was innocent. The only thing they care about is the story.

I work for CBS News. I want to tell you one thing about CBS. We don’t care if you did it. We don’t care if you’re innocent. We like a story. We want to do a story. That’s all we care about.

It was recognised as far back as 1999 in the legal profession that journalists have an inclination to slant their reports in favour of the defendants.

P. Cassell, “The guilty and the ‘innocent’: An examination of alleged cases of wrongful conviction from false confessions”, Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 1999:

...academic research on miscarriages should not rely on media descriptions of the evidence against defendants. Journalists will all too often slant their reports in the direction of discovering “news” by finding that an innocent person has been wrongfully convicted.

The default position of mainstream media organisations in the US was that Amanda Knox is innocent despite the fact that the vast majority of journalists who covered the case weren’t in a position to know this - they hadn’t regularly attended the court hearings or read a single page of any of the official court reports.

The news organizations in Seattle was so partisan in their support of Amanda Knox that they were effectively just mouthpieces for the PR firm of David Marriott that was hired by Curt Knox to influence a credulous and naive local audience who felt duty-bound to support the hometown girl.

Lawyer Anne Bremner couldn’t resist the temptation to use the case to promote herself in the media. Judge Michael Heavey was recruited so he could use his position as a judge to sway the public.

The vast majority of people in Seattle were kept completely ignorant of the basic facts of the case by all their newspapers and all their TV news, so they were not in a position to realize that both Bremner and Heavey got basic facts wrong.

Many American journalists who reported on the case hold the ridiculous belief that the US legal system is the only competent and just one in the world, and that no US citizen charged by a foreign court with any crime can possibly be guilty of it or ever receive a fair trial.

The claim that Amanda Knox was being framed for a murder she didn’t commit by corrupt officials in a foreign country by her supporters was manna from heaven for mainstream media organizations in America.

It was a sensational story that was guaranteed to enrage and entertain a gullible American public in equal measure.

It’s not possible to ascertain precisely who originated the story that Amanda Knox was being framed for a murder she didn’t commit by a corrupt legal system.

But it almost certainly came from someone within or very close to Amanda Knox’s family. Jan Goodwin was one of the first journalists to make the claim after interviewing Edda Mellas for Marie Claire in 2008.

Studying abroad should have been a grand adventure. Instead, Amanda Knox has spent a year in jail, accused by a corrupt legal system of murdering her roommate.

Goodwin didn’t offer any evidence to substantiate her claim that the Italy legal system is corrupt, presumably the word of Edda Mellas was good enough for her.

It transpired that the word of Edda Mellas and ex-husband Curt and Amanda Knox’s supporters was good enough for the vast majority of journalists who covered the case on both sides of Atlantic.

They unquestiongly accepted everything they heard without bothering to do any fact-checking whatsoever. Time and again not a single investigator or court official in Perugia was interviewed.

This explains the reason why so many articles about the case are riddled with factual errors and well-known PR lies.

Other media organisations wanted to get in on the act and claim there was dastardly plot to frame Amanda Knox for Meredith’s murder.

CBS News allowed a couple of zany conspiracy nuts to spout their nonsense without providing any evidence to support their wild-eyed claims. Here’s Paul Ciolino again:

This is a lynching ... this is a lynching that is happening in modern day Europe right now and it’s happening to an American girl who has no business being charged with anything. (Paul Ciolino, CBS News.)

Here is Peter van Sant.

We have concluded that Amanda Knox is being railroaded… I promise you’re going to want to send the 82nd Airborne Division over to Italy to get this girl out of jail. (Peter Van Sant, CBS News.)

The reporting was invariably tinged with xenophobic sentiments. Italy was portrayed as some backward Third World country whose police force was comically incompetent. Here’s CBS’s Doug Longhini.

But in the case of Amanda Knox, the American student convicted of murder in Italy last December, the Via Tuscolana apparently failed to separate fantasy from truth. Too many Italian investigators rivaled Fellini as they interpreted, and reinterpreted facts, to suit their own, surrealistic script.” (Doug Longhini, CBS News).

WHERE in all the transcripts is that proved?  Doug Longhini’s pompous and pseudo-intellectual comments are meaningless and lack any substance, although he was no doubt very pleased himself for his “clever” reference to Fellini.

Ironically Longhini was unable to separate fantasy from truth when he produced the error-ridden American Girl, Italian Nightmare for CBS News. The documentary includes the familiar PR lies about satanic rituals, the 14-hour interrogation sessions, and Knox not knowing Rudy Guede.

Lawyer John Q Kelly seemingly forgot the Latin maxim “semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit” - “he who asserts must prove” - when he claimed that Knox and Sollecito were being railroaded and evidence against them had been manipulated.

My thoughts, Larry, it’s probably the most egregious international railroading of two innocent young people that I have ever seen. This is actually a public lynching based on rank speculation, and vindictiveness. It’s just a nightmare what these parents are going through and what these young adults are going through also.

“There’s been injustice here. There’s been injustice in other countries but this is just beyond the pale. The manipulation of evidence; the most unfavorable inferences drawn from the most common of circumstances and conduct was just a gross injustice here.”

(John Q Kelly, CNN).

Judy Bachrach was also allowed to claim there was a conspiracy to Amanda Knox on CNN.

Everyone knew from the beginning that the prosecutor had it in for Amanda Knox, that the charges are pretty much trumped up…

From the beginning this was carefully choreographed, they wanted to find her guilty, they’ve kept her in jail for two years even before trial and they did find her guilty. This is the way Italian justice is done. If you’re accused, you’re guilty.

There isn’t an ounce of hard evidence against her and all of Italy should be ashamed actually.” (Judy Bachrach, CNN).

Arguably the craziest conspiracy nut - and the competition is fierce - is the former FBI agent Steve Moore in early retirement.

Steve Moore claimed the Perugian police, Guilano Mignini, Dr Patrizia Stefanoni, Edgardo Giobbi the head of the Violent Crimes Unit in Rome, Judge Massei, and the Italian Supreme Court were all part of a dastardly plot to frame Amanda Knox.

Moore claimed the following on his blog.

For this to happen, though, pompous prosecutor Giuliano Mignini, forensic perjurer Patrizia Stefanoni, and mind-reading detective Edgardo Giobbi (and others), must be prosecuted for their corruption. The judge who rubber stamped the lies in the first trial, Massei, must be also called to the bar of justice-or back to law school.

In a discussion with lawyer Paul Callan on CNN Moore actually claimed the Supreme Court was involved in the conspiracy.

Paul Callan: “And now “¦ and they (the Perugian police) got the Supreme Court of Italy involved in this conspiracy? You know, that’s like saying that “¦ [Steve Moore interrupts]”

Steve Moore: “Yes, they do. Yes, they do. You are being naive. You don’t understand the Italian system. You don’t understand it. You are defending something you don’t understand.”

Barbie Nadeau reported Moore’s claim that evidence was manipulated for The Daily Beast.

The evidence that was presented in trial was flawed, it was manipulated.

Steve Moore has never provided any evidence to support his wild-eyed hysterical claims there was a huge conspiracy involving a prosecutor, different police departments, Judge Massei and judges at the Italian Supreme Court to frame Amanda Knox for Meredith’s murder.

It’s no wonder TV legal analyst Paul Callan was smiling, desperately trying not to burst out laughing, when he discussed the case with Moore on CNN.

Moore provided irrefutable proof in the short time he was on CNN that he is ignorant of the basic facts of the case, and that he hasn’t read any of the official court reports. He falsely claimed “the DNA that they said was Raffaele’s was actually a woman’s DNA.”

No expert claimed this at the trial.

Sollecito’s DNA was identified by two separate DNA tests. Of the 17 loci tested in the sample, Sollecito’s profile matched 17 out of 17. David Balding, a professor of Statistical Genetics at University College London, analysed the DNA evidence against Sollecito and concluded it was “very strong”.

Moore told Erin Burnett: “The second trial proved with independent experts that the DNA that they claim was the victim’s was not on the knife.”

A number of forensic experts - Dr Stefanoni, Dr Biondo, Professor Novelli, Professor Torricelli, and Luciano Garofano - have all confirmed that sample 36B which was extracted from the blade of the knife WAS Meredith’s DNA. The independent experts did not carry out a test on this sample. 

In England there were deranged conspiracy nuts claiming Amanda Knox was framed too.

Amy Jenkins bizarrely claimed in The Independent that Knox and Sollecito were the victims of a miscarriage of justice because Knox was a young woman, the Italians didn’t like the fact Knox snogged her boyfriend and someone needed to save face or something.

The truth is, Amanda Knox’s great crime was to be a young woman ““ but mainly it was to be a young woman who didn’t know how to behave. She was 20 years old, she was suffering from shock, and she was in a foreign country. She was interrogated with no lawyer and no translator present. She made a phony confession.

Clearly no saint, she wasn’t a Madonna either. That’ll make her a whore then. She snogged her boyfriend; she was slightly provocative on Facebook; she turned an inappropriate cartwheel. In a Catholic country, it’s clearly not such a leap to go from there to stabbing your room-mate in the neck during a violent sexual assault ““ because that’s the leap the prosecution made.

To save face, Knox and her poor boyfriend had to be somehow levered into the frame. As the whole juggernaut of injustice chugged on it became harder and harder for the six lay judges who acted as a jury to destroy a case that had been constructed over two years by prosecutors who were their close working colleagues.” (Amy Jenkins, The Independent).

3. Concluding Advice: READ THE DOCUMENTS

More and more the translated documents prove that all of them have been wrong. The conspiracy theorists predictably haven’t provided one iota of evidence that there was ever any conspiracy to frame Amanda Knox for Meredith’s murder.

I suspect the producers at mainstream media organisations like CBS News and CNN knew there never was any conspiracy to frame Amanda Knox all along, but they didn’t get care because they wanted a sensational story. 

Too many people within the media perversely see murder as entertainment. Rather than providing balanced and factually accurate coverage of murder cases they want to outrage and entertain the masses with melodramatic stories of conspiracies involving corrupt prosecutors and cops who want to frame innocent people for murders they didn’t commit instead.

We shouldn’t be surprised by the popularity of Making of a Murderer on Netflix. It filled a vacuum after Knox and Sollecito were acquitted in 2015.

I have no doubts that journalists from mainstream media organisations are currently looking for the next alleged case of someone being framed or railroaded for a murder they didn’t commit.

Comments Under Original Of This Post

There was an interesting exchange in the comments under the original post.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 12/07/21 at 09:10 AM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (1)

Wednesday, December 01, 2021

Correcting NY Times 10: It Was Not The ITALIAN Media That Massively Hoaxed And Inflamed

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Sollecito at his & Knox’s first appeal, repeated

This is the tenth in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

1. Origin Of This Hoax

On 26 March 2013 Italians heard from the Supreme Court what they all already knew.

The appeal by Knox and Sollecito in front of Judge Hellman in 2011 had been corrupted (in at least five ways, noticed mostly only by Italians). So Hellman’s overturn of Massei’s guilty verdict was thus annulled.

Thus the judicial processes of RS and AK were not definitively completed as from their late-2011 release, because Italian law says that the Supreme Court MUST sign off first.

So THEIR OWN FIRST APPEAL would have to be repeated, in Florence, if Knox and Sollecito didn’t want to return to prison to serve out their Massei-awarded terms.

Strict measures would be taken to keep it uncorrupted this time (though Knox and Sollecito both tried; this post gives one huge example).

And in early 2014 Knox and Sollecito lost their own appeal. As hundreds of Americans do, every day. The prosecution’s quickfire fact-based case, well summarized in several days, had remained too strong.

(The Fifth Chambers a year later had zero evidence presentations - the trial and appeal prosecutors were not even invited, as the fix was already in to arrive at that “not enough evidence” outcome.) 

2. Correct Italian Framing Of Repeat Appeal

It’s important to note that the list of examples below is only of website headlines; there are hundreds more examples of correct framing in media texts and TV reports.

“Processo d’appello” is CORRECT

Click for Post:  Cronaca: Meredith, il 30 settembre processo d’appello a Firenze…
Click for Post:  Il sussidiario: Al via il nuovo processo d’appello...
Click for Post:  Perugia Today: “a Firenze il nuovo processo d’appello
Click for Post:  Quotidiano: “il nuovo processo d’appello a Sollecito e ad Knox…”
Click for Post:  La Nazione: famiglia Kercher parteciperà al processo d’appello
Click for Post:  Corriere: A Firenze il via all’appello bis
Click for Post:  24ORE Meredith, sarà da rifare a Firenze il processo d’appello
Click for Post:  Giurisprudenza Penale: Omicidio [MK] la sentenza di appello (bis)
Click for Post:  Yahoo: Meredith, pg Appello bis chiede condanna [Knox & Sollecito]


3. False English-Language Framing Of Repeat Appeal

As described by sources, around 2013 Curt Knox and David Marriott ran an Orwellian campaign to make key components of the American and British media, especially the Associated Press, inflame much of the public into thinking that this was hugely unfair.

To paraphrase this framing: “Look, Amanda and Raffaele had already won an appeal! Now the vindictive Italian justice system and its vindictive prosecutors and judges are putting them on trial all over again!”

So in compliant components of the US and UK media, those meanie Italians, and kangaroo courts, and anti-Americanism, and double-jeopardy, and extradition, and witch-hunts, and sexism, were raged about, even by the New York Times as we have just seen again.

The corruption of the Hellman appeal that was the direct cause of Knox’s and Sollecito’s own repeat appeals was absolutely never to be reported. Numerous threats ensured this.

And Knox was to not only refuse to come back to Italy for her own appeal; she would also email the judge that her own appeal was very unfair, and rub in the “vindictive” smear.

It’s important to note that the lists of examples below are only of website headlines; there are hundreds more examples of false framing in media texts and TV reports.

1. “Retrial” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  Associated Press: Amanda Knox on retrial: ‘Everything is at stake’
Click for Post:  Reuters: Knox, Sollecito to face Italy retrial in Kercher murder
Click for Post:  Washington Post: Knox will not return to Italy for retrial
Click for Post:  New York Times: Amanda Knox’s retrial Begins in Italy
Click for Post:  CNN: Amanda Knox retrial verdict: Six things to know
Click for Post:  Today: Amanda Knox and ex-boyfriend found guilty in retrial
Click for Post:  NPR: Italian Court Orders retrial For Amanda Knox
Click for Post:  Guardian: Amanda Knox retrial for Meredith Kercher murder opens
Click for Post:  Independent: Knox: A retrial, two films, endless speculation
Click for Post:  Daily Beast: Amanda Knox retrial Opens
Click for Post:  CBS News: Amanda Knox retrial under way in Italy
Click for Post:  Mirror: Knox has makeover before Kercher murder retrial verdict
Click for Post:  BBC: Meredith Kercher murder: Amanda Knox retrial opens
Click for Post:  Fox: Knox retrial over killing of Meredith Kercher begins
Click for Post:  People: Amanda Knox retrial for Meredith Kercher’s Murder Opens
Click for Post:  Christian Science Monitor: Amanda Knox retrial starts without her
Click for Post:  Chicago Tribune: Amanda Knox’s retrial begins in Italy
Click for Post:  Irish Times: Italy court orders Amanda Knox retrial for Kercher murder
Click for Post:  E: Knox’s Ex Raffaele Sollecito on retrial: “I Still Live in a Nightmare”
Click for Post:  Sky News: Amanda Knox retrial: Key Questions Remain
Click for Post:  The Wrap: Amanda Knox retrial Ordered in Italy
Click for Post:  France24: Judges in Amanda Knox retrial order new DNA tests
Click for Post:  Investor Place: Amanda Knox retrial: The Verdict Is In
Click for Post:  Agence France-Press: Amanda Knox retrial for Italy murder begins
Click for Post:  Latin Times: Knox retrial Update: American Student Says…
Click for Post:  Mercury: retrial ordered as murder acquittal is overturned

2. “Second trial” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  USA Today: Prosecutor outlines case in second trial of Amanda Knox
Click for Post:  News Com: Knox’s second trial starts in Italy without her
Click for Post:  People: A critical component to Knox’s second trial…
Click for Post:  Vox: After a second trial convicted Knox and Sollecito…
Click for Post:  CBS News: guilty verdicts in the second trial
Click for Post:  Atlantic: guilty of the murder of Meredith Kercher the second time
Click for Post:  ABC News: In the second trial, the defense…
Click for Post:  CBC: Those verdicts had been overturned in a second trial

3. “Guilty again” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  Reuters: Amanda Knox Found Guilty Again
Click for Post:  ABC News: Amanda Knox Found Guilty Again
Click for Post:  USA Today: Amanda Knox found guilty again
Click for Post:  Amanda Knox guilty again
Click for Post:  Epoch Times: Amanda Knox Guilty Again
Click for Post:  Winchester: Amanda Knox guilty again
Click for Post:  Fox: Amanda Knox found guilty again of murder of roommate
Click for Post:  Mirror: Watch tearful killer describe being found guilty again
Click for Post:  CNN: Amanda Knox found guilty of murder again
Click for Post:  News-com: Amanda Knox guilty again
Click for Post:  Daily Mail: Knox’s fury after being found GUILTY AGAIN

4. “Second guilty verdict” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  Reuters:  Cassation threw out the second guilty verdict
Click for Post:  Inside Edition: Knox Defiant Following Second Guilty Verdict
Click for Post:  CNN: That second guilty verdict was thrown out in March
Click for Post:  Independent: first live interview after second guilty verdict
Click for Post:  Newsweek: threw out the second guilty verdict
Click for Post:  Daily Mail: a year after the second guilty verdict.
Click for Post:  BBC: the second guilty verdict announced by…
Click for Post:  Jerusalem Post: threw out the second guilty verdict

5. “Re-convicted” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  Agence France-Presse: Italian court re-convicts Knox for murder
Click for Post:  New York: Knox Reconvicted of Murder in Italy, Still Not Over
Click for Post:  BU Now: Knox Reconvicted for Murder

6. “Again convicts” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  SA Times Court: again convicts Knox of murder
Click for Post:  Newsmax: Italian Court Again Convicts Amanda Knox for Murder
Click for Post:  Straits Times: Italian court again convicts Knox, Sollecito

7. “New guilty verdict” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  Guardian: I feel stranded and trapped since new guilty verdict
Click for Post:  LA Times: Knox on new guilty verdict: “Hit me like a train”
Click for Post:  Entertainment: Amanda Knox reacts to new guilty verdict

8. “Third trial” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  AP News Service: FIRST TRIAL, SECOND TRIAL, THIRD TRIAL
Click for Post:  Komo News: Knox gets 28 1/2 years in prison in 3rd murder trial
Click for Post:  The Columbian: Italian court convicts Knox of murder in 3rd trial

9. “Third verdict” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  USA Today: Amanda Knox trial nears third verdict
Click for Post:  UPI: Amanda Knox awaits third verdict from Italian court
Click for Post:  Fox News: Amanda Knox trial nears third verdict

10. “Conviction reinstated” is NOT correct

Click for Post:  Associated Press: Amanda Knox’s murder conviction reinstated
Click for Post:  Hollywood Reporter: Amanda Knox’s Murder Conviction Reinstated
Click for Post:  Tribune Chronicle: Amanda Knox’s murder conviction reinstated
Click for Post:  NPR: Knox Guilty Verdict Reinstated
Click for Post:  CSM: Court in Florence reinstated a guilty verdict
Click for Post:  Turley: Amanda Knox’s murder conviction reinstated
Click for Post:  RNZ: Knox murder conviction reinstated
Click for Post:  Toronto Star: Knox has murder conviction reinstated

4. Was “Double Jeopardy” Effective?

There are certainly examples of media having been corrupted into believing this, but it failed as a full-blown meme because the many US lawyers who did their homework, in contrast to most reporters, could see this was no second trial.

It was simply a conviction upheld. It did not result from a trial (or even a mistrial, which Americans are quite familiar with). It resulted from a defendants’ first appeal, quite legally and correctly done over. 

A survey of websites of American lawyers suggests that a majority could see Knox’s guilt. To many of them the more relevant legal issue was one of extradition against which to them Knox had no clear case, especially as this was an instance of murder. 

And the US very rarely refuses to extradite, as we have posted, because they will seek in turn to have their own perps sent back also - Italy actually sent several renegades back to the US during this judicial process.

5. And What Of The Italian Reaction?

Even now this giant hoax remains mostly below the radar in Italy. It was not Italian “tabloids” demonizing “Foxy Knoxy” that lied to and inflamed their audiences on a grand scale.

It was most of the American press.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 12/01/21 at 10:00 AM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (8)

Sunday, November 28, 2021

Correcting NY Times 9: Final Fatal Sequence Proves 3 Attackers With Complete Certainty

Posted by Cardiol MD


This explains autopsy findings. It may not be an easy read. It is the ninth in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

1. Context Of This Post

In previous posts I noted my extensive court experience with forensic testimony. I have American doctorates in medicine and law.

Also that the remorseless waves of forensic evidence above all, in days of harrowing closed-door presentations of expert testimony in 2009, (1) ended the defenses’ feeble bids to frame Guede as a lone wolf, (2) caused Sollecito and Knox to react with evident stress in front of a closely-watching jury, and (3) above all caused unanimous verdicts of guilty to murder with a sex crime component.

[Massei Report] Within the crime of murder, carried out in the course of the sexual assault which Meredith Kercher was subjected to according to what has been presented, the crime of sexual assault is assimilated as a special aggravating circumstance of the former [i.e. of the murder].

2. Availability Of Forensic Detail

The forensic evidence published by the courts was in Italian, distributed between several documents, and reported-on by less than 5 percent of the non-Italian media. The BBC, Associated Press, Reuters, London Times and New York Times, made zero mention of it.

Meredith’s autopsy was performed by Dr. Luca Lalli. Though the court heard them described at length, his detailed findings are not included in Massei’s report, and they still await their full translation into English. The Massei report includes only a limited paraphrase of Lalli’s findings.

Accordingly, to fully comprehend the totality of it in English requires the reading of: (1) the early 2009 Micheli Report; (2) the early 2010 Massei Report; (3) the early 2011 Giordano Report; and (4) parts of Darkness Descending by authors Russell, Johnson, and Garofano (see more below).

Here now is a safe bet for you. Not a single pathologist anywhere who is on top of all of this evidence will ever conclude that Meredith was not the victim of a pack attack.

Contrary to the incessant bait & switch of the toxic Knox PR in the US (“but the DNA…”) which had zero effect on any jury in Italy, not even one court, including the annulled 2011 appeal and the final appeal to the 2015 Supreme Court, ever concluded to the contrary. It all still stands.

Even the Knox & Sollecito defenses stopped denying it after 2009. No TV report or article or book has ever attempted to prove that Guede or anyone else was a lone-wolf killer in light of this vast amount of material.

3. The Final Fatal Sequence

In my opinion the most decisive fact excluding the single attacker theory is all the hard proof that 2 different knives were unquestionably used to torture and murder Meredith on the night. 

There were 2 major penetrating knife-wounds into Meredith’s neck; one entering on the left-side, and one entering on the right-side, which was made by a pocket-knife of the size Sollecito customarily carried.

The latter wound could not have been made by whatever knife entered on the left-side as the size discrepancy was huge. Two knives had to have been used.

For enigmatic reasons, Massei chose to disagree with the reconstruction proposed by the prosecution’s expert witnesses, which depicted Meredith on her knees facing the floor: Massei concluded that Meredith was in a standing position facing her attackers:

Massei Page 372-373: considering the neck wounds sustained, it must be believed that Meredith remained in the same position, in a standing position, while continuously exposing her neck to the action of the person striking her now on the right and now on the left. Such a situation seems inexplicable if one does not accept the presence of more than one attacker who, holding the girl, strongly restrained her movements and struck her on the right and on the left because of the position of each of the attackers with respect to her, by which it was easier to strike her from that side.

4. Certainties re Final Fatal Sequence:

Here I reiterate the relevant certainties which I first posted in Those Pesky Certainties Cassation’s Fifth Chamber May Or May Not Convincingly Contend With #3 on Wednesday, May 20, 2015.

Meredith’s torture & murder, perpetrated by 3 people, took place in her room at Number 7, Via della Pergola in Perugia, Umbria, Italy on the night of November 1-2, 2007. This room measured eleven by nine and a half feet, contained a single bed, a bedside table, and a cupboard. The space was small but enough for Meredith and three perpetrators.

Certainty One re Final Fatal Sequence

In “Darkness Descending - the Murder of Meredith Kercher”  Paul Russell (Author), Graham Johnson (Author), and Luciano Garofano (Author) give clearer, more detailed descriptions of Dr. Lalli’s findings than Massei does.

On pages 72-74 of DD it emerges that the cut (Stab A) made by a large knife in Meredith’s neck was on the left-side, ran obliquely from left-to-right, almost parallel to her jaw, and slightly upwards.

Certainty Two re Final Fatal Sequence

DD does state that the knife entered 8cm vertically below her left ear, 1.5cm horizontally towards the front of her neck, but does not specify the cut’s length.

Certainty Three re Final Fatal Sequence

A large knife created a gaping wound, visible only through the opened-skin of the left side, continuing its travel under the skin, traveling across the mid-line plane, towards the right-side, exposing the oral cavity, fatty tissues and throat glands. Important jaw muscles were also severed.

Certainty Four re Final Fatal Sequence

As DD states, there was another stab wound (Stab B) on the right-hand side of Meredith’s neck, 1.5 cm long, penetrating 4 cm subcutaneously.

Certainty Five re Final Fatal Sequence

Stab B was made by a knife smaller than the above large knife.

Certainty Six re Final Fatal Sequence

The wound was shallow, did not create a gaping wound, did not cut important subcutaneous structures, but did create a route to the exterior through which blood from Stab A, then created by the large knife on Meredith’s left side, could also exit to Meredith’s right side.

Certainty Seven re Final Fatal Sequence

The large knife had damaged no significant vessels of the left side.

Certainty Eight re Final Fatal Sequence

Blood also flooded the subcutaneous tissues around the breech in the right-hand side of Meredith’s airway caused by the knife-stab on the left-side of her neck.

Certainty Nine re Final Fatal Sequence

This resulted in Meredith’s inhalation of her own blood.

Certainty Ten re Final Fatal Sequence

Meredith stops screaming, but now her blood seems to be everywhere, including over her attackers, and they quickly abandon her, already evading the accountability they are fully aware is theirs.

Certainty Eleven re Final Fatal Sequence

As DD comments, during Meredith’s autopsy, surprise was expressed that the Jugular Veins and Carotid Arteries (of both right and left sides) were intact.

Exzperts who read about this murder concluded from this that the killers must have known about the major blood vessels (MBVs), but not about branches-of-Carotid-branches such as little RSTA.

5. Beyond Any Reasonable Doubts re Final Fatal Sequence:

Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt One re Final Fatal Sequence

Accepting Massei’s conclusion, Knox and Sollecito were standing-up and facing Meredith in Meredith’s room. Knox, Sollecito and/or Guede, were participating in the restraining of Meredith.

Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt Two re Final Fatal Sequence

Sollecito (or possibly Guede) was holding the smaller Knife, probably in his right hand. This smaller knife made Stab B.

Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt Three re Final Fatal Sequence

Stab B preceded Stab A, and caused Meredith’s scream.

When Meredith screams Knox plunges Knife36 into Meredith’s neck in the above long-axis direction, from left to right, transecting Meredith’s Hyoid bone, first opening Meredith’s airway to the atmosphere, then transecting Meredith’s Right Superior Thyroid Artery.

Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt Four re Final Fatal Sequence

Knox was holding Knife36, probably in Knox’s right hand, against the left side of Meredith’s neck with Knife36’s point directed slightly upwards toward the right side of Meredith’s neck, the blade-label facing towards Knox, the palm of Knox’s right hand also facing towards Knox and the long-axis of Knife36 angled a few degrees above horizontal.

Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt Five re Final Fatal Sequence

When Meredith screams Knox plunges Knife36 into Meredith’s neck in the above long-axis direction, from left to right, transecting Meredith’s Hyoid bone, first opening Meredith’s airway to the atmosphere, then transecting Meredith’s Right Superior Thyroid Artery.

Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt Six re Final Fatal Sequence

A thin stream of bright-red blood spurted from this artery to its exterior environment, probably through the cuts made in her skin to the outside by both knives.

(Consistent with bleeding from both cuts, Follain, in his book “A Death In Italy” states that Guede saw that blood was coming out of the left side of Meredith’s neck. Follain also states that Francesco Camana of the Rome forensic police, in Camana’s written report, notes that spurts of blood in the middle of Meredith’s chest made her sweatshirt more bloody on the right side than on the left side)

Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt Seven re Final Fatal Sequence

The large knife was Knife-36, which had been brought to the murder room from Sollecito’s kitchen.

Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt Eight re Final Fatal Sequence

The 3 murderers were Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, & Ruede Guede.

6. Other Essential Facts Corroborating Roles of AK & RS

1. Amanda Knox admitted she was present at the place and time of Meredith’s murder.

2. Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on the top of the handle of Knife-36

3. Meredith Kercher’s DNA was found on the blade of Knife-36.

4. Amanda Knox admitted that Meredith had never been in Sollecito’s apartment.

5. A second sample of Knox’s DNA was also found on Knife-36, where the blade goes into the handle. This second sample was an LCN sample of mixed DNA, and was statistically determined to be Knox’s DNA. (RIS Berti & Barni 2013 report)

6. A DNA mixture compatible with Knox’s and Sollecito’s DNA was found on another stained pocket knife that Sollecito had on him.

7. Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp. 

8. Some 7 samples yielded DNA mixtures compatible with Ms. Kercher’s DNA mixed with either Knox’s DNA, Sollecito’s DNA or Guede’s DNA.

9. A DNA mixture compatible with Ms. Kercher’s DNA and Guede’s DNA was found on Ms. Kercher’s purse near the zipper.

10. A DNA mixture compatible with Ms. Kercher’s DNA and Knox’s DNA was found in three blood traces in the bathroom: (1) on the bidet drain plate, (2) in the sink and (3) on a plastic container containing cotton swabs.

11. A DNA mixture compatible with Ms. Kercher’s DNA and Knox’s DNA was also found in a Luminol-revealed blood-stain on the floor of Romanelli’s room, and in a Luminol-revealed bloody footprint in the corridor.

12. A second Luminol-revealed blood stain in Romanelli’s room yielded Ms. Kercher’s DNA.

13. A sample of blood from the small bathroom faucet yielded ONLY Knox’s DNA.

14. Guede’s DNA was found in fewer places than Knox’s: on Ms. Kercher’s purse, the left sleeve of her sweat jacket, her bra strap, in Ms. Kercher and on the toilet paper in the large bathroom.

7. Forensic Conclusions

In Common Law Jurisdictions, such as U.S. Federal Courts, U.K., Canada, & Australia, etc, Knox and Sollecito, as well as Guede would surely have been found guilty and would have failed appeals, if any were even allowed.

There would have been no possibility of crime-scene amateurs and public-relations hired guns to contend this, for at least three reasons: (1) they very conspicuously lack anyone of status qualified to do so; (2) the extensive testimony in closed-court hearings would never be so described in a public document; and (3) Common Law juries are “black-box” and in most cases including murder do no explaining (also judges sometimes forbid jury members from talking later).

The decisions in Italy widely suggest to Italians the main influence of Sollecito’s Mafia connections, of which Knox is a very lucky collateral beneficiary.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 11/28/21 at 05:17 PM • Permalink for this post • Archived in Hoaxers from 2011Jessica BennettComments here (4)

Thursday, November 25, 2021

Correcting NY Times 8: Some 20 Forensic Proofs Guede Did NOT Attack Meredith Alone

Posted by Cardiol MD




This explains autopsy findings. It may not be an easy read. It is the eighth in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

1. Guede Persona, An Overview

First, for the record, I have testified on forensic evidence at numerous trials.

Convicted murderer Rudy Guede to this day claims, quite unbelievably, that Meredith let him into the house. His evolving claims as to how they had arranged that earlier were all thoroughly shot down at his trial.

But at the same time, he was no drifter or serial knife carrier, he had no police record in 2007 (unlike Knox and Sollecito), and no drug dealing has ever been charged or proved. Up to very recently, he had had a full-time paying job up north. And attempts to pin him to three burglaries all fell flat:

In the Milan “break-in” Guede had a key. In October 2008 Judge Micheli mistrusted and sharply rebuked a witness who claimed a “break-in” by Guede; he filed no police report. And the lawyers office “break-in” had to be two people with a car, opposing forces copying files on a contentious case, the lawyers themselves believed.

Guede seriously discounted his role on the night of Meredith’s death, but some physical evidence (not a lot) proved he had played a part in the attack. Thereafter his shoeprints lead straight to the front door.

2. Moving Target In Court

Neither Judge Micheli nor Judge Massei nor the Supreme Court believed he acted alone or had any part in the very obvious cleanup that had been carried out.

The Knox and Sollecito defenses failed miserably to prove he climbed in Filomena’s window, and despite much innuendo they never really tried to prove he was a lone attacker.

That is why in 2011 we saw two of the most bizarre defence witnesses in recent Italian legal history, the jailbirds Alessi and Aviello, take the stand

Alessi became so nervous making his perjured claim that Guede told him Guede did it with two others that he was physically sick and had to take time off from the stand.

Aviello loudly proclaimed that his brother and another did it (not Guede) and then claimed the Sollecito family via Giulia Bongiorno floated bribes including payment for a sex-change operation in his prison for false testimony.

Tellingly, although Bongiorno threatened to sue Aviello, she never has. Even more tellingly, Judge Hellmann himself initiated no investigation, and simply let this serious felony claim drop dead.

Here is a far-from-exhaustive list, first posted here in April 2013, of 20 reasons why Rudy Guede could not have acted alone. Also why not even one single scrap of evidence has ever been found for any two other than Knox and Sollecito themselves.

3. Twenty Lone-Wolf Disproofs

1.  Guede’s Final Appeal Report said Meredith sustained 43 wounds

The testimony at the 2009 trial about the 43 wounds was presented in closed court out of humane respect by the jury for the feelings of Meredith’s family.

So even the diligent and trustworthy Italian media mostly missed this, as they were locked outside, and to our knowledge all of the normally sharp foreign reporters also missed out. 

Mention of the 43 wounds was omitted from the 2009 Massei Trial Report and also from the 2011 Hellman Appeal Report.

Its inclusion in December 2010 in Judge Giordano’s Supreme Court report on Guede’s final appeal reflects that report’s excellent factual completeness.

The PMF translation at the time read, in relevant part:

The body presented a very large number of bruising and superficial wounds – around 43 counting those caused by her falling – some due to a pointed and cutting weapon, others to strong pressure: on the limbs, the mouth, the nose, the left cheek, and some superficial grazing on the lower neck, a wound on the left hand, several superficial knife wounds or defence wounds on the palm and thumb of the right hand, bruises on the right elbow and forearm, ecchymosis on the lower limbs, on the front and inside of the left thigh, on the middle part of the right leg, and a deep knife wound which completely cut through the upper right thyroid artery fracturing the hyoid bone, a wound which caused a great deal of bleeding.

Including the number of minutes occupied by an initial verbal confrontation, the escalation of that confrontation into taunting and then the physical attack, leading to the infliction of 43 wounds, and to the fatal stabbing, how many minutes would all of this occupied?

The prosecution estimated it took fifteen.

2.  Meredith had taken dance classes and played football & karate)

See the Massei Translation, p23.

Every day Meredith called her family, with whom she had a very close relationship. She had taken classes in dance and played sports (football, karate); she was a strong girl, both physically and in terms of temperament (cf. statements by her mother and by her sister Stephanie, hearing of June 6, 2009).

3.  Meredith was a strong girl, physically and in temperament

See the statements by her mother and by her sister Stephanie (hearing of June 6, 2009). and description of her karate. (Massei Translation, pp23, 164, 366, and 369).

With regard to the totality of these circumstances, it must be considered that Meredith could only have made an outright refusal to Rudy’s advances and in doing so could also count on her slim [fit] physique, which the photos allow [one] to understand, [and] on her good athletic training (other than dance she had also done sports characterised by a certain physicality such as football, and had even taken a course in karate), sustained by her strong character.

4.  Meredith must have been “strongly restrained”

See the Massei Translation, p371; p399, in the Italian original.

Conversely, considering the neck wounds sustained, it must be believed that Meredith remained in the same position, in a standing position, while continuously exposing her neck to the action of the person striking her now on the right and now on the left. Such a situation seems inexplicable if one does not accept the presence of more than one attacker who, holding the girl, strongly restrained her movements and struck her on the right and on the left because of the position of each of the attackers with respect to her, by which it was easier to strike her from that 372 side. One of these attackers was Rudy and the others were those who allowed Rudy to enter the house and who were with him in the house and who, in order to lead the nvestigations astray, then organised the staging of the broken window and the mess in Romanelli’s room: Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, according to all that has already been shown.

5.  Meredith remained virtually motionless throughout the attack

That was in spite of Meredith’s physical and personality characteristics [Massei Translation p369]  [Massei Translation p370-371].

A first indication to be taken into account is Meredith’s physical build: the photographs of her body and the data of her approximate height and weight reveal a physique with “normotrophic muscular mass and normally distributed subcutaneous fat” (cf. declarations Lalli p. 3), a slim physique which would have permitted Meredith to move with agility. To this must be added the declarations of the parents and the sister of Meredith. Her mother, Arline Carol Mary Kercher, recalled that Meredith had practised football and karate (p. 7 hearing 6 June 2009), and her sister, Stephanie Arline Lara, stated that Meredith also did boxing, if only the once, and that “physically she was very strong” (p. 20, hearing 6 June 2009). Also her father, John Leslie Kercher, declared that his daughter was quite strong and had taken a course in karate (p. 23 hearing 6 June 2009). It has also been noted that Meredith was not in bed and undressed when the “advances” and the attempts to subject her will commenced. Being still dressed and awake, and since it must be excluded because of what has been said above that the violent action could have taken place with Meredith lying on the bed, it is considered that she, who was sober and fully conscious since no traces indicating either the use of drugs or the abuse of alcohol were found, would have opposed a firm resistance, as she could claim a strong physique, experienced in self-defence by the lessons in karate that she had taken.

6.  The defensive wounds were almost non-existent

See the report of Dr Lalli, pp. 33, 34, 35 with the relevant photos. From Massei Translation p370:

The signs of this resistance, however, consist in a scream, the scream heard by Nara Capezzali at around around 23:30 and by Maria Ilaria Dramis when, having gone to bed at 22:00 pm, she awoke at a later time which she was not able to quantify; they consist also in some tiny defensive wounds: one on the palm of her [396] right hand of a length of .6cm showing a tiny amount of blood; another on the ulnar surface of the first phalange of the second finger of the left hand, also of length .6cm; another on the fingertip of the first finger with a superficial wound of .3cm, and another tiny wound corresponding to the fourth radius.  Compared with these almost nonexistent defensive wounds (cf. report of Dr Lalli, pp. 33,  34, 35 with the relevant photos), there is an injured area which is impressive by the number,  distribution and diversity, specifically of the injuries (bruises and wounds) on the face and neck of Meredith.

7.  One killer couldn’t inflict 43 wounds with so few defensive wounds.

See the Massei Report quotes above.

8.  There must necessarily have been two knives at the scene of the crime

See the Massei Translation p377.

Even this consideration, therefore, leads one to hold that the biological trace attributable to Amanda and found on the knife handle, could have derived from the use of the knife for the purpose of striking, rather than to cut food; it could have derived, therefore, from the harmful action carried out against Meredith and as a consequence, a biological trace attributable to Meredith remained in the tiny striations present on the face of the blade, in spite of the subsequent cleaning, and which does not appear otherwise explainable as to how, in this regard, it was to be found there (Meredith had never been in Raffaele Sollecito’s house and could never have used this knife). Moreover, the knife Raffaele Sollecito carried with him had a definitely shorter blade as has been seen than the length that would have been necessary for causing the deeper resulting wound, with a depth of 8cm, and therefore, there must necessarily have been two knives at the scene of the crime, first one, and then the other, being used against Meredith.

9.  A lone killer would need one hand/arm or both to restrain Meredith

So how could he use 2 knives?  To use 2 knives a lone killer would have to place 1 knife down, leaving blood-stain[s] wherever it was placed, and then reach for the other knife.

Even wiping the blades on the killer’s clothes, using the one hand, and later scrubbing of the knives would not erase all the blood, as has already been demonstrated.

10.  Two killers could divide attack, one holding Meredith, both holding knives

Meanwhile the other killer used one hand/arm to restrain Meredith, and the other hand to use the various knives. Could a lone killer accomplish all that?

11.  Meredith’s shoes, pants and underwear had been removed

See the Massei Translation p.370

“It is impossible to imagine in what way a single person could have removed the clothes that Meredith was wearing (shoes, pants and underwear), and using the violence revealed by the vaginal swab, could have caused the resulting bruises and wounds recalled above, as well as removing her sweatshirt, pulling up her shirt, forcing the bra hooks before tearing and cutting the bra.”  [Massei Translation p.370]

12.  Meredith’s sweatshirt had been pulled up and removed.

See the quote above of page 370 of the Massei Trial Report Translation.

13.  Meredith’s bra had been forcibly unhooked

See the quote above of page 370 of the Massei Trial Report Translation.

14.  Meredith’s bra had been torn

See the quote above of page 370 of the Massei Trial Report Translation.

15.  Meredith’s bra had been cut

See the quote above of page 370 of the Massei Trial Report Translation.

16.  Violence to Meredith was revealed by the genital swab.

See the quote above of page 370 of the Massei Trial Report Translation.

17.  In the 2011 Hellmann appeal Sollecito’s own lawyers didnt allege lone killer

They themselves brazenly introduced false testimony to the effect that there were two other killers.

18.  Even Judge Hellmann didn’t deny the complicity of AK and RS

Even H/Z seemed to conclude they are probably guilty, but not beyond a reasonable doubt:

“in order to return a guilty verdict, it is not sufficient that the probability of the prosecution hypothesis to be greater than that of the defence hypothesis, not even when it is considerably greater, but [rather] it is necessary that every explanation other than the prosecution hypothesis not be plausible at all, according to a criterion of reasonability. In all other cases, the acquittal of the defendant is required.”  [H/Z Report p.92]

19.  Judge Micheli, in Guede’s trial, found that Guede did not act alone

And that the evidence implicated Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as accomplices of Rudy Guede in the murder of Meredith Kercher.

20.  Massei found that the evidence implicated AK and RS

He concluded they were joint perpetrators with Rudy Guede in the murder of Meredith Kercher.

4. Proof Of Pack Attack Was Huge

There is an incessant claim among conspiracy theorists THAT KNOX’S OWN LAWYERS NEVER MADE that there was no proof Knox was in Meredith’s room. Simply not true.

1. The autopsy results (essentially unchallenged by the defenses) show definitively that at least two attackers and almost certainly three MUST have carried out the attack.

2. The minute-by-minute recreation of the attack on Meredith and subsequent rearrangement of her body in closed court at trial REQUIRED three to be there.

3. Knox’s DNA mixed with Meredith’s DNA elsewhere, Sollecito’s footprint on the bathroom mat, and his DNA on Meredith’s bra clasp, are ULTIMATE PROOFS.

It is actually very rare for murder scene analysis and autopsy analysis and DNA analysis to all provide such firm proof of who the killers were.


Tuesday, November 23, 2021

Correcting NY Times 7: No Jessica Bennett Evidence Does NOT Prove Guede Was Sole Killer

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Juror amused at Guede tying opposing counsel in knots in 2011

This is the seventh in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

Post Overview

See how those reporters groveling to Knox never seem curious about who the “real killers” were?

An increasingly frantic Knox has incessantly been blaming all of the attack on Guede. She is sure to do it yet again, maybe even today, as Guede is now free to speak out.

But guess who turned their backs on the so-called lone-wolf hoax 10 years ago? It was Knox’s own defense.

Her team and Sollecito’s had demonized the absent Guede almost daily at trial in 2009, and brought in witnesses, every one of which proved incredibly weak. The prosecution simply sat there, amused.

And in the excellent explanation of the trial verdict by Judge Massei (already anticipated by Judge Micheli) the lone-wolf notion proved an enormous fail. Many of the reasons are explained below.

So at their appeal in 2011, Knox’s and Sollecito’s own defenses turned their backs on the failed lone-wolf ploy, and they instead brought in two witnesses (Alessi and Aviello) from different prisons for a Plan B.

The nefarious pair were meant to testify “Yes, it WAS a pack attack, we all concede that; but the pack did not include Sollecito and Knox; it was really some other guys”.

Well, that did not go well.

There were no other guys. Aviello was sick, so scared was he of a perjury charge. And Alessi was yelling to the judge that the defense had offered bribes.

Here now is a superb post by Marcello in 2013 definitively dismantling for Knox many main elements of the lone-wolf hoax.

1. Problems Of Your “Guede did it alone” Mantra

Your attempts to frame Guede for the entire attack sound racist, and they fly in the face of a multitude of hard facts.

Why are you and your more untethered supporters arguing to the media that Rudy Guede alone attacked Meredith (he could not have), that he was a drifter (he wasnt), a burglar (he wasnt), and drug dealer (he wasnt), and that his DNA traces are “all over Meredith’s room” (they werent)?

There are surprisingly few DNA traces of Guede in there, and outside Meredith’s door there is only evidence of (1) his prior use of the south bathroom, and (2) his shoeprints headed straight for the front door.

There is zero evidence that Rudy Guede was ever in the shared bathroom (the one with Sollectio’s bloody footprint on the bathmat) and zero evidence he was in Filomena’s room (the one with the broken window and the mixed DNA of Meredith and Knox). 

2. Evidence Against You Is Far, Far Stronger

Explain if you can about Sollecito’s bloody footprint. Explain if you can about the evidence of cleanup. Explain this and this about your multiple contradictory alibis.

Explain if you can why your own witnesses Alessi and Aviello were such disasters for your side in court. Explain your cell phone actions (or non-actions) and the timing and content of your phone calls, and explain your computer actions (or non actions).

Explain why in Sollecito’s book he claims he sent several emails throughout the night; but there zero records of such emails with his email provider. Explain why both Sollecito and yourself framed Dr Mignini for a crime in your books.

There are three compelling reasons above all why the Massei court and the Supreme Court will remain totally unbending on the point that Guede did NOT attack Meredith alone, and that it had to be a pack attack on Meredith.

  • One is the several full days of closed court testimony at trial by crime-scene and autopsy experts from Rome, who accounted for every point of evidence in Meredith’s room, and all the numerous wounds on her body, with depictions of a 15 minute pack attack which had to have involved three people. This seriously upset the jury and your own defense was essentially left speechless.

  • One is the prosecution’s video shown in closed court during Summations of the recreation of the attack on Meredith, which accounted for every point of crime-scene and autopsy evidence with a 15 minute pack attack involving three people.  This seriously upset the jury and your own defense was essentially left speechless
  • .
  • One is that the entry of an attacker via Filomena’s room is so absolutely unbelievable. Your own defense always knew this, and barely tried to make that sale (hence the witnesses Alessi and Aviello). There are seven other routes for a burglar to enter the house.

All of the seven are faster and quieter, and five of them are darker: two via the east windows, and three up onto the balcony and into the house via the louvre door or the kitchen window.

All seven routes would be obvious to any burglar, long before he walked all the way around the base of the house to beneath Filomena’s window (which he did several times in your scenario - while leaving no footprints at all). 

3. The Numerous Questions From Which You Hide

On or after 6 November you have both promised to appear in the appeal court in Florence. You are apparently too nervous to face cross-examination under oath, but you have said you intend to try to explain things.

    1) Rudy Guede had been to the apartment at least twice already on prior occasions and knew the boys who lived in the lower story. Why did Guede choose to NOT break-in to the lower story where he knew (or could ascertain) that all four boys were away on holiday, and therefore could break-in and rummage with some certainty of not getting caught?

    2) Why did Guede choose to break-in to the upper story of the villa mid-evening, when he surely knew Knox and Kercher would be staying at the villa for the holidays and could have been there or returned at any time to “catch him in-the-act”?

    3) Surely Guede would have verified that no one was present by circling the cottage and checking if any lights were on in the windows? But Guede “missed” the really easy way in: the balcony in the dark at the rear, used in 2 burglaries in 2009.

    4) If Guede did circle the cottage to make sure no one was there before attempting the break-in, why would he then choose the most visible and more difficult path of entry through a second story window, as opposed to the more hidden and easier path of break-in at the back of the villa, which he would have noticed while circling the villa?

    5) Why would Guede choose to break-in through a second story window that was highly exposed to the headlights of passing cars on the street as well as exposed to night lighting from the carpark?

    6) Ms. Romanelli testified that she had nearly closed the exterior shutters. Assuming her memory is correct, there is no way a burglar could easily verify if the windows were latched and if the inner scuri were latched to the window panes, which would make access to the window latch impractical unless one was armed with a core drill or an ax. Why would Guede, who was certainly familiar with such windows, choose to attempt the break-in through a window that he could not easily verify would allow him quick access?

    7) Assuming the shutters were closed, Guede would have to climb up the wall and open the shutters before smashing the window with the rock. The night of the murder, the grass was wet from rain the previous day. Why was there no evidence of disturbed grass or mud on the walls?

    8) Guede had Nike sneakers, not rock climbing shoes. How did he manage the climb up the wall with that type of footwear?

    9) If the shutters were closed, or somewhat closed, how did Guede manage to lift himself up to the sill with only an inch of sill available to grab onto?

    10) Assuming Guede opened the shutters, how did Guede verify if the inner scuri where not latched to the window panes, which would prevent access to the window latch? There was no light inside Ms. Romanelli’s room to reveal that the scuri were ajar.

    11) Assuming Guede managed to check that the inner scuro behind the right-hand window was not latched, how did he manage to break the glass with a 9 lb rock with one hand while hanging on to the sill with the other?

    12) Assuming Guede managed check that the right-hand inner scuro was not latched, how did he break the glass with the rock without having glass shards fly into his face?

    13) If Guede climbed down to the lob the 9 lb rock at the window from 3 meters below, how would he do so to avoid glass shards raining down on him?

    14) If Guede climbed down to the lob the rock at the window from below, why would he choose a 9 lb 20 cm wide rock to lob up to a window 3 meters above him, with little chance of striking the window in the correct fashion?

    15) If Guede climbed down again and climbed back up to the carpark (up a steep slope with slippery wet grass and weeds) to lob the 9 lb 20 cm wide rock from the car park, why is there no evidence of this second climb down on the walls?

    16) Why did Guede choose a 9 lb 20 cm wide rock to throw from the car park, given that a large, heavy rock would be difficult to lob with any precision? Especially considering that the width of the glass in the window pane is only 28 cm wide, surely anyone, experienced or not, would have chosen a smaller, lighter rock to throw with greater precision.

    17) If Guede lobbed a 9 lb 20 cm rock from the car park, such a lob would require some velocity and therefore force. Guede would have been roughly 11-12 feet away from the window, in order for the lob to clear the wood railing at the carpark. If the rock was thrown with some velocity, why is the upper 1/2 of the glass in the window pane intact, without any fracture cracks at all?

    18) If Guede lobbed a 9 lb 20 cm rock from the car park, such a lob would require some velocity and therefore force. Why is there so little damage to the scuro the rock hit, so little damage to the terrazzo flooring impacted by the rock, and so little damage to the rock itself, which surely would have fractured more on impact with a hard terrazzo floor?

    19) Why was there no evidence of glass shards found in the grass below the window?

    20) If Guede climbed the wall to open the shutters, climbed down and up to the car park to throw the rock, then climbed back down and up again to the window, how does he manage to hoist himself onto the sill without cutting himself on the glass that was found on the sill?

    21) If Guede climbed the wall to open the shutters, hoisted himself onto the sill, tapped the glass with a 9 lb rock to lightly break the glass in a manner more consistent with how the window was broken, why did he throw the rock into the room, rather than let it fall into the grass below?

    22) Why was no dirt, grass, muddy shoeprints or similar trace evidence found on the window sill?

    23) Why was no dirt, grass, muddy shoeprints or similar trace evidence found in Romanelli’s room?

    24) If Guede climbed the wall to open the shutters, climbed down and up to the car park to throw the rock, then climbed back down and up again to the window again, hoisted himself onto the sill without cutting himself on the glass that was found on the sill, unlatched the window and stepped inside Filomena’s room, how did he manage to get glass on top of Romanelli’s clothing that was found under the window sill?

    25) Why would Guede, who would have spent a good 10 minutes trying to break and enter with the climbing up and down from the carpark, waste valuable time throwing clothes from the closet? Why not simply open the closet doors and rifle through the clothes without creating more of mess?

    26) Why did he disregard Romanelli’s laptop, which was in plain view?

    27) Why did Guede check the closet before checking the drawers of the nightstand, where surely more valuable objects like jewelry would be found?

    28) Why were none of the other rooms disturbed during the break-in?

    29) Assuming Ms. Kercher arrived to the cottage after Guede’s break-in, presumably when Guede was in the bathroom, why did she not notice the break-in, call the police and run out of the cottage?

    30) Assuming Guede was in the bathroom when Ms. Kercher returned, why go to the extent of attacking Ms. Kercher in her room rather than try to sneak out the front door, or through the window he had just broken, to avoid if not identification, at least more serious criminal charges?

    31) Assuming Ms. Kercher was at the cottage while Guede broke-in, why did she not call the police the moment she heard the rock crash through the glass, loudly thud to the terrazzo floor and investigate what was happening in Romanelli’s room while Guede was climbing back down from the car park and climbing back up to the window?

    32) Assuming Ms. Kercher was at the cottage while Guede broke-in, Guede could have been on the sill already because he had tapped the glass with the 9 lb rock to break it. Therefore perhaps Guede was already partially inside Romanelli’s room when he was discovered by Ms. Kercher. In this case Guede follows Ms. Kercher to her room in an attempt to dissuade her from calling the police and the assault ensues. But then, if this scenario is correct, when does Guede have time to rifle through Romanelli’s clothing and effects?

    33) Why is there a luminol revealed footprint in Romanelli’s room that has mixed traces of Knox’s and Kercher’s DNA ?

    34) Why does this footprint not match Guede’s foot size?

    35) If multiple attackers were required to restain Ms. Kercher, holding her limbs while brandishing two knives and committing sexual violence, then who else was with Guede and why no traces of this 4th (or more) person(s) were found, either in shoeprints, footprints, fingerprints, DNA or otherwise?

    36) If Guede and others were involved in the assault, why has Guede not acknolwedged them, and instead consistently hinted that, and finally admitting that Sollecito and Knox were with him during the assault?

    37) If Guede and others were involved in the assault, why do the other shoeprints, footprints, DNA traces and fingerprints all point to Knox and Sollecito being present during the assault, in one way or another?

4. Italy Is Not Buying The Racist Mantra

If the mantra of Knox & her strange gang remains “the black guy did it” and “Italians are brutal, corrupt and stupid” then they should PROVE that. Mere fact-free ranting in the US will never prove Knox was not involved.


Saturday, November 20, 2021

Correcting NY Times 6: How Jessica Bennett Uses Mafia Playbook To Smear Prosecutor Mignini

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Respected NY Times Publisher A G Sulzberger

This is the sixth in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

1. The False NY Times Report

This post explains the background to the periodic demonization of any Italian prosecutors and judges the mafias are running scared of.

Two individuals long under a cloud for their mafia ties (Spezi is passed on now and Sforza - still wanted for a crime of violence in Seattle - is feigning invisibility) spread the false claim years ago that Dr Mignini was pursuing them (he wasn’t at the time but however) because he simply imagined that they were into something satanic.

Now the New York Times’s Jessica Bennett, one of a line of strange women in media seriously confused on the facts who have popped up to make Knox their own (more on this later), is unearthing and repeating as hard fact this false satanic claim.

What they likely do remember are the more salacious details of a Halloween murder in a picturesque medieval town: the prosecution’s theory about a satanic sex game gone awry.

On the “satanic” see below. On the “sex game gone wrong” this was actually a decent proffer by the prosecution in early days, because the recreation of the crime did in fact suggest a hazing with sexual overtones, and the legal teams were buying in to it. But the parents insisted on a hard line instead.

Foolishly as it turned out: all three perps were handed stiff sentences and all three looked brutal in Italian eyes. All three were CONVICTED of a sex crime. Jessica Bennett doesn’t try to explain that - as she doesn’t try to explain the arcs of Sollecito, or the lawyers, or the juries, or the many prosecutors and judges in the case. Or the three bent courts.

2. Dr Mignini’s 2013 “Satanic” Rebuttal

This is what the New York Times, given some actual fact checking, could very easily have found out. It was not the first or last time that Dr Mignini explained this.

To the editor of Florence Corriere

Dear Director,

I am Giuliano Mignini, the magistrate who performed the investigation and trials of first instance and appeal in Perugia against the people accused of the murder of Meredith Kercher, as well as the investigation into the death of Francesco Narducci linked to the one performed by the Florence Prosecution Office in relation to the masterminds of the “Monster of Florence” murders.

I saw reported the interview that the journalist Mario Spezi - a person accused in the Narducci case - did with Amanda Knox, a main defendant in the appeal trial that will start today published in the Corriere Fiorentino on Sep. 29 2013.
 
In two recent cases the Court of Cassation has annulled verdicts, which acquitted Knox and Sollecito, and which decided [by Judge Micheli] a dropping of charge against Spezi (the parts regarding ‘lack of certainty about malice’ were annulled too).

Therefore I don’t need to add anything further on that point.  Instead, I need to point out the falsehood of an assertion which Mr. Spezi makes at the beginning of his article, as he tries to explain the reason for a link which, in his opinion, allegedly exists between the two cases, the one related to the Monster murders and Narducci’s death, and the one about the Kercher murder.

Mr. Spezi’s text claims: “a strangely similar background, for two different cases, behind which the magistrate thought he could see satanic orgies on the occasion of Halloween for Amanda, and ritual blood sacrifices as a worship to the Devil in the Monster of Florence case”.

This is an assertion that Mr. Spezi and crime-fiction author Douglas Preston have been repeating for years, but does not find the smallest confirmation in the documentation of the two trials, nor in the scenario put forward by the prosecution in which the Meredith murder (which didn’t happen on Halloween but on the subsequent night) was the consequence of a sex hazing to which Meredith herself did not intend to take part, and, above all, it was the consequence of a climate of hostility which built up progressively between the Coulsdon girl and Amanda because of their different habits, and because of Meredith’s suspicion about alleged money thefts by Knox.

Furthermore the object of the proceedings in the Narducci case is the scenario about the murder of the same Narducci and the attempt, by the doctor’s father and brother, to conceal the cause of his violent death, and this included the background within which the event - which was a homicide in my opinion and in the opinion of my technical consultant, coroner Prof. Giovanni Pierucci of the University of Pavia - had developed and taken place.

I had already denied several time assertions of such kind, but Mr. Spezi and Mr. Preston, and some people connected to them, go on repeating a lie, apparently hoping that it will become true by repeating it.

Another astonishing fact is that, despite that I was the prosecutor in the Kercher trial together with my colleague Manuela Comodi and then subsequently with my colleague Giancarlo Costagliola [at annulled apeal], and despite that I limited myself to formulating judicial requests which were all agreed to by a multitude of judges and confirmed by the Supreme Court, I am still considered as the only one responsible for an accusation against Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito, by twisting its content in various ways.

In the Narducci case, in the same way, I simply limited myself to performing the investigation and requesting the remands to trial, and the trial will have to start again now because the Supreme Court has annulled the dropping of charges [by Judge Micheli] and sent back the trial to another preliminary judge in Perugia.

The purpose - quite overt - of such endlessly repeated lies, is to defame the investigator, picturing him as a magistrate who is following alleged personal obsessions rather than sticking at facts, as instead he is.

The hope that such conscious misrepresentation of reality could bring advantage to the defences (foremost that of Spezi himself) is consistent with a bad habit which has all along flourished in Italy but is now also copied abroad.

Therefore I ask you to please publish my rectification against false and seriously defamatory information.

Kind regards

Giuliano Mignini


Tuesday, November 16, 2021

Correcting NY Times 5: How Time & Again Sollecito & Family & Lawyers Put Blame On KNOX

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Jessica Bennett channeled inflammatory, dishonest Knox PR

This is the fifth in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

1. Context Of This Post

The Knox/Sollecito relationship has always reeked of her having dropped him in it - for which he will not forgive her any time soon.

Evidence indicates he was a part of the crime (DNA, a footprint, an eyewitness to the pair in the park, cellphone and computer activity, and a missed call from his dad) and was not just brought in at the crime-scene rearrangement stage. But seemingly neither he nor Guede had signed up for Knox madly delivering Meredith’s fatal stab.

Knox was deeply into the drug scene (probably the only reason she was even there) which her flatmates intensely disliked - an angle Sollecito and his team have promoted much harder than the police after they put Knox’s drug-dealer away, entirely thanks to her.

Unsurprisingly, prior to arrest Knox tried to be at the police station whenever Sollecito was there.

Keeping a close watch on him? Fearing a stab in her own back? Remember how she showed up with him late on 5 November, unwanted and unannounced?

And sure enough, before the night was out, Sollecito had testified to police that Knox had gone out on her own on the night Meredith was killed, and had made him lie.

We have noted over three dozen of Sollecito’s telling separations from Knox. He tends to come out with them several times every year, whereupon Knox usually tellingly melts down.

Sollecito’s signed statement to police made on 6 Nov 2007 on the night of their arrest was the very first of these - and he repeated the same indictment before Judge Matteini, the supervising magistrate, to ram things home.

In 2015 our fine Wiki team obtained, translated and posted the statement Sollecito signed that night, and we posted this below.

2. Sollecito Drops Knox In Soup

We have frequently noted that RS and AK were provided with an extraordinary total of SIX opportunities in 2007 and 2008 to head off a trial and to be released.

Each opportunity is very well documented (Matteini hearings, Ricciarelli hearings, Mignini hearings, Supreme Court rulings, and the two Micheli rulings) and the transcripts and reports make very clear why RS and AK failed each time.

Not one of those transcripts or rulings has been “explained” or rebutted by the RS and AK apologists. It is very clear now that their falsifying efforts are being left way back there in the dust.

Document after document after document proving the huge strength of the case is going live in English now for which they have no realistic response.  For example, the “brutal” Knox “interrogation” on 6 November is absolutely vital to their body of claims.

But document after document has shown that to be simply a huge hoax.  Dumb silence is the only response.

This new translation of Sollecito’s statement of 6 November 2007 in the central police station, complete for the first time, has just gone live on the Wiki here. As always, we sure appreciate the translation help.

Note: many of the claims here were proved wrong by phone and computer records and those dropping Knox in the soup contradict fluctuating claims by Knox.

Sollecito never agreed to testify or be cross-examined on this or many other statements once made.

Smart move, from his point of view. At the same time from 2007 to 2016 Sollecito NEVER testified that Knox was simply at his home all of the 1 November 2007 night.

Boldface below is added by us. 

Perugia Police Headquarters
Flying Squad
General Affairs Area.

SUBJECT: Witness statement of person informed of the facts given by SOLLECITO Raffaele, already identified.

On November 5th 2007 at 22:40 in the offices of the Flying Squad of the Perugia Police Headquarters. Before the undersigned of the Criminal Investigation Dept. Deputy Commissioner MONICA NAPOLEONI, Chief Inspector Antonio FACCHINI Vice Superintendent of Police Daniele MOSCATELLI, Assistant Chief Ettore FUOCO is present the above-mentioned who, to supplement the declarations made [November] in these Offices, in regards to the facts being investigated, declares as follows: [*A.D.R. = Question Answer = QA]

QA I have known Amanda for about two weeks. From the night that I met her she started sleeping at my house. On November 1st, I woke up at around 11, I had breakfast with Amanda then she went out and I went back to bed. Then around 13:00-14:00 I met her at her house again. Meredith was there too. Amanda and I had lunch while Meredith did not have lunch with us.

QA Around 16:00 Meredith left in a hurry without saying where she was going. Amanda and I stayed home until about 17:30-18:00.

QA We left the house, we went into town, but I don’t remember what we did.

QA We stayed there from 18:00 until 20:30/21:00. At 21:00 I went home alone because Amanda told me that she was going to go to the pub Le Chic because she wanted to meet some friends.

QA At this point we said goodbye and I headed home while she headed towards the center.

QA I went home alone, sat at the computer and rolled myself a spliff. Surely I had dinner but I don’t remember what I ate. Around 23:00 my father called at my home number 075.9660789. During that time I remember Amanda had not come back yet.

QA I browsed at my computer for another two hours after my father’s phone call and only stopped when Amanda came back presumably around 1:00.

QA I don’t remember how she was dressed and if she was dressed the same way as when we said goodbye before dinner.

QA I don’t remember if we had sex that night.

QA The following morning around 10:00 we woke up, she told me she wanted to go home and take a shower and change clothes.

QA In fact at around 10:30 she went out and I went back to sleep. When she went out that morning to go to her house, Amanda also took an empty bag telling me she needed it for dirty clothes.

QA At around 11:30 she came back home and I remember she had changed clothes; she had her usual bag with her.

QA I don’t know the contents of her bag.

QA I remember we immediately went to the kitchen, we sat down and talked for a while, perhaps we had breakfast. In that circumstance Amanda told me that when she got to her house she found the entrance door wide open and some traces of blood in the small bathroom and she asked me if it sounded strange. I answered that it did and I also advised her to call her housemates. She said she had called Filomena but that Meredith was not answering.

QA At around 12:00 we left the house; passing through Corso Garibaldi we arrived in Piazza Grimana, then we went through the Sant’ Antonio parking lot and reached Amanda’s house. To walk there it took us about 10 minutes.

QA As soon as we got there she opened the door with her keys, I went in and I noticed that Filomena’s door was wide open with some glass on the floor and her room was in a complete mess. The door to Amanda’s room was open and I noticed that it was tidy. Then I went towards Meredith’s door and saw that it was locked. Before this I looked to see if it was true what Amanda had told me about the blood in the bathroom and I noticed drops of blood in the sink, while on the mat there was something strange - a mixture of blood and water, while the rest of the bathroom was clean.

QA I went to the kitchen and saw that everything was in order, then went around the rest of the house, I went to Laura’s room and noticed it was tidy. In that moment Amanda went inside the big bathroom, next to the kitchen and came out frightened and hugging me tight telling me that earlier when she took the shower [incorrect; Knox did not take a shower in this bathroom; she claimed to use someone else’s hair drier there] she had seen feces inside the toilet, while now the toilet was clean.

QA I just took a rapid glance at the bathroom trusting what Amanda had told me.

QA At that point I was asking myself what could have happened and I went out to find Meredith’s window to see if I could climb to it. I went outside with Amanda and she tried to climb to it, I immediately stopped her telling her to not do it because it was dangerous. I then told Amanda that the best solution was to break down the door, I tried to kick it and shoulder it open but I didn’t manage to open it. Then I called my sister on her cellphone and asked her what I should do since she is a Carabinieri lieutenant. My sister told me to call the Carabinieri (112, the Italian emergency number), which I did, but in the meantime the Postal Police showed up.

QA In my previous statement I told a load of rubbish because Amanda had convinced me of her version of the facts and I didn’t think about the inconsistencies. I heard the first statements that she made to the Postal Police who intervened at the place.

QA She always carried a big bag that she also had the night of November 1st.

The investigating officials acknowledge that the deposition ends at 3:30 (AM) of November 6th 2007.


Thursday, November 11, 2021

Correcting NY Times 4: Some Of Hundreds Of Examples Of Media Being Lied To About Knox (2)

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Knox has commandeered her parents’ vicious mythmaking machine

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.

This is the fourth in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

1. Overview Of This Post

What has been Knox’s only career for the past decade?

Trashing Italy and elevating herself for cash. This has involved wild mis-statements of the case, inflaming of ill-informed Americans about Italian justice and its officials, and leading much of the American media around by the nose - especially the craven New York Times.

Here are more of the Knox PR juggernaut’s false claims, as nailed by our main poster Machine back in 2014. They have been repudiated, again and again, and yet gullible chunks of the American media still unearth the zombie claims, again and again.

2. Fifty key false claims

1. Knox was called to the Perugia central police station on 5 November 2007.

Neither the police nor the prosecutors brought Knox in for questioning on 5 November 2007. She insisted on being there unwanted, and stayed after it was suggested she go home and sleep.

Amanda Knox herself testified in court that she wasn’t called to come to the police station on 5 November 2007.

Carlo Pacelli: “For what reason did you go to the Questura on November 5? Were you called?”

Amanda Knox: “No, I wasn’t called. I went with Raffaele because I didn’t want to be alone.”

Monica Napoleoni, the head of Perugia’s homicide squad, said they told Knox she should go home to rest, especially as she angrily complained she was tired, but Knox still insisted on staying:

Amanda also came that evening, the evening of the 5th. We said to Amanda that she could go home to rest. Since, during those days, she was always saying, always complaining that she wanted to rest, wanted to eat, we said: “Look, you’ve eaten; you can go and rest yourself. If there’s a need, we’ll call you.’

Knox remained very nervous, and insisted on staying there.

Inspector Rita Ficarra was the one who led the discussion on a list of possible perps with Knox which she later listed in a typed record admitted to evidence.

Rita Ficarra: My astonishment was that I saw, I found her there, and I found her “demonstrating” her gymnastic abilities: she was doing a cartwheel; she had shown the back arch, she had done the splits, and it seemed to me, sincerely, a bit out of place, that is to say given the circumstances, the moment and the place. For which [reason] I admonished her, and I even asked her what she was doing there.

She, and my colleagues also confirmed this, said to me that she had come because they had called Raffaele Sollecito, he had been invited that evening to give another recap, and she had accompanied him.

Judge Massei [GCM]: You said this to her in English or in Italian?

RF: In Italian. I reiterate that she speaks Italian, with me she speaks only in Italian. I do not understand a word of English. My colleagues confirm that there was Sollecito in another room and in that moment the Deputy Commissioner Napoleoni and other colleagues were listening to him.

And continuing to speak, the girl told me that she was rather shocked at the fact, annoyed at the fact that she had been called and recalled several times by the Police and [that] she was totally tired.

At that point, I also admonished her because I said: you’re tired, yet nonetheless you came this evening, when nobody has invited you: you could have gone to rest. And furthermore, I said, you don’t understand that we are talking about a murder, of a person that you say was your friend, [who] lived in the same house as you, it happened in your house. If the Police call you, put yourself in our shoes: we need useful information.

2. Knox was subjected to an all-night interrogation on 5/6 November.

Under the Italian definition of an interrogation (similar to US and UK) Knox was not interrogated even once prior to 18 December, and was done so then at her own request. 

According to Barbie Nadeau in The Daily Beast, Amanda Knox’s informal questioning (known as a summary/recap) began at about 11:00pm with her agreement.

Since Knox was already at the police station [in the company of Raffaele Sollecito], the head of the murder squad decided to ask her a few questions. Her questioning [about others being at the house] started at about 11pm.

After Amanda Knox had made her witness statement at 1:45am, she wasn’t questioned again that evening. She herself decided to made another witness statement at 5:45am, but she wasn’t asked any questions.

3. Knox wasn’t provided with an interpreter for her questioning on 5 November 2007.

This claim is completely false as shown through the trial testimony of Knox and her interpreter. Knox’s interpreter on 5 November 2007, Anna Donnino, testified at length at trial about Knox’s conversation that evening. And Amanda Knox herself spoke about her interpreter when she later gave testimony at the trial.

4. Knox wasn’t given anything to eat or drink.

As reported by Richard Owen, in The Times, 1 March 2009:

Ms Napoleoni told the court that while she was at the police station Ms Knox had been “treated very well. She was given water, chamomile tea and breakfast. She was given cakes from a vending machine and then taken to the canteen at the police station for something to eat”.

Also reported by Richard Owen, in The Times, 15 March 2009:

Ms Donnino said that Ms Knox had been “comforted” by police, given food and drink, and had at no stage been hit or threatened.

John Follain in his book Death in Perugia, page 134, also reports that Knox was given food and drink during her questioning:

During the questioning, detectives repeatedly went to fetch her a snack, water, and hot drinks, including chamomile tea.

This is from the relevant court transcript:

Monica Napoleoni: Amanda was given something to drink several times. She was brought hot chamomile; she was taken to the bar of the Questura to eat. First she was given brioches from the little [vending] machine.

Carlo Pacelli: These methods of treatment, how did they translate into practice? With what behaviour/actions [were they carried out] in actual fact? Earlier, you recalled that they actually brought her something to eat”.

MN: It’s true. That morning, I remember that Inspector Ficarra actually took her to the bar to eat as soon as it opened. But before [that], we have little [vending] machines on the ground floor, and she was brought water, she was brought hot drinks, she was brought a snack. But also Raffaele, he was given something to drink; it’s not as though they were kept hungry; absolutely not.

Giuliano Mignini:  Had types of comfort been offered to her?

Anna Donnino:  Well, during the evening, yes, in the sense that I remember that someone went down to the ground floor; it was the middle of the night, so in the station at that hour there are those automatic distributors; there’s nothing else; someone went to the ground floor and brought everybody something to drink, some hot drinks and something to eat. I myself had a coffee, so I believe that she also had something.



Above: Several of the myth inventors and disseminators: Sforza, Mellas, Preston

5. Knox was beaten by the police.

The witnesses who were present when Knox was questioned, including her interpreter, testified under oath at the trial in 2009 that she wasn’t hit. (Under Italian law, witnesses must testify under oath, while defendants do not, so are not required by law to be truthful on the stand.)

These are from the relevant court transcripts:

Giuliano Mignini: Do you recall, shall we say, that night between the 1st and then the spontaneous declarations and then the order for arrest, who and what was with her, other than you, whether there were other subjects that spoke with us, how they behaved? Did [she] undergo/experience violence by any chance?

Rita Ficarra: Absolutely not.

GM: Was she intimidated, threatened?

RF: No. I, as I said earlier, I came in that evening and there were some colleagues from the Rome SCO, I was with Inspector Fausto Passeri, then I saw come out, that is come out from the entry-door to the offices of the Flying [Squad], the Assistant Zugarini and Monica Napoleoni, who appeared for an instant just outside there, then we went back in calmly, because the discussion we had with her was quite calm.

Giuliano Mignini: ... violence, of any kind?

Monica Napoleoni: But absolutely not!

Mignini:  You remember it; you’ve described it; however, I’ll ask it again. Was she threatened? Did she suffer any beatings?

Anna Donnino: Absolutely not.

GM: She suffered maltreatments?

AD:  Absolutely not.

Carlo Pacelli:  In completing and consolidating in cross-examination the questions by the public prosecutor, I refer to the morning of the 6th of November, to the time when Miss Knox had made her summary information. In that circumstance, Miss Knox was struck on the head with punches and slaps?

Anna Donnino:  Absolutely not.

CP:  In particular, was she struck on the head by a police woman?

AD:  Absolutely not!

CP:  Miss Knox was, however, threatened?

AD:  No, I can exclude that categorically!

CP:  With thirty years of prison”¦ ?

AD:  No, no, absolutely not.

CP:  Was she, however, sworn at, in the sense that she was told she was a liar?

AD:  I was in the room the whole night, and I saw nothing of all this.

CP:  So the statements that had been made had been made spontaneously, voluntarily?

AD:  Yes.

Carlo Della Vedova:  This is…

Giancarlo Massei:  Pardon, but let’s ask questions, if you please.

CP:  You were also present then during the summary informations made at 5:45?

AD:  Yes.

CP:  And were they done in the same way and methods as those of 1:45?

AD:  I would say yes. Absolutely yes.

CP:  To remove any shadow of doubt from this whole matter, as far as the summary information provided at 5:45 Miss Knox was struck on the head with punches and slaps?

AD:  No.

CP:  In particular, was she struck on the head by a policewoman?

AD:  No.

Even Amanda Knox’s lawyer, Luciano Ghirga, distanced himself in the Italian media from these allegations, and never lodged any complaint:

There were pressures from the police, but we never said she was hit.

6. Knox was refused a lawyer.

Rita Ficarra and Anna Donnino testified that Knox was several times advised to have a lawyer, but each time she declined the offer:

Anna Donnino:  ...she was asked if she wanted a lawyer.

Giuliano Mignini:  And what was her response?

AD: She had answered no; I remember that she replied with no.

Before she insisted on drafting her 1:45 and 5:45 am accusations Knox was advised to have a lawyer advise her, but she declined and pressed on.

Dr Mignini has wondered if the Supreme Court really understood this in banning the two unprovoked accusations from Knox’s main trial. [Similarly, the ECHR misunderstood. See other posts.]

7. Knox was tag-teamed by two police officers every hour.

There are complete typed records of every questioning session (recap/summary session) with Knox, all translated now, and she signed every single page. Her status was a person with possible information, one of a number, and not a suspect. The investigators, usually no more than two, were all named. 

On 6 November, according to Anna Donnino, who arrived at the police station at about 12:30am, there was a total of three people in the room with Knox who was there of her own volition and could have walked right out:

Anna Donnino: “I had been made to enter a room where in fact there was Inspector Ficarra at a small table, another colleague from SCO (I only remember his first name; he was called Ivano), a police officer, and there was Miss Knox seated. I seated myself beside her.”



Above: Several of the main myth inventors and disseminators: Fischer, Sforza, Moore

8. Knox was asked to imagine what might have happened.

According to the corroborative testimony of the three others present, including Rita Ficarra and Anna Donnino, Amanda Knox voluntarily and spontaneously accused Patrick Lumumba of murdering Meredith.

Here is Rita Ficarra (Knox had volunteered her phone).

We found only that one [text message] sent by her. She was given the mobile into her hand, and it was said, who is this person, and did you go out later or not? She said the name of Patrick Lumumba, and gave the declaration that then ...

GM: And what behaviour did she then adopt/assume?

RF: She suddenly put her hands to her head, burst out crying and said to us “It’s him, it’s him, it was him, he killed her”. It was the only time that I saw her cry.

GM: This behaviour, did she then continue like that during the course of that morning, by now we were at what time?...

RF: No, she was as if she was giving vent in that moment, she cried, she began to say that he was crazy, he was crazy.

Here is Anna Donnino (Knox had volunteered her phone):

Judge Massei: This change, at what moment did it happen, and in what did it consist of?

Anna Donnono: The change had occurred right after this message, in the sense that the signorina said she hadn’t replied to the message from Patrick, when instead her reply message was shown to her she had a true and proper emotional shock. It’s a thing that has remained very strongly with me because the first thing that she did is that she immediately puts her hands on her ears, making this gesture rolling her head, curving in her shoulders also and saying “It’s him! It’s him! It was him! I can see/hear him or: I know it.[Lo sento]” and so on and so forth.

Carlo Pacelli:  So the statements that had been made had been made spontaneously, voluntarily?

Anna Donnino:  Yes.

Here is Judge Massei.

[After hearing and weighing up the testimony of these witnesses and Amanda Knox, Judge Massei stated that it couldn’t be claimed that] “Amanda Knox was persuaded by the investigators to accuse Diya Lumumba, aka Patrick, by means of various pressing requests which she could not resist.” (Massei report, page 388.)

[He noted that there had been] “no corroboration of the pressing requests which Amanda was seemingly subjected to in order to accuse Diya Lumumba of the crime committed to the detriment of Meredith.” (Massei report, page 389.)

Judge Massei concluded at trial in 2009 that Knox had freely accused Patrick Lumumba of Meredith’s murder and awarded her a prison sentence for calunnia confirmed in 2013 and again in 2015 by the Supreme Court for which there is no further appeal.

9. Amanda Knox claimed she had had a “dream-like vision” in her witness statements.

Amanda Knox makes no mention of a dream or vision in her two witness statements - the unproven notion that she was having “false memories” was suggested by Saul Kassin, a grandstander, years later; he was wrong on numerous proven facts.

Knox categorically stated that she met Diya Lumumba at Piazza Grimana, and that they went to the cottage on Via della Pergola. In her first witness statement at 1.45 am, she claims that Lumumba killed Meredith.

This is from the voluntary 1:45 am statement.

I responded to the message by telling him that we would see each other at once; I then left the house, telling my boyfriend that I had to go to work. In view of the fact that during the afternoon I had smoked a joint, I felt confused, since I do not frequently make use of mind-altering substances, nor of heavier substances.

I met Patrik immediately afterward, at the basketball court on Piazza Grimana, and together we went [to my] home. I do not recall whether Meredith was there or arrived afterward. I struggle to remember those moments, but Patrik had sex with Meredith, with whom he was infatuated, but I do not recall whether Meredith had been threatened beforehand. I recall confusedly that he killed her.

This is from the voluntary 5:45 am statement.

I wish to relate spontaneously what happened because these events have deeply bothered me and I am really afraid of Patrick…  I met him in the evening of November 1st 2007, after sending him a reply message saying “I will see you”. We met soon after at about 21.00 at the basketball court of Piazza Grimana. We went to my apartment in Via della Pergola n. 7.

I do not clearly remember if Meredith was already at home or if she came later, what I can say is that Patrick and Meredith went into Meredith’s room, while I think I stayed in the kitchen. I cannot remember how long they stayed together in the room but I can only say that at a certain point I heard Meredith screaming and as I was scared I plugged up my ears.

10. Amanda Knox was questioned in Italian

The police provided Amanda Knox with an interpreter, Anna Donnino, so that she could enumerate visitors to the house for Rita Ficarra in English.

11. Dr Mignini questioned Knox on 5 November 2007.

Dr Mignini did not question Amanda Knox that evening. She wanted to make further declarations, and he came to the police station on the night only because he was on duty and had to witness Knox being cautioned. After Knox was cautioned that she need not say anything without a lawyer, Knox nevertheless insisted that she draft a second statement in front of him.

Mr Mignini explained what happened in his e-mail letter to Linda Byron, a journalist for King5 in Seattle:

All I did was to apply the Italian law to the proceedings. I really cannot understand any problem.

In the usual way, Knox was first heard by the police as a witness, but when some essential elements of her involvement with the murder surfaced, the police suspended the interview, according to article 63 of the penal-proceedings code.

But Knox then decided to render spontaneous declarations that I took up without any further questioning, which is entirely lawful.

According to article 374 of the penal-proceedings code, suspects must be assisted by a lawyer only during a formal interrogation, and when being notified of alleged crimes and questioned by a prosecutor or judge, not when they intend to render unsolicited declarations.

Since I didn’t do anything other than to apply the Italian law applicable to both matters, I am unable to understand the objections and reservations which you are talking about.”

In Amanda Knox’s written witness statement, she explicitly states that she’s making a spontaneous declaration:

I wish to relate spontaneously what happened because these events have deeply bothered me and I am really afraid of Patrick, the African boy who owns the pub called Le Chic located in Via Alessi, where I work periodically.

12. Knox didn’t confess until 6am.

Amanda Knox’s first written statement was made at 1:45am. It was not a confession, it was a false accusation.

13. Knox retracted her allegation against Lumumba immediately.

Amanda Knox didn’t retract her accusation immediately. In fact, she never did formally. Knox reiterated her allegation in her handwritten note to the police late morning of 6 November 2007, which was admitted in evidence: From the Massei report:

[Amanda] herself, furthermore, in the statement of 6 November 2007 (admitted into evidence ex. articles 234 and 237 of the Criminal Procedure Code and which was mentioned above) wrote, among other things, the following:

I stand by my [accusatory] statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrick”... “in these flashbacks that I’m having, I see Patrick as the murderer”.

This statement was that specified in the notes of 6 November 2007, at 20:00, by Police Chief Inspector Rita Ficarra, and was drawn up following the notification of the detention measure, by Amanda Knox, who “requested blank papers in order to produce a written statement to hand over” to the same Ficarra. (Massei report, page 389.)

Knox did not withdraw the false accusation at her first hearing in front of the supervising magistrate on 8 November.

The Massei court took note of the fact that Amanda Knox didn’t recant her false and malicious allegation against Diya Lumumba during the entire time, two weeks, he was kept in prison.

14. In the days following Meredith’s murder, Knox voluntarily stayed in Perugia to help the police

This claim is contradicted by Amanda Knox herself. In the e-mail she wrote to her friends in Seattle on 4 November 2007 she categorically stated she was not allowed to leave Italy:

“i then bought some underwear because as it turns out i wont be able to leave italy for a while as well as enter my house”

Knox actually knew on 2 November 2007 that she couldn’t leave Italy. Amy Frost, a friend of Meredith, reported the following conversation (Massei report, page 37):

“I remember having heard Amanda speaking on the phone. I think that she was talking to a member of her family, and I heard her say ‘No, they won’t let me go home; I can’t catch that flight.’”

15. All of Meredith’s friends left immediately.

The police also told Sophie Purton that they needed her to stay on in Perugia on precisely the same basis as Amanda Knox. Sophie had been counting on leaving Perugia to fly back home as soon as her parents arrived, but the police called to tell her they needed her to stay on; they would let her know when she could leave. Her father stayed on with her.

In chapter 19 of Death in Perugia John Follain states that Sophie Purton was questioned by Mignini and Napoleoni in the prosecutor’s office on 5 November 2007.

16. There were only two tiny pieces of DNA evidence that implicated her, but they were probably contaminated.

The Italian Supreme Court explained how DNA evidence should be assessed in court; i.e., contamination must be proven with certainty, not supposition. The Court stated that the theory “anything is possible” in genetic testing is not valid.

The burden of proof is on the person who asserts contamination, not the person who denies it.

In other words, if the defence lawyers claim the DNA evidence was contaminated, they must describe the specific place and time where it could have plausibly occurred. Nobody has ever proved that the bra clasp and knife evidence were contaminated. Even Conti and Vecchiotti excluded contamination in the laboratory:

“Laboratory contamination was also excluded by these experts [Conti and Vecchiotti].” (The Supreme Court report, page 92.)

(1) The bra clasp

The fact that the bra clasp was not collected immediately because defense witnesses were not available is irrelevant. The cottage was a sealed crime scene and nobody entered the room during this time:

...the flat had been sealed and nobody had had the opportunity to enter, as shown in the case file.” (The Italian Supreme Court report, page 92.)

Alberto Intini, the head of the Italian police forensic science unit, excluded environmental contamination because “DNA doesn’t fly.”

Even Conti and Vecchiotti excluded contamination in the laboratory because Dr Stefanoni last handled Sollecito’s DNA twelve days before she analysed the bra clasp.

Professor Francesca Torricelli testified that it was unlikely the clasp was contaminated because there was a significant amount of Sollecito’s DNA on it.  His DNA was identified by two separate DNA tests. Of the 17 loci tested in the sample, Sollecito’s profile matched 17 out of 17.

David Balding, a Professor of Statistical Genetics at University College London, analysed the DNA evidence against Sollecito and concluded that the evidence was strong”

“...because Sollecito is fully represented in the stain at 15 loci (we still only use 10 in the UK, so 15 is a lot), the evidence against him is strong”

(2) The knife

Dr Stefanoni analysed the traces on the knife six days after last handling Meredith’s DNA. This means that contamination couldn’t have occurred in the laboratory. Meredith had never been to Sollecito’s apartment, so contamination away from the laboratory was impossible. 

The knife and bra clasp are not the only pieces of DNA evidence.

According to the prosecution’s experts, there were five samples of Knox’s DNA or blood mixed with Meredith’s blood in three different locations in the cottage. After the trial in 2009, The Kerchers’ lawyer, Francesco Maresca, said the mixed-blood evidence was the most damning piece of evidence against Amanda Knox.

The Scientific Police experts concluded it proves that Meredith and Knox were bleeding at the same time.

17. The knife has essentially been thrown out.

The knife hasn’t been thrown out. A further DNA sample (36-I) was extracted from the blade late in 2013 and tested by the Carabinieri RIS DNA experts Major Berti and Captain Barni. The sample was attributed to Amanda Knox, the second. Judge Nencini stated in his report that Knox stabbed Meredith with the knife.



Above: Several of the myth inventors and disseminators: Hampikian, Burleigh, Heavey

18. The knife doesn’t match any of the wounds on Meredith’s body.

The prosecution experts, multiple defence experts and Judge Massei in his report have all agreed that the double DNA knife DID match the large wound on Meredith’s neck.

“On these matters, the considerations already made must be recalled which led this Court to evaluate the outcome of the genetic investigation as reliable, and this knife as absolutely compatible with the most serious wound.” (Massei report, page 375.)

Barbie Nadeau, an American journalist based in Rome, reported directly from the courtroom in Perugia that multiple witnesses for the defence, including Dr. Carlo Torre, conceded that the double DNA knife was compatible with the deep puncture wound in Meredith’s neck.

According to multiple witnesses for the defense, the knife is compatible with at least one of the three wounds on Kercher’s neck, but it was likely too large for the other two. (Barbie Nadeau, Newsweek.)

He (Dr. Carlo Torre, defence expert) conceded that a third larger wound could have been made with the knife, but said it was more likely it was made by twisting a smaller knife. (Barbie Nadeau, The Daily Beast.)

19. The DNA on the blade could match half the population of Italy.

Vieri Fabani, a lawyer for the Kerchers, pointed out that there is the possibility of 1 in 1 billion 300 million that the DNA on the blade does not belong to Meredith. 

20. Meredith’s DNA wasn’t found on the blade of the knife.

A number of independent forensic experts—Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr. Renato Biondo, Professor Giuseppe Novelli, Professor Francesca Torricelli and Luciano Garofano—have all confirmed that sample 36B was Meredith’s DNA.

Even American experts Elizabeth Johnson, Greg Hampikian and Bruce Budowle, who have been critical of the Scientific Police’s work in this case, have conceded that the DNA was consistent with Meredith’s DNA profile.

It should be noted that none of these American experts testified at the trial or played any official role in the case. They became involved in the case after being approached by supporters of Amanda Knox. They had no bearing on the legal proceedings in Florence.

Judge Nencini accepted that Judge’s Massei and the prosecution’s assertions that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade of Sollecito’s kitchen knife and that it was the murder weapon.   

21. No other knives were taken from Sollecito’s apartment.

Judge Massei discusses a jack-knife that was 18cm long with an 8cm blade at some length and the results of the DNA tests that were carried out on it:

“He [Armando Finzi] recalled they found another knife whose total length was 18cm, with an 8cm blade” (Massei report, page 106.)

“On the jack”‘knife, four samples were taken, with negative results where blood-derived substances had been looked for; on the fourth sample, which involved the handle, the genetic profile was found to be of Sollecito plus Knox.” ( Massei report, page 194.)

22. The knife was chosen at random.

Armando Finzi was the police officer who bagged the knife. He testified that he thought it was the murder weapon because it was compatible with the wound on Meredith’s neck. Andrea Vogt explained this in the same article:

“Armando Finzi, an assistant in the Perugia police department’s organized crimes unit, first discovered the knife in Sollecito’s kitchen drawer. He said the first thing he noticed upon entering the place was a “˜strong smell of bleach.’ He opened the drawer and saw a “˜very shiny and clean’ knife lying on top of the silverware tray.

” “˜It was the first knife I saw,’ he said. When pressed on cross-examination, he said his “˜investigative intuition’ led him to believe it was the murder weapon because it was compatible with the wound as it had been described to him. With gloved hands, he placed the knife in a new police envelope, taped it shut with Scotch tape, then placed it inside a folder, he said. There were smaller and bigger knives in the drawer, but no others were taken into evidence from the kitchen, he said.” (Andrea Vogt, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 28 February 2009.)

23. No control tests were done.

John Follain pointed out in Death in Perugia that the control tests had been filed with another judge:

“The tests had been filed with an earlier test, and Judge Pratillo Hellmann later admitted them as evidence.” (Death in Perugia, Kindle edition, page 409.)

The judges at the Supreme Court in Italy noted in their report that the negative controls had been carried out:

“...since all the negative controls to exclude it [contamination] had been done by Dr Stefanoni”¦” (Supreme Court report, page 93.)

The judges at the Italian Supreme Court criticised the court-appointed independent experts Conti and Vecchiotti for assuming they hadn’t been done.

24. There is no evidence of Amanda Knox at the actual crime scene.

The crime scene involves the whole cottage and isn’t limited to Meredith’s room. Knox and Sollecito were both convicted of staging the break-in in Filomena’s room. Furthermore, there is plenty of evidence placing Amanda Knox in Meredith’s room on the night of the murder.

For example, her DNA was found on the handle of the murder weapon, her bare bloody footprints were revealed by Luminol in the hallway and her own room and, according to the Scientific Police, her blood was mixed with Meredith’s blood in different parts of the cottage. Knox’s lamp was found in Meredith’s room, and a shoeprint in her size of shoe.

25. None of the Luminol* stains contained Meredith’s DNA.

Two of the traces revealed by Luminol contained Meredith’s DNA:

“Amanda (with her feet stained with Meredith’s blood for having been present in her room when she was killed) had gone into Romanelli’s room and into her [own] room, leaving traces [which were highlighted] by Luminol, some of which (one in the corridor, the L8, and one, the L2, in Romanelli’s room) were mixed, that is, constituted of a biological trace attributable to [both] Meredith and Amanda”¦” (Massei report, page 380.)

[* Luminol is a substance used in crime-scene investigations to reveal blood that has been cleaned up. It reacts with the microscopic particles of iron in the blood and turns it fluorescent.]

26. Mignini is persecuting Amanda Knox.

As shown above Dr Mignini was absent when Knox made her false accusation. Because of checks and balances, prosecutors in Italy have far less power than their American counterparts. The decision to send Knox to trial was actually made by Judge Micheli in 2008, not by Dr Mignini.

Judge Massei, Judge Cristiani and six lay judges found Knox guilty of murder in Perugia in 2009, and Judge Nencini, Judge Cicerchia and six lay judges confirmed Knox guilty of murder at the appeal in Florence in January 2014. 

Dr Mignini is just one of several prosecutors who have been involved in the case. Manuela Comodi was Mignini’s co-prosecutor at the the trial in 2009.  Giancarlo Costagliola was the main prosecutor in the first appeal, which was annulled by the Italian Supreme Court. He and Giovanni Galati appealed against the 2011 acquittals. Dr Mignini played no part in the new appeal in Florence. Alessandro Crini was the prosecutor.

27. Mignini claimed Meredith was killed as part of a satanic ritual.

Mignini has never claimed that Meredith was killed during a satanic or sacrificial ritual, and that’s the reason why no one has been able to provide a verbatim quote from Mignini supporting this false accusation.

Mignini specifically denied claiming that Meredith was killed in a sacrificial rite, in his letter to the Seattle reporter Linda Byron:

On the “sacrificial rite” question, I have never said that Meredith Kercher was the victim of a “sacrificial rite.”

Mignini also made it quite clear that he has never claimed that Meredith was killed as part of a satanic rite in his interview with Drew Griffin on CNN:

Drew Griffin: “You’ve never said that Meredith’s death was a satanic rite?”

Mignini: “I have never said that. I have never understood who has and continues to say that. I read, there was a reporter - I don’t know his name; I mention it because I noticed it - who continues to repeat this claim that, perhaps, knowing full well that it’s not like that.

“I have never said that there might have been a satanic rite. I’ve never said it, so I would like to know who made it up.”



Above: Several of the myth inventors and disseminators: Kassin, Dempsey, Douglas

28. Mignini claimed Meredith was killed in a sex game that went wrong.

Mignini didn’t say anything about there being a sex game that went wrong when he presented his timeline to the court at the trial. Please be warned that there is some extremely graphic content below:

[Timeline of the attack on Meredith]

23:21: Amanda and Raffaele go into the bedroom while Rudy goes to the bathroom.

23:25: A scuffle begins between Amanda, helped by Raffaele, and Meredith. The English girl is taken by the neck, then banged against a cupboard, as shown by wounds to the skull. She resists all this. Rudy Guede enters.

23:30: Meredith falls to the floor. The three try to undress her to overcome her; they only manage to take off her trousers. The girl manages to get up, she struggles. At this point, the two knives emerge from the pockets of Amanda and Raffaele: one with a blade of four to five centimetres, the other, however, a big kitchen knife. Meredith tries to fend off the blades with her right hand. She is wounded.

23:35: The assault continues. Sollecito tries to rip off the English girl’s bra.

23:40: Meredith is on her knees, threatened by Amanda with the knife while Rudy holds her with one hand and with the other hand carries out an assault on her vagina. There is first a knife blow on her face, then straight away another. However, these blows are not effective. The three become more violent. With the smaller knife, Sollecito strikes a blow: the blade penetrates 4 centimetres into the neck.

There is a harrowing cry, which some witnesses will talk about. Amanda decides to silence her, still according to the video brought to court by the prosecutors, and strikes a blow to the throat with the kitchen knife: it will be the fatal wound. Meredith collapses on the floor.

23:45: Meredith is helped up by Rudy and is coughing up blood. The English girl, dying, is dragged along so that she can continue to be undressed.

29. Mignini called Amanda Knox a “she-devil.”

It wasn’t Mignini who called Amanda Knox a “she-devil”;  it was Carlo Pacelli, the lawyer who represents Diya Lumumba, at the trial in 2009.

Carlo Pacelli’s comments were widely reported by numerous journalists who were present in the courtroom. Barbie Nadeau describes the moment he asked if Knox is a she-devil in some detail in Angel Face:

“Who is the real Amanda Knox?” he asks, pounding his fist in the table. “Is she the one we see before us here, all angelic? Or is she really a she-devil focused on sex, drugs, and alcohol, living life on the edge?”

“She is the luciferina - she-devil.” (Barbie Nadeau, Angel Face, Kindle edition, page 124.)

30. Dr Mignini was convicted of a felony and faced prison.

The Florence Appeal Court and Cassation scathingly threw out a malicious prosecution for which both the prosecutor and judge suffered. Dr Mignini has never faced the slightest risk of prison.  Often now seen on national TV, Dr Mignini is expected to be the next Prosecutor General of Umbria.

31. Rudy Guede was a drifter.

Rudy Guede lived in Perugia from the age of five, and he had his own apartment at the time of the murder. He had had a good job up north, with a promising future, but the enterprise closed down.

32. Guede had a criminal record at the time of the murder.

Rudy Guede didn’t have any criminal convictions at the time of Meredith’s murder. He was not a drug dealer and not a police informant and police had no record of him.

As Judge Micheli scathingly noted, there is no proof that he committed any break-ins. None of the three “examples” advanced desperately at trial by the defenses stood up. One claim (a bedroom) was a grandstanding fake. One claim (a lawyers’ office) involved two people and a car. In the third claim (a preschool) a staff-member had given Guede a key.

33. Guede left his DNA all over Meredith and all over the crime scene.

There was only one sample of Guede’s DNA on Meredith body and there were only five samples of his DNA at the cottage. His DNA was found on a vaginal swab, on the sleeve of Meredith’s tracksuit, on her bra, on the zip of her purse and on some toilet paper in the bathroom that Filomena and Laura shared. 

...also a genetic profile, from the Y haplotype on the vaginal swab, in which no traces of semen were found; DNA on the toilet paper in the bathroom near the room of Mezzetti, where unflushed faeces were found; on the bag found on the bed; on the left cuff of the blue sweatshirt (described as a “zippered shirt” in the first inspection, discovered smeared with blood near the body and partly underneath it); and on the right side of the bra found by the foot of Kercher’s body” (Judge Giordano sentencing report, page 5.)

34. Guede left his semen at the crime scene.

Guede’s DNA semen wasn’t found at the crime scene.

...also a genetic profile, from the Y haplotype on the vaginal swab, in which no traces of semen were found”¦” (Judge Giordano sentencing report, page 5.)

In one of these swabs was found biological material belonging to a male subject identified as Rudy Hermann Guede. This material, which turned out not to be spermatic [158], could be from saliva or from epithelial cells from exfoliation”¦” (Massei report, page 158.)

35. Guede left his DNA inside Meredith’s bag.

According to the Micheli report, which was made available to the public in January 2009, Guede’s DNA was found on the zip of Meredith’s purse, and not inside it.

...b) traces attributable to Guede: ...on the bag found on the bed”¦”  (Judge Giordano sentencing report, page 5.)

36. Guede left his bloody fingerprints all over the crime scene.

He left zero fingerprints. According to the Micheli report, the Massei report and Rudy Guede’s final sentencing report, Guede was identified by a single bloody palm print:

...b) traces attributable to Guede: a palm print in blood found on the pillow case of a pillow lying under the victim’s body - attributed with absolute certainty to the defendant by its correspondence to papillary ridges as well as 16-17 characteristic points equal in shape and position” (Judge Giordano sentencing report, page 5.)

It is confirmed that Guede was identified by a bloody palm print in the Micheli report (pages 10-11) and the Massei report (page 43).

37. Guede left his hair at the crime scene.

The Scientific Police didn’t find any hair that belonged to Rudy Guede at the crime scene. That’s why there’s no mention of this in any of the court documents.

38. Guede pleaded guilty or confessed.

Rudy Guede has never pleaded guilty or confessed to Meredith’s murder. He offered to testify against Knox and Sollecito at trial in 2009, but the prosecutors did not want to give him any breaks. 

39. Guede’s prison sentence was reduced because he made a deal with the prosecutors.

Guede was sentenced to 30 years in prison by Judge Micheli in 2008. However, his sentence was reduced because he opted for a fast-trial, which means he automatically received a third off the sentence of Knox and Sollecito. Generic mitigating circumstances—i.e., his young age—were also taken into consideration.

40. Guede didn’t implicate Knox and Sollecito until much later.

Rudy Guede first implicated Knox and Sollecito whilst on the run in Germany on 19 November 2007 in an intercepted Skype conversation with his friend Giacomo:

Giacomo: “So they [Knox and Sollecito] killed her while she was dressed.”

Guede: “Yes, here it says that they [clothes] were washed in the washing machine, but that’s not true. She was dressed.”

41. Amanda Knox didn’t know Rudy Guede.

Amanda Knox testified in court that she had met Rudy Guede on several occasions.

Here’s the court transcript:

Carlo Pacelli (CP), Patrick Lumumba’s lawyer: In what circumstances did you meet him (Rudy)?

Amanda Knox (AK): I was in the center, near the church. It was during an evening when I met the guys that lived underneath in the apartment underneath us, and while I was mingling with them, they introduced me to Rudy.

CP: So it was on the occasion of a party at the house of the neighbors downstairs?

AK: Yes. What we did is, they introduced me to him downtown just to say “This is Rudy, this is Amanda”, and then I spent most of my time with Meredith, but we all went back to the house together.

CP: Did you also know him, or at least see him, in the pub Le Chic, Rudy?

AK: I think I saw him there once.

CP: Listen, this party at the neighbors, it took place in the second half of October? What period? End of October 2007?

AK: I think it was more in the middle of October.

42. Raffaele Sollecito had never been in trouble with the police.

Raffaele Sollecito had a previous brush with the police in 2003.

...Antonio Galizia, Carabinieri [C.ri] station commander in Giovinazzo, who testified that in September 2003 Raffaele Sollecito was found in possession of 2.67 grams of hashish.” (Massei report, page 62.)

43. Sollecito had an impeccable track record.

Sollecito was monitored at university after being caught watching hardcore pornography featuring bestiality:

...and educators at the boy’s ONAOSI college were shocked by a film “˜very much hard-core…where there were scenes of sex with animals with animals,’ at which next they activated a monitoring on the boy to try to understand him. (Pages 130 and 131, hearing 27.3.2009, statements by Tavernesi Francesco).” (Massei report, page 61.)

44. Sollecito couldn’t confirm Knox’s alibi because he was sleeping.

The claim that Sollecito couldn’t confirm Knox’s alibi because he was sleeping is completely contradicted by Sollecito’s witness statement:

“Amanda and I went into town at around 6pm, but I don’t remember what we did. We stayed there until around 8:30 or 9pm.

“At 9pm I went home alone and Amanda said that she was going to Le Chic because she wanted to meet some friends. We said goodbye. I went home, I rolled myself a spliff and made some dinner.” (Aislinn Simpson, The Daily Telegraph, 7 November 2007.)

Police said Raffaele Sollecito had continued to claim he was not present on the evening of the murder. He said:

“I went home, smoked a joint, and had dinner, but I don’t remember what I ate. At around eleven my father phoned me on the house phone. I remember Amanda wasn’t back yet. I surfed on the Internet for a couple of hours after my father’s phone call, and I stopped only when Amanda came back, about one in the morning, I think.” (The Times, 7 November 2007.)



Above: The two provisionally convicted who originated some of the cancerous myths.

45. Amanda Knox had never been in trouble with the police.

According to Andrew Malone in an article on the Mail Online website, Amanda Knox was charged with hosting a party that got seriously out of hand, with students high on drink and drugs, and throwing rocks into the road, forcing cars to swerve.

He claimed the students then threw rocks at the windows of neighbours who had called the police. Knox was fined $269 (£135) at the Municipal Court after the incident (crime No: 071830624).

Barbie Nadeau also reported that Knox had had a previous brush with the law:

...and her only brush with the law was a disturbing-the-peace arrest for a house party she threw. (Barbie Nadeau, Angel Face, Kindle edition, page 6.)

According to the police ticket written by Seattle Police officer Jason Bender, Knox was issued with an infraction for the noise violation and warned about the rock throwing:

I issued S1/Knox this infraction for the noise violation and a warning for the rock throwing. I explained how dangerous and juvenile that action was.

46. Amanda Knox was retried for the same crimes.

All criminal cases in Italy are subject to three levels of review. No verdict is final until it has been confirmed by the Supreme Court.

Amanda Knox was not retried. She simply appealed her provisional 2009 convictions. The first appeal was held in Perugia in 2011, where she was provisionally acquitted by Judge Hellmann.

However, the Italian Supreme Court annulled the acquittals because Hellmann was found to have made a series of grave legal errors, and ordered a new appeal in Florence.

47. The Italian Supreme Court ruled that Amanda Knox’s “interrogation” was illegal.

The Italian Supreme Court has never stated that Amanda Knox’s recap/summary session on 5 November 2007 for the simple building of a list of prospect names with Rita Ficarra was illegal.

Even Bruce Fischer, who runs the Injustice in Perugia website and had heatedly denied this, eventually admitted this was not true on the former Perugia Murder File.net website:

When it comes to the admissibility of the written statements, you are technically correct. The interrogation itself was never ruled illegal.

Note that as stated above it was not an interrogation.

48. The Supreme Court threw out Amanda Knox’s statements.

The Supreme Court ruled that the 1:45am and 5:45am statements Knox insisted upon couldn’t be used against her in the murder trial because she wasn’t represented by a lawyer when she made them, even though she declined the presence of a lawyer.

However, both her statements were used against her at the calunnia component of the trial.

49. Dr. Stefanoni and the forensic technicians broke international protocols.

There is no internationally accepted set of standards. DNA protocols vary from country to country, and in America they vary from state to state. For example, New York state accepts LCN DNA tests in criminal trials.

Conti and Vecchiotti cited obscure American publications such as the Missouri State Highway Patrol Handbook and the Wisconsin Crime Laboratory Physical Evidence Handbook, not international protocols.

50. Amanda Knox is being railroaded or framed.

It would be immensely difficult in the Italian system for police or prosecutors to frame anyone and sustain this through two levels of appeal. With all its checks and balances and its professional career paths, it may be the system least prone to false final convictions in the world.

A number of Knox’s supporters, including Judy Bachrach, Paul Ciolino and Steve Moore, have claimed in the US media that Amanda Knox is being railroaded or framed, but they mis-state multiple facts and provide no hard proof or any reason why. The Hellmann appeal was wiped off the books, but they wrongly still draw upon that.

The collection of the DNA and forensic evidence was videotaped by the Scientific Police and, as the judges at the Supreme Court noted, defence experts were actually in the police labs to observe the DNA tests and reported nothing wrong:

...the probative facts revealed by the technical consultant [Stefanoni] were based on investigative activities that were adequately documented: sampling activity performed under the very eyes of the consultants of the parties, who raised no objection” (The Supreme Court report, page 93.)

The legal proceedings against Sollecito and Knox have been monitored throughout by US officials from the Rome embassy, and they at no time have ever expressed any concerns about the fairness or legitimacy of the judicial process.

Sources

Court documents
The Micheli report
The Massei report
Judge Giordano sentencing report
The Supreme court report
The Nencini report

Court testimony
Amanda Knox
Anna Donnino
Monica Napoleoni

Articles
The Daily Mail
The Times
The Telegraph
The Daily Beast
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Books
Death in Perugia, Kindle edition, John Follain
Angel Face, Kindle edition, Barbie Nadeau

Television programmes
Drew Griffins’ interview with Giuliano Mignini on CNN

Websites
The Freelance Desk
Perugia Murder File.org
Perugia Murder File.net
CPS website
Seattle-Post Intelligencer


Monday, November 08, 2021

Correcting NY Times 3: Some Of Hundreds Of Examples Of Media Being Lied To About Knox (1)

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters

This is the third in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

Post Overview

In December 2007 a prominent Rome lawyer walked off the Knox team because of the tidal wave of lies that the massive and brutal Knox PR machine was already generating. In February 2009 Knox’s remaining lawyers publicly announced that the defamations needed to stop.

And yet they continue. Right up to this day. Even in the New York Times. Our main poster Machine posted this (one of many similar) in August 2010.

1 False claim-making endemic in support of Knox

In many posts we have been addressing the myriad false claims of Knox & family, lies that already number up in the hundreds.

And here are 150 questions for the two perpetrators posted by our great Powerpoint creator, Kermit, just prior to their conviction. If reporters had sought answers to all of those, they might have once and for all nailed down the truth from the two, and made clear what REALLY happened.

Edda Mellas is already charged along with Curt Knox with making things up, in that pending case about slandering Amanda Knox’s interrogators. And as Finn MacCool seems to have got all the facts right in this post on Amanda Knox’s calls with Edda Mellas, it seems surprising that she is not also charged with perjury.

It’s a great pity that not more media people have put aside their emotions, and actually analyzed the numerous wild claims that come pouring out of Edda Mellas. The fact that so many professional journalists have given her a free pass and never challenged, cross-checked, or probed her claims is especially shameful.

Why has Edda Mellas been able to make so many false claims in the media without being challenged? 

One primary reason according to the Daily Beast is because journalists are required to give certain guarantees about positive coverage in order to gain any access to Amanda Knox’s family: “Of the handful of American journalists in Perugia in late 2007 and early 2008, none got access to the Knox family without certain guarantees about positive coverage.”

And another reason why Edda Mellas has been able to get away with repeatedly propagating the same core false claims is that the journalists in the US who have interviewed Edda Mellas are almost completely ignorant of the basic facts of the case. They haven’t bothered to find out enough about the case to be in a position to challenge what she says.

In fact any journalist - in fact, anyone interested in the case - can check the veracity of her claims against the official court documents, including the Micheli Sentencing Report of January 2009 and the Massei Sentencing Report of March 2010 (both summarised on TJMK in English).

And they can check the claims against the objective reporting of the various respected Rome-based journalists who speak fluent Italian and who actually attended the trial - the only Rome-based English-language reporter who has ever filed biased reports was Peter Popham, who seemed reflexively anti-Italy, and who was withdrawn two years ago.

2. Numerous False Knox-Family Claims

This analysis focuses on the claims that Edda Mellas has made in interviews with Larry King on CNN, Chris Wragge on CBS, Linda Byron on King 5, and The Guardian’s Simon Hattenstone. There are other videos and text interviews that we could have drawn examples from.

Edda Mellas on CNN’s Larry King Live

Edda Mellas and Curt Knox appeared on Larry King Live shortly after the verdict last December. You can see them in the videos above and below. The timing here corresponds to the time counter at bottom-left of the video.


False claim 1 “The prosecution had changed the motive four times during the trial. and at the end they finally had to say we don’t have a motive but it doesn’t matter.” (minute 4.22 above)

Barbie Nadeau pointed out that the prosecutors had changed their theory, but only rather slightly:

“The prosecution lawyers began their case in January 2009 by arguing that Kercher was killed during a sex game gone awry. When it came time for closing arguments, they had changed the theory slightly, trying to make the case that Knox resented her prissy British roommate and killed her in hatred”

A sex attack was still involved.

Prosecutor Mignini also suggested that a hard drug like cocaine might have been involved, and certainly never said that they didn’t have a motive. Co-Prosecutor Manuela Comodi said that she didn’t know precisely what the motive was, but certainly never claimed that there was none.


False claim 2:  “He (Rudy Guede) all of a sudden had money that he didn’t have earlier in the day” (minute 3.22 above)

Edda Mellas is plucking “facts” out thin air with this claim. No evidence was presented at any court hearing that showed that Rudy Guede suddenly had money that he didn’t have earlier in the day on 1 November 2007.


False claim 3:  “There is no murder weapon.” (minute 4.32 above)

Judge Massei indicates in the sentencing report that Amanda Knox’s judges concluded that the double DNA knife, the larger of the two indicated by Meredith’s autopsy, is indeed the murder weapon.

It is totally compatible with the deep puncture wound in Meredith’s neck, and according to a number of independent forensic experts, it contained Meredith’s DNA on the blade..

 


False claim 4:  “The Italian Supreme Court found the interrogation illegal” (minute 7.54 above)

Though this claim has been repeated in different ways, the Italian Supreme Court has NEVER ruled that Amanda Knox’s interrogation either as a witness or a suspect was illegal. In the suspect interview, she had both a lawyer and interpreter present.


False claim 5:  “They admit to the fact they really have no physical evidence” (minute 7.54 above)

As it took the prosecutors four or five months to present it, they have never admitted that they have no physical evidence. The stop-start-stop nature of the defense phase of the trial showed how very telling the evidence was.


False claim 6:  “They believe Meredith was killed at about 9.30pm” on Larry King Live (minute 0.54 here)

The prosecutors didn’t claim this at the trial. According to Mignini’s timeline, which he used when presenting his scenario for what happened to the judges and jury at trial, Meredith was killed at about 11.50pm.


False claim 7:  Amanda Knox didn’t know Rudy Guede (minute 1.02 here)

Unbelievably, Edda Mellas claimed that Amanda Knox didn’t know Rudy Guede despite the fact that Amanda Knox testified IN COURT that she had met Rudy Guede on several occasions.

Here’s the actual court transcript:

Carlo Pacelli (CP), Patrick Lumumba’s lawyer: In what circumstances did you meet him (Rudy)?

Amanda Knox (AK): I was in the center, near the church. It was during an evening when I met the guys that lived underneath in the apartment underneath us, and while I was mingling with them, they introduced me to Rudy.

CP: So it was on the occasion of a party at the house of the neighbors downstairs?

AK: Yes. What we did is, they introduced me to him downtown just to say “This is Rudy, this is Amanda”, and then I spent most of my time with Meredith, but we all went back to the house together.

CP: Did you also know him, or at least see him, in the pub “Le Chic”, Rudy?

AK: I think I saw him there once.

CP: Listen, this party at the neighbors, it took place in the second half of October? What period, end of October? 2007?

AK: I think it was more in the middle of October.


False claim 8:  Rudy Guede’s DNA was in Meredith’s purse (minute 3.16 here

Edda Mellas’s claim that Rudy Guede’s DNA was in Meredith’s purse is completely untrue. According to the Micheli report, which was made available to the public in January 2008, Guede’s DNA was found on the zip of Meredith’s purse and not inside it.


False claim 9:  “Even the Italian Supreme Court ruled that her rights were repeatedly violated.” (minute 5:32 above

The Italian Supreme Court has NEVER ruled that Amanda Knox’s rights were repeatedly violated. Not even her own lawyers claimed that, and no complaint was ever lodged.

The first of Knox’s two written statements couldn’t be used against her simply because she wasn’t represented by a lawyer when she made it - and she volunteered that statement, in a seeming state of panic, when she was told Sollecito was no longer supporting her alibi..

CBS Network

We continue next with Edda Mellas making claims in an interview for the CBS Early Show.

Whilen Edda Mellas was in Perugia, she was interviewed by CBS’s Chris Wragge. (Embedding of this CBS video YouTube on sites like TJMK is disabled, which suggests that CBS might be worried that the claims made were wrong and they should have been challenged on-air.) 


False claim 10:  The double DNA knife is incompatible with the wounds on Meredith’s body. (minute 0.16 above)

In the interview Edda Mellas made the following claim: “The knife they think is the murder weapon is way too big and demonstrated how it had to have been a much smaller knife that caused all the wounds.”

Edda Mellas’s claim above is simply not true.

Barbie Nadeau reported directly from the courtroom in Perugia that multiple witnesses for the defence, including Dr. Carlo Torre, conceded that the double DNA knife was compatible with the deep puncture wound in Meredith’s neck.

“According to multiple witnesses for the defense, the knife is compatible with at least one of the three wounds on Kercher’s neck, but it was likely too large for the other two.” (Barbie Nadeau, Newsweek).

“He (Dr. Carlo Torre) conceded that a third larger wound could have been made with the knife, but said it was more likely it was made by twisting a smaller knife.” (Barbie Nadeau, The Daily Beast).

Judge Massei categorically states in the judges’ sentencing report that the double DNA knife was compatible with the large wound on Meredith’s neck.


False claim 11:  Meredith’s room was so tiny, there wasn’t enough room for four people in some kind of tussle. (minute 0.27 above)

In the same interview with Chris Wragge, Edda Mellas asserts that there couldn’t have been an attack on Meredith involving three assailants.

“The space available this crime happened is so tiny you can’t have had four people in that room in some kind of tussle.”

The Violent Crimes Unit itself used detailed images at the trial to show that there was more than enough room for an attack involving three attackers.


False claim 12:  There is no evidence of Amanda Knox at the actual crime scene. (minute 2.06 above)

“Its the fact at the actual crime scene there is no physical evidence of Amanda; not a hair, not a fingerprint, not a nothing.”

The crime scene involves the whole cottage and it isn’t limited to Meredith’s room. Knox and Sollecito were both CONVICTED of staging the break-in and tampering with the crime scene.

Furthermore, there is plenty of evidence actually placing Amanda Knox in Meredith’s room on the night of the murder: the double DNA knife, and the blood she tracked into the bathroom, the hallway, Filomena’s room, and her own room.

According to two imprint experts, there was a woman’s bloody shoeprint on the pillow under Meredith’s body which matched Knox’s foot size.

Even Sollecito’s forensic consultant, Professor Vinci, claimed that he had found Amanda Knox’s DNA on Meredith’s bra.


False claim 13:  “The DNA is so insignificant. It’s this tiny spot. It’s not blood.” (minute 2.16 above)

Three independent DNA experts -  Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr. Renato Biondo, and Professor Francesca Torricelli - confirmed that Meredith’s DNA was definitely on the blade of the double DNA.

The DNA charts themselves show a clear and unmistakable match. Edda Mellas doesn’t seem to understand that DNA evidence almost always involves only microscopic traces of DNA.

Dr. Stefanoni testified at the trial that the DNA on the blade could indeed have come from Meredith’s blood.

We continue next with Edda Mellas in an Interview with Linda Byron on Seattle TV station King 5.


False claim 14:  Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito maintained the same story (minute 3.17)

Edda Mellas claimed in this interview with Linda Byron that Amanda Knox had maintained the same story for over a year when she was asked whether her daughter had lied.

In another interview with Linda Byron in November 2009, Edda Mellas bizarrely claimed that Amanda Knox hadn’t changed her story. KING 5 Investigator Linda Byron asked her: “Did she change her story?”

Edda Mellas responded: “No, no. For this whole year they have maintained the story - what they did that night. They stayed at Raffaele’s, they made dinner, they watched a movie. That’s it, that’s the story.”

Edda Mellas’s statement that Amanda Knox didn’t change her story and that she and Sollecito maintained the same story is yet another incorrect and misleading claim.

Knox and Sollecito both gave three different alibis. The posts on their alibis are linked-to up at the top here. Knox gave at least three different times for when she and Sollecito had dinner on the night of the murder.

Knox gave different reasons for writing her handwritten confession, and she gave different accounts of seeing the blood in the bathroom which contradict each other.

And most devastating of all, Sollecito stopped providing Knox with an alibi on 5 November 2007.

Sollecito is STILL nearly three years later refusing to corroborate her alibi. He clearly hasn’t maintained that Knox was with him at his apartment - actually he claimed that she went out for four hours.


False claim 15 : Amanda Knox wasn’t provided with an interpreter (minute 2.37)

Edda Mellas made this false claim, which has been widely propagated by Knox groupies, in an interview with Linda Byron on King5.

It’s not difficult to prove that this claim is completely false. Knox’s interpreter on 5 November 2007, Anna Donninio, even testified at the trial. And Amanda Knox herself spoke about her interpreter when she gave testimony at the trial.

Edda Mellas On ABC TV

We continue next with these claims of Edda Mellas on ABC TV. [This video had been embedded here; but a nervous ABC spotted it, and had it banned from this site.]


False claim 16:  “Amanda Knox is incredibly honest” (minute 11.25)

In an interview with ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas Edda Mellas claimed that her daughter is “incredibly honest”.

And Edda Mellas told The Guardian’s Simon Hattenstone that “Amanda doesn’t know how to lie.”

In fact, Amanda Knox’s mobile phone records, data recovered from Sollecito’s computer, and corroborative testimony of numerous witnesses, provide irrefutable proof that Amanda Knox has lied - again and again.

For example, her felony lies about him directly led to Diya Lumumba, an innocent man, spending two weeks in prison - even though as recorded in prison she told her mother Edda Mellas that her claims were not true. .


False claim 17 : Amanda Knox could have left Italy, but she chose to stay and help the police.

In an earlier interview with Larry King in October 2009, Edda Mellas told him that Amanda Knox could have left Italy, but she chose to stay and help the police:

“After the murder, Mellas said, friends and family told Knox to leave Italy—to either come home or stay with relatives in Germany—but Knox refused because she wanted to help find the killer and prove that she had nothing to do with it.”

“Many people asked her to leave, but she said no. ‘I’m going to stay. I’m going to try and help, I’m going to try and finish school’ Mellas said.”

Edda Mellas’s claim is flatly contradicted by Amanda Knox herself, in the e-mail she wrote to her friends in Seattle on 4 November 2007:

“i then bought some underwear because as it turns out i wont be able to leave italy for a while as well as enter my house”

And along with one of Meredith’s friends who walked home with Meredith on the night, the police told Amanda Knox pretty promptly that as her status was (then) a primary witness, she was not to go anywhere.

The fact that Knox did stay was of little help to the investigation - in fact, she seemed to work hard to derail it - and one of her main concerns at the time, a pretty callous one, was whether she would be staying or moving out of the house and getting a rent refund.


False claim 18:  Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were not under the influence of drugs on the night of the murder (BBC Radio)

In an interview with BBC Radio after the verdict, Edda Mellas apparently stated that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were not under the influence of drugs on the night of the murder.

This is despite the fact that both Knox and Sollecito had both themselves actually claimed they had smoked cannabis. The prosecution believed they might have been on a hard drug like cocaine, which also seems the general belief around Perugia.

3. And Some Conclusions

The fact that Edda Mellas has been able to propagate so many wrong claims in the media for so long without being challenged seems to speaks volumes about the naivety and unprofessionalism of her interviewers, and of the media organisations they work for.

As they usually do,  ABC News, CBS News, CNN, King 5, and other media outlets should have interviewed objective crime-case professionals, who don’t have a vested interest in the case.

Instead they have relied again and again on Amanda Knox’s mother and other family members as primary sources.

Amanda Knox is not an innocent political prisoner who was railroaded in some Third World country for some very murky reason. She was unanimously convicted after a lengthy trial at which the evidence was absolutely overwhelming. 

As the Christian Longo and Scott Peterson cases that we posted on below go to prove, seemingly quite normal people commit horrific murders. Probably the vast majority of murders are committed by people who to many seemed normal.

It seems downright perverse that some of the journalists who have interviewed Edda Mellas treat Amanda Knox as a victim, and with cloying sympathy ask “How is Amanda doing?”  They wouldn’t dream of asking Charles Manson’s mum how the Manson girls are doing.

It is time for the sake of the truth, the legitimacy of the verdict, the relations between the US and Italy, and the peace of mind of Meredith’s family and friends, that from now on they hold Edda Mellas’s feet to the fire.


Friday, November 05, 2021

Correcting NY Times 2: Trial Lawyer Shows How To Cut Through Smoke To Compelling Guilty Case

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


This is the second in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

1. Narrative Of My Own Arrival

The image above is of Dr Comodi who presented more than half the case at trial which I followed with a professional eye. There is a note at the bottom here on who I am and how this originated.

All of us who come to this case have one key question: did they do it? On the internet, you will find people who are passionate in their defence of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito and you will find people who are passionate in their support of the prosecution. 

Placing my own cards on the table here: as a twenty-plus year practising trial lawyer, I am firmly a part of that latter camp. 

But it wasn’t always that way. It was mastering the vast array of damning information on the evidence that changed my views.

What became very clear to me, early on, was that very few people in the English-speaking world are aware of anywhere near all of the evidence in this case.

I had thought I had grasped the core of the case, but I did not.  The case is deep and complex, and like many criminal cases, the complete facts behind it have been only sketchily reported in the media. 

I summarise below what I have found most compelling and of high potential in court.

2. Four Telling Contexts

1 The unanimous jury

I am sure that we all agree that no jury, in any murder case, given the awesome responsibility of adjudicating on (young) people’s lives for a multi-decade period of imprisonment, condemns people lightly.

It should be a matter of logic that the evidence presented against the accused must have been deep and satisfied the 6 lay jurors and 2 judges on the case for them to pronounce that huge judgement. That doesn’t mean that there couldn’t be the possibility of a mistrial, but clearly the evidence presented must have been substantial.

In this, we’ve already hit the first problem.  Some supporters of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito will tell you there’s no evidence against them. 

This is patently silly.  No jury ever convicts people and sends them to prison for 24 plus years without being quite convinced of the case against them.  Miscarriages of justice do happen, but the idea that there is “no evidence” can be summarily dismissed. 

The only question is whether the evidence is sufficient, true and accurate.

2 The voluminous evidence

So is the evidence enough to convict beyond a reasonable doubt?  The six lay jurors and two professional judges thought so, clearly.  What you realise, when you come to the facts of the case, is that the evidence is based not around a single key event but on multiple points. 

It can be astonishing to realise that the case is based not only on DNA evidence but also on cellphone evidence and computer records and further yet on multiple conflicting and contradicting versions of what happened that night from the mouths of the accused, not to mention falsely accusing an innocent man of responsibility for murder causing his incarceration. 

The wealth of evidence is actually extremely unusual. It goes way beyond the quite similar Scott Peterson case.

3 The Massei Sentencing Report

What is absolutely new to the English speaking legal world is that the reasoning for the conviction can be read in an extremely detailed 440+ page report available online.  Bilingual posters at the Perugia Murder File Forums many of whom who are also key posters at TJMK translated the entire document into English over several months in 2010. 

It was my privilege to play an extremely small part in that work.  People from four different continents with backgrounds in forensic science, law, academia and a host of other disciplines participated. 

You can download and read the full Massei Report here. There is an effective executive summary in the conclusions from page 388 onwards, and an excellent short version starting here.

4 The Knox PR campaign

If you are new to this case, you will likely be shocked how much evidence there is against the convicted parties.  Amanda Knox’s family have spent over $1m and involved a professional PR agency called Gogerty Marriot to suggest otherwise in the English-speaking media. 

You might wonder why an innocent person needs a million dollar PR campaign on their part.  Make yourself a coffee and read the conclusions of the judge’s report. It will take you about 15 minutes.  Up until you read this report, almost everything you watch, hear and read is PR spin and is quite deliberately positioned to make you believe there is no case.

When you complete it,  I believe you will have a very different take. That 15 minutes could change your ideas about everything you thought you knew about the murder of Meredith Kercher.

3.  Scan Of Evidence Highpoints

Consider as you read these what is your own possible explanation for each of the following:

  • the fact that the wound pattern and the reconstruction of the attack, each presented at trial in extensive closed-court sessions, showed this absolutely had to be a pack attack; 

  • the DNA of Raffaele Sollecito on Meredith’s bra-clasp in her locked bedroom;

  • the almost-entire naked footprint of Raffaele on a bathmat that in *no way* fits that of the other male in this case - Rudy Guede;

  • the fact that Raffaele’s own father blew their alibi that they were together in Raffaele’s flat at the time of the killing with indisputable telephone records;

  • the DNA of Meredith Kercher on the knife in Raffaele’s flat which Raffaele himself sought to explain as having been from accidentally “pricking” Meredith’s hand in his written diary despite the fact Meredith had never been to his flat (confirmed by Amanda Knox);

  • the correlation of where Meredith’s phones were found to the location of Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guedes’s flats;

  • the computer records which show that no-one was at Raffaele’s computer during the time of the murder despite him claiming he was using that computer;

  • Amanda’s DNA mixed with Meredith Kercher’s in five different places just feet from Meredith’s body;

  • the utterly inexplicable computer records the morning after the murder starting at 5.32 am and including multiple file creations and interactions thereafter all during a time that Raffaele and Amanda insist they were asleep until 10.30am;

  • the separate witnesses who testified on oath that Amanda and Raffaele were at the square 40 metres from the girls’ cottage on the evening of the murder; and the fact that Amanda was seen at a convenience store at 7.45am the next morning, again while she said she was in bed;

  • the fact of Knox’s claim that she was aggressively interrogated for days, although she did not even have the status of a witness, and signed every page of every typed record of her mild, mundane and quite limited questionings;

  • the accusation of a completely innocent man by Knox again and again when under no pressure which she insisted on putting in writing;

  • The fact that Knox and her mother, in whom she confided that the accusation was untrue, left Patrick imprisoned for a full two weeks;

  • the fact that during Knox’s very unconvincing performance on the witness stand in July 2009 she admitted she was treated well and was not abused;

  • the lies of Knox on the witness stand about how their drug intake that night (“one joint”) is totally contradicted by Sollecito’s own contemporaneous diary;

  • the fact that when Amanda Knox rang Meredith’s mobile telephones, ostensibly to check on the “missing” Meredith, she did so for just three seconds - registering the call but making no effort to allow the phone to be answered in the real world

  • the knife-fetish of Raffaele Sollecito, and his formal disciplinary punishment for watching animal porn at his university so far from the wholesome image portrayed;

  • the fact that claimed multi-year kick-boxer Raffaele apparently couldn’t break down a flimsy door to Meredith’s room when he and Amanda were at the flat the morning after the murder but the first people in the flat with the police who weren’t martial artists could;

  • the extensive hard drug use of Sollecito as told on by Amanda Knox;

  • the fact that Amanda knew details of the body and the wounds despite not being in line of sight of the body when it was discovered;

  • the fact that after a late evening’s questioning, Knox wrote a 2,900 word email home which painstakingly details what she said happened that evening and the morning after that looks *highly* like someone committing to memory, at 3.30 in the morning, an extensive alibi;

  • the fact that both Amanda and Raffaele both said they would give up smoking dope for life in their prison diaries despite having apparently nothing to regret;

  • the fact that when Rudy Guede was arrested, Raffaele Sollecito didn’t celebrate the “true” perpetrator being arrested (which surely would have seen him released) but worried in his diary that a man whom he said he didn’t know would “make up strange things” about him despite him just being one person in a city of over 160,000 people;

  • the fact that both an occupant of the cottage and the police instantly recognised the cottage had not been burgled but had been the subject of a staged break-in where glass was *on top* of apparently disturbed clothes;

  • the fact that Knox and Sollecito have feuded quite publicly ever since November 2007 and have shown far more anger toward one another than either has ever shown toward Guede;

  • the fact that Knox and Sollecito both suggested each other might have committed the crime and Sollecito TO THIS DATE does not agree Knox stayed in his flat all the night in question;

  • the fact of the bizarre behaviour of both of them for days after the crime;

  • the fact that cellphone records show Knox did not stay in Sollecito’s flat but had left the flat at a time which is completely coincidental with Guede’s corroborated presence near the girl’s flat earlier in the evening;

  • the fact that Amanda Knox’s table lamp was found in the locked room of Meredith Kercher in a position that suggested it had been used to examine for fine details of the murder scene in a clean up;

  • the unbelievable series of changing stories made up by the defendants after their versions became challenged;

  • Knox’s inexplicable reaction to being shown the knife drawer at the girl’s cottage where she ended up physically shaking and hitting her head despite being joyful earlier at the police station.


4. My Concluding Advice

This list is not exhaustive. It goes on and on and on, And yet, those supporting Knox will tell you that’s all made up, all coincidental. 

Really?  Does the enormous weight of all that evidence look made up to you?

If so, it must be the most over-rigged criminal case in the history of crime.  Unlikely beyond all and any reasonable doubt.

The judge’s report explains why the jury found the defendants guilty. I truly expect you will be astonished at the amount of evidence if all you’ve done is watched a film or read a few press reports. 

This advice by the experienced trial lawyer SomeAlibi was posted at the start of the first appeal by Sollecito and Knox, the one that was corrupted and annulled and then repeated in Florence. Posted before the enormous Knox PR moved into crazed overdrive. It remains one of the best “landing places” for good reporters and others curious to know why Knox more-and-more frantically tries to shake the tenacious black cloud hanging over her.


Wednesday, November 03, 2021

Correcting NY Times 1: How Jessica Bennett Lied To Readers On Knox As Exchange Student

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


This is the first in a multi-part series focused on provable realities in response to an inflammatory three-page report in the New York Times almost exclusively channeling dishonest and repeatedly-refuted Knox PR.

A Damning Question For Knox

Your book contains myriad easy-to-disprove false claims.

One repeated incessantly throughout was that you were a legitimate student, on a well-funded exchange program, on the same basis as Meredith. 

As always, I had gone to my mom first. She’s a free spirit who believes we should go where our passions lead us. When I told her mine were leading me 5,599 miles away from home, to Perugia, Italy, for my junior year of college, her unsurprising response was “Go for it!”....

Now I had to convince my dad. He’s a linear thinker who works in finance. He’s into numbers and planning. As practical and organized as he is, he’d have a lot of questions. So I approached him armed preemptively with the answers….

“Dad,” I said, trying to sound businesslike, “I’d like to spend next year learning Italian in a city called Perugia. It’s about halfway between Florence and Rome, but better than either because I won’t be part of a herd of American students. It’s a quiet town, and I’ll be with serious scholars. I’ll be submerged in the culture. And all my credits will transfer to UW.”

This mantra of earnest intentions appears again and again throughout the book.  You would return from Europe academically far down the road, and only one more year at college away from a dazzling career of some kind.

What total nonsense. How absurd.

  • First, to those fellow students who knew you in Seattle and Perugia, all of this comes as a very big surprise. See the quote at the top above. You were mainly known for voraciously chasing boys and drugs, and any academic ambitions and career ambitions came a distant third and fourth. Perugia at the time had the reputation of being one of Europe’s easiest drug cities; was that as some acquaintances think the real reason you made a beeline to it?

  • Second, you were utterly underfunded for a full academic year in Europe which costs Americans on average maybe $20,000. Why did your accountant father and math teacher mother not do the sums, see the huge shortfall,  and absolutely insist that you apply for the grants and scholarships that are readily available? How did you propose to work legally in Europe to make up the shortfall, as all Americans working in Europe require a work permit? (And what of your fingering Patrick for the murder, after he took a risk of losing his bar business in hiring you illegally?)

  • Third, there is no way that your “study year” in Perugia (if it was to be a year, which is highly doubtful)  could represent your junior year at university. There is no way “all” your “credits” could be transferred to the University of Washington, because (1) the School for Foreigners (a non degree issuing junior arm of Perugia University) does not even issue credits that count for American universities; in fact it is only a glorified language school (nice, but no better than several in Seattle) which allows in anyone who wants to study there. And (2) unlike Meredith you were not even enrolled at the main university, so zero prospects of transferring credits from there.

Your status was in fact that of a loose cannon and quite the opposite of a typical American studying abroad. You had almost zero study load to keep you out of mischief and off drugs; compare that to Meredith’s 40-50 hours a week. You were really, while denying it, taking a year off from your studies and career in Europe, as this account  by an academic counselor makes quite clear.

The media have now repeated countless times that Amanda Knox was on a “study abroad program”.

In fact, as these things are defined, she was not. It is precisely that she was NOT on a study-abroad program that she was able to adopt a lifestyle that seems to have led her to where she is now.

To go on a study-abroad “program” means that you attend an organized and SUPERVISED curriculum and agenda, most often with peers, faculty and/or at the very least a local administrative staff person assigned to periodically look after the participants’ behavior and well-being.

In fact the University of Washington does not even have a study abroad “program” in Perugia.

It merely suggests to UW students that the Universita per Stranieri is a possible destination and place for students to go on their own, and if asked helps out with some administration.

Knox took the “non-conformist” path to study abroad. I recall reading that she did not want to go on a program so as to not follow the herd, so to speak. So she did study abroad, but cheaply, and outside an organized program by the University of Washington. She was basically in Perugia on her own.

This is characteristic of at least two type of people, those who are adventurous, exploratory and want a true full-immersion experience into the cultural side of the host country (usually Italian majors), and those who want to be untethered and to have total freedom and no one to answer to so they can do as they wish.

Her casual attitude to her studies and other strong hints in her behavior and writings suggests that she was the latter type.

And presumably her biological parents understood all of this and signed off on it, even before Amanda Knox ever left Seattle.

Parents especially should know that if Knox had attended a UW-operated or US-University run study abroad program with supervision, her attendance in class would have been monitored, and any behavior that would upset roommates may have been reported.

In these programs for the most part there are strict housing rules such as no overnight guests, let alone bringing guys home to sack up with. Most of the time roommates will complain on the spot or get back to the American administrators that they have an out-of-control roommate bringing guys home, drinking excessively, or doing drugs.

In addition, programs with the proper supervision have enough of a presence to let the participants know that someone is at least checking up now and again. And as a result they watch their behavior.

Furthermore, in well-run programs, students are given significant preparation about living in the specific host country and city with pre-departure materials and perhaps meetings, talking with ex-participants, and attending an extensive multi-day orientation where staff and even local police lecture them about the many pitfalls of living in a foreign and new environment away from home.

They are reminded that the laws are different in other countries, and more importantly that there are some bad people walking the streets. They are told to enjoy themselves and learn, but also to be careful, stay alert, stay out of trouble, and so on.

I myself work in study abroad and we know what unleashed unsupervised colleges students get themselves into. We are trained to look for potential problems and we visit all students accommodations at least once per month and speak with everyone there.

We have open-door counseling and professionals with years of experience on staff. We watch out for all our students regularly”; we know what behavior to look for, and when to intervene, at least most of the time.

Yes, it costs more to attend the Universita per Stranieri or any overseas university through a US-college or US-university monitored program with local on-site staff and supervision.

But the situation Amanda has created, or at least found herself in, is much less likely to happen to students on a supervised and accredited study abroad program.

Let’s face it, at the age of 20, 21, or 22, many young adults are still really more or less kids. Naive and vulnerable, especially those who have yet to explore their “wild side”, they sometimes see this as an opportunity to make up for lost time.

This is exemplified in the fact that many pass out from drinking in the days after they arrive. Bottom line, they need guidance, and no more so than when they are 8000 miles from home and on their own.

Knox took the “I am too good to go on study abroad program with fellow students” route and the cheapest way overseas.  And it is not proving so cheap anymore.

Her biological parents really should have known better. All parents should either make sure the students are mature enough, or make sure they have a structured environment that can assist them while abroad. It is well worth the extra cost and peace of mind.

So the media should please get this straight from now on.

  • Amanda Knox was NOT on a study abroad “program” while in Perugia.  She was at most “studying abroad” as that term is used very loosely.

  • She took a leave from the University of Washington to study Italian at what is essentially a glorified language school which anyone can attend.

  • She was totally unsupervised in a high-risk situation where it would have seemed obvious to any supervisor that she was looking to break away.

  • And she most likely would have had a very difficult time getting any credit for her studies from the University of Washington at the conclusion.

So. The worst possible deal for any student abroad. The parents signed off in advance.  It seems to have exploded on Knox. And poor Meredith died.

In fact so scary was your semi-connection to the University of Washington with its zero control and potential huge liabilities that SINGLE HANDED your irresponsible and dangerous arc in Perugia sparked reforms in universities throughout American

Mirroring a nationwide trend, the University of Washington is overhauling how its students and professors interface with foreign countries….

The UW study abroad experience today involves much more oversight than it did two years ago when Amanda Knox left on an unsupervised European adventure that quickly degenerated into a nightmare.

When Knox, who is on trial for murder in Italy, left her familiar U-district environs in late summer 2007, she embarked on her own independent study in Umbria with very few guidelines or institutional oversight.

She arrived in the tolerant student melange of Perugia, a vibrant college town with temptation at every turn and many paradoxes (drug deals and party plans are often made on the steps of the cathedral).

A month later, the honor student’s pub-crawling, pot-smoking college shenanigans had taken a very serious turn and she was being hauled off to the Capanne penitentiary, where she remains today, pleading her innocence as the trial and controversial accusations against her plod forward.

Once her troubles began, the university tried to offer support, but had very few official guidelines to follow for responding to the kind of complicated legal-judicial matter Knox faced.

It’s different now….

In the wake of several negative overseas episodes, officials are busy raising awareness about the positive impact the UW is having worldwide and taking steps to improve communications, regulation and emergency preparedness for its students abroad.

Compared with two years ago, international education officials are more closely tracking who, where and what study-abroad programs involve. The university has new rules:. The department chair has to sign off on the program. Insurance is required. So is a cell phone. No program money can be used to buy alcohol, just for starters.

“There’s a much more formal process now,” said Taso Lagos, a UW professor who teaches international communication and manages a study-abroad program in Greece. “With administrators that are very aware, with lines of communication open and policies in place if something happens.”...

The UW’s growing commitment to international education—- even in a budget crisis—is reflected in some developments. [UW Vice Provost for Global Affairs Stephen Hanson] was named a vice provost in January, and in the spring, the UW dedicated an entire wing of the Gerberding Hall administration building to growing an international mission and profile.

This year, a travel security and information officer is coming on board to oversee emergency response and preparedness, as is Peter Moran, a new director of international programs and exchanges who previously worked at the Fulbright Commission office in Katmandu, Nepal.

New guidelines are being put in place to streamline communications, ease financial transactions and institute mandatory training for faculty taking students abroad. The Global Support Project, a rapid-response team with one person from each branch of the central administration, takes on cross-disciplinary international challenges.

Such reforms aren’t unique to UW.

Universities across the country are examining how better to organize study abroad to meet blossoming demand from students (and prospective employers) for foreign experience. Many are turning to independent service providers whose business it is to contract housing, health care or niche risk management services dealing with legal, financial or public relations crises when things go haywire abroad…..

Though the university bore no responsibility for any of the events Knox became entangled in, media across the world continued to mention the University of Washington—whether it was because of character witnesses who were her college buddies, reports of wild off-campus parties Knox attended in Seattle or her studies while in prison.

And it gets even worse. Page 14 of Sollecito’s book says you were not even staying in Perugia for more than one semester or term.

This was maybe three or four days into our relationship. The night before we left [for Assisi], I noticed she was chatting on Facebook with an American friend. I asked who he was. Right away, she explained that she, like Meredith, had left behind a boyfriend when she came to Italy. His name was David Johnsrud, known as D.J., and… they chatted or e-mailed almost every day. D.J. was spending his junior year in China… As the conversation went on, I learned she had just bought a ticket to China to visit D.J. later in the year [this was in October] and my suspicions were confirmed.

That intention to quit Perugia so soon is missing from your own book. Strange.

Your fake front of a diligent, serious, demanding year in Italy appears again and again throughout your book.  It is the whole basis for why you were at least the equal of Meredith and her circle and the others who lived in your house.

For why you would have little time off for irresponsible partying. For why there was no way you could possibly feel jealous or over-competitive toward Meredith.

In fact, both you and your foolish parents acted grossly irresponsibly. And as a direct result, Meredith died.


Monday, November 01, 2021

RIP Meredith Susanna Cara Kercher 28 December 1985 - 1 November 2007

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Not Meredith, of course, there are none of her doing ballet - pity, she is said to have been pretty good. But, someone who knew her has told us that this was her kind of dance…

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 11/01/21 at 12:00 PM • Permalink for this post • Archived in Concerning MeredithHer memoryComments here (1)

Saturday, September 25, 2021

Comparing The Kercher & Petito Cases: What’s Similar, What Differs

Posted by Peter Quennell

Timeline uploaded this past Thursday

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.


1. Overview Of Petito Case

Gabrielle “Gabby” Petito and Brian Laundrie met when at high-school on Long Island a few miles east of New York.

Brian’s parents moved to western Florida south of St Petersburg, apparently in 2015 when their house was bought (for just over $100,000), and they run a juicing-machine-sales business from there.

Gabby and Brian became engaged, and moved in with them down there. Neither have full college degrees, but Gabby has some nutritionist training and did work. Brian? Not clear.

Seemingly a bright and loving couple, they had established a way of traveling to great locations and mostly sleeping in a small van Gabbie owned.

They reported all this “van life” on social media video which had a sizeable following and so would have given them some sort of financial return.

This latest trip had taken them west from New York to southern Utah, where, with various incidents reported en-route, they headed north through eastern Utah to western Wyoming.

There, a week ago, just outside a dispersed camping ground, Gabby’s lifeless body was found. She had been dead for possibly three weeks.   

2. Similarities

1. In the US, these are perhaps the highest-profile murder cases in recent years

2. The two girls were of approximately the same age; both sets of parents are divorced.

3. Each girl was killed by someone seemingly sociopathic and in a psychotic rage.

4. Each presumed killer knew their victim well; signs of tension were seen by friends.

5. Each presumed killer rearranged the crime scene and worked on creating an alibi.

6. Each of the suspected killer’s parents circled the wagons and hired hardline help.

7. In each case national-level law-enforcement and their excellent labs became involved.

3. Differences

1. In the US Gabby has about 100% of public support; Meredith was deliberately ignored.

2. Gabby built a large following on social media; serious student Meredith not so much.

3. Local police in Utah and Florida made critical mistakes; in Italy, they made none.

4. Meredith’s family were illegally stalked; Gabby’s two sets of parents are revered.

4. Mysteries remaining

1. Why did Laundrie fly back to Florida leaving Gabby alone in Salt Lake City Utah for a week? Did he need a new prescription for mental-health-related meds?

2. Why did the cops who accosted the pair north of Moab Utah not know HE had been reported hours before for hitting Gabby on a Moab street? [resolved]

3. Did Laundrie’s extended psychotic-rage incident in a Jackson Wyoming restaurant (some 30 miles south of where she was found), which Gabby apologized to staff for, lead to her death?

4. Oddly, around the time of death, Laundrie hitchhiked twice, from way north of the campground, heading back south; was he trying to create an “I wasn’t there” alibi?

5. Gabby’s death is officially a homicide; where exactly was her body found, was it buried, and what was the cause of death? [resolved]

6. Why did Brian drive back to Florida in Gabbie’s van after seemingly trying to create an alibi and then fail to report and refuse to talk?

7. Where exactly is he now?


Below: Smart, but watch with caution. This was before Gabby’s body was found, and entertains a long trip west of the Tetons, impossible once the date of Laundrie’s Jackson restaurant meltdown is factored in.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/25/21 at 09:40 AM • Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (50)

Page 1 of 90 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›