Thursday, November 30, 2017

The Academic Fraud By Martha Grace Duncan Enabled By Emory & Harvard Law Schools

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Emory Law Dean Schapiro; Martha Grace Duncan; Harvard Law Dean Manning

1. Series Overview

Remember Saul Kassin? Remember Greg Hampikian? Remember Doug Bremner? Remember Peter Gill? Remember Chris Halkidis?

Our main poster Machine now spots another academic fraud. A seriously driven and defamatory one, a law professor, Martha Grace Duncan of Emory University, in Atlanta USA.

Her flippant, xenophobic, me-me-me paper is published by Harvard University Law School. Those who seemingly vetted it include Nasheen Kalkat, Alexa Meera Singh, and Brianne Power. We have written to them; they are not responding yet. 

2. Duncan’s Thesis

Duncan seeks to make readers believe that Knox was demonized, charged and convicted because..? Because she was free-spirited. That’s it, apparently. There was no real case at all against her.

Foolish prosecutors. Foolish judges. Foolish juries. Foolish Italy. And the demonizer who amazingly swayed all of them was one of the prosecutors, Dr Mignini, an Italian and a Catholic (both groups she tars as anti-women). Really.

3. Omissions: Examples

In getting there, the jeering flippant Duncan ignores the victim, Meredith (mentioned only briefly and callously). She ignores that Knox was not an exchange student. She ignores the bizarre behavior that was making Knox so unpopular in Perugia. She ignores Knox’s over-the-top drug use, extending back to Seattle. She ignores that Knox was stinking of cat-pee on the morning of the murder, a sign of cocaine use (and of no recent shower). 

She ignores the breaks Dr Mignini gave Knox. She ignores what he actually said. She ignores Knox’s endless trail of incriminating behaviors. She ignores the co-defendant Sollecito (mentioned only once, because he doesnt fit the demonizing-of-Knox theory). She ignores the kind boss Knox maliciously framed, put in prison for two weeks, served three years for framing, and still owes $100,000 (Patrick).

She ignores that two courts were provably corrupted. She ignores that Knox’s so-called “interrogation” was a hoax. She ignores over 30 other hoaxes. She ignores that the 30-plus judges who handled the case published extensive lists of evidence. She ignores that there were two unanimous pro-guilt juries (and one corrupted one). She ignores that Knox was NOT exonerated. She ignores Knox’s promotion of the stalking of the victim’s family (a felony). She ignores that Italy’s murder and incarceration rates are 1/6 those of the US.

She even ignores the co-prosecutor Dr Manuela Comodi, never once mentioned, presumably because a very bright woman prosecutor doesnt fit the demonizing-of-Knox theory.  None of the huge wave of court documents or trial transcripts support any of her thesis. So of course! Duncan ignores every last one of them.

In future posts, we’ll rebut Duncan’s flippant, xenophobic, me-me-me paper in detail, with its dozens of false Knox PR talking points, and list the many damning facts she fraudulently omits.

Meanwhile the posts listed on this page are pretty convincing. Take a look.


Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 11/30/17 at 03:00 AM in Crime hypothesesThe psychology


Comments

I am checking into the Emory University attorney Martha Duncan Grace.

The little I was able to find showed her parroting the Madonna-whore dichotomy, the hybrid Italian justice system, the crazed Satanic theories of Mignini, and poor Knox who was just an innocent free spirit from the West who lacked ability to cut a bella figura or to tone down her individualistic streak which is her American heritage.

Complete hooey that underestimates Italian common sense and tries to erase the hard evidence against Miss Knox and that can’t account for her needless lies and changes of story and tales of amnesia while admitting drug use and “confusion”.

The Italians might have seen Knox as an ignorant hoyden but they didn’t decide her guilty of murder based on her atrocious manners and lack of sensitivity chip.

Ms. Duncan would do well not to assume medieval blindness to the quite smart and modern Italians whose biggest weakness may be an overabundance of caution and compassion to the obvious liars.

Posted by Hopeful on 11/30/17 at 12:58 PM | #

Hi Hopeful

Like Burleigh, Duncan comes off as anti-catholic. They are not the only ones. We might use some posts exploring that.

Mignini being catholic actually only affected him in one way that we know of - it makes him a target in Perugia for the numerous anti-catholic masonic elements. The chief judge was one of them. 

Perugia prosecutors have all been targets for the dangerous Ndrangheta mafia which has been moving into Perugia and Umbria generally throughout this whole period.

Sollecito’s relatives in Montreal and the Dominican Republic are Ndrangheta. No wonder they were happy to help to take Dr Mignini and Italian justice down a peg.

With Rocco Sollecito gunned down and his son on trial, Raffaele now lacks an effective godfather, and could even become a target.

Perugia and Florence prosecutors are also targets of those accused of corruption in government as trials that cannot be held in Rome for safety reasons are held there.

What about all this then, Martha Grace Duncan? Still inclined to screech at the prosecutor? Then explain why.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/30/17 at 01:58 PM | #

My mini review of the Martha Grace Duncan paper is here. (Can’t write a longer one, sorry)

http://perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic.php?p=132330#p132330

Posted by Ergon on 12/01/17 at 02:29 AM | #

Copying here James Raper’s very helpful mini review on the previous thread below our notice first mentioning Martha Grace Duncan.

Re Martha Duncan

Supposed to be a scholarly work. She lists the names of 16 research assistants, and acknowledges the input of 17 other people, who are all presumably students and/or professional colleagues of hers. Her base data is derived from reading news reports and articles in the american media as well as books on the case (and on others) available for sale in american bookshops, so her myopic slant is not surprising.

She is flogging a notion (the tribulations of adolescence) drawing (as if no-one else ever has) on personal experience and literature. The article, which is garbage, but which might have been interesting in another context, could have been written as a thesis by a trainee social worker or an immature student of psychology.

Difficult to believe she is actually a professor of law. I would have thought that this would be rather embarrassing to her faculty, but I suspect not (she has received an award for the article) and if so that is an indictment of the sad state of affairs in academia in the US.

By James Raper

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/01/17 at 08:50 AM | #

Quite a little industry Duncan has been running here. She must already have duped thousands. In the paper Duncan claims in part:

Previous versions of this Article were presented at (1) the Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza, Università degli Studi di Torino; (3) the European University Institute, Fiesole, Italy; (3) the Emory Law Faculty, (4) the Emory Psychoanalytic Studies Program, and (5) the Emory Workshop on Geographies of Violence.

She teaches lawyers of course. An academic fraud. This case has seen more than its share. Strong affinities to the case of another academic, Saul Kassin.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C831/

Kassin also could not explain the official focus on Sollecito by way of what Hopeful called the madonna/whore complex that PR shill Nina Burleigh got so carried away with.

Christine Corcos runs the blog where the Martha Duncan notice that the Machine spotted appears. She tells us in an email that the article will appear in a scholarly legal journal.

Successful peer review is expected. She’s not certain whether peer review has already happened or is still ahead. I suggested maybe she should check what her blog promotes.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/01/17 at 09:14 AM | #

James along with Yummi anticipated Martha Duncan’s huge confusion over how the Italian system actually works now.

They explain it accurately in this key post.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/reasonable_doubt_in_italian_law/


American legal commenters who actually understand the Italian system as described there respect it just fine.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/harvard_professor_alan_dershowitz_and_philly_lawyer_ted_simon/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/why_numerous_american_judges_favor_the_supremely_neutral_italian_kind/


The UK/US alternative is “black box juries” which can convict or release based on anything they choose and never have to explain why.  Plus no automatic right to appeal. It’s the US system that is under so much fire now.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/01/17 at 09:35 AM | #

The devil is in the details of this case, and all the details are in the Wiki court documents Martha Duncan ignores.

Finn Macool first pointed this out and showed how it works in a very very smart post. A must-read.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/why_defendants_mostly_dont_testify_those_devils_that_lurk_in_the_detai/

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/01/17 at 09:44 AM | #

Martha Duncan is the 8th academic fraud by my count assuming Waterbury is an academic of some kind.

Doug Bremner
Chris Halkidis
Greg Hampikian
Saul Kassin
Michael Krom Leeds
Mark Waterbury
Michael Wiesner Honolulu

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/01/17 at 12:43 PM | #

I’ve read Martha Grace Duncan’s academic paper. It’s riddled with factual errors and she regurgitates many well-known PR lies.

She falsely claims (1) Amanda Knox was retried in absentia (2) she was fully exonerated by the Supreme Court (3) her DNA wasn’t found at the crime scene (4) there were long hours of interrogation on 5 and 6 November 2007 (5) Knox had the option of leaving Perugia, but chose to stay (6) she had a noble desire to be honest and helpful with the police and prosecutor (7) Sollecito’s kitchen knife was chosen at random (8) the Supreme Court dropped all charges against Knox and Sollecito (9) Knox was found guilty of murder largely because of what others saw as her strange behaviour and (10) Mignini said Meredith was killed in a sex game gone awry.

She seems completely oblivious to the fact that the Supreme Court ascertained the following: (1) there were multiple attackers (2) it’s a proven fact that Amanda Knox was at the cottage when Meredith Kercher was killed (3) she washed Meredith’s blood off in the small bathroom (4) she lied repeatedly to the police (5) she falsely accused Diya Lumumba of murder to cover for Rudy Guede and (6) the break-in at the cottage was staged.

Posted by The Machine on 12/01/17 at 01:08 PM | #

Good work Machine.

Martha Duncan’s convenient omissions would fill a small book. First examples in addition to those you list:

1. She leaves out that Knox was found guilty of calunnia, confirmed by all courts.

Knox rightly served three years, and is a felon for life.

2. She leaves out Sollecito too!!

His name appears in the text only once. Obvious reason: Like others who took this foolish Saint Knox path she cant explain why Sollecito was charged too.

3. In avid development of her lucrative “award winning” cottage industry she omitted to talk with any prosecutors or any police.

4. She defames Dr Mignini throughout with convenient but dishonest omissions like all of these.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/new_mignini_interview_makes_doug_preston_looking_increasingly_incompet/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/dear_ken_jautz_of_cnn_Full_CNN_Interview_With_Mignini_that_cnn_should_1/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/translation_of_dr_migninis_interview_after_takedown_of_sollecito_book/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/netflixhoax_trial_co_prosecutor_dr_mignini_responds/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/The_Amanda_Knox_Trainwreck_knox_invents/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/netflixhoax_trial_co_prosecutor_dr_mignini_responds/

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/01/17 at 02:26 PM | #

It is truly amazing the garbage that can get published when one has Ph.D after their name.

As discussed in Part One, Amanda was found guilty of murder largely because of what others saw as her strange behavior, in particular, her failure to mourn her roommate’s death. Through a series of improvident and impulsive actions, she actually helped the prosecutor build his case against her, leading to two murder convictions, four years of incarceration, and over seven years in a legal limbo before she was finally exonerated.

Freud who seek punishment to alleviate the tension of unexpiated guilt?170 Or were the police correct that the most compelling explanation of Amanda’s behavior was her involvement in the crime?171 As the reader may have surmised by now, I believe the answer to the last question to be no. Amanda’s actions, however unseemly, can be persuasively explained by theories other than her participation in the murder. Let us now consider some of these alternative theories

Fully 1/3 of her paper is listing Knox’s ‘‘quirky’’ behaviour and listing it as reasons why she IS viewed oddly.  Duncan quotes Nina Burleigh, and Dempsey, along with some generic media

To Martha Duncan’s credit, she does seem to understand at least that Florence 2013/2014 was a redo of AK/RS appeal.

March 26, 2013: The Court of Cassation, Italy’s highest criminal court, overturns the acquittal of Amanda and Raffaele and orders a new appeal.
January 30, 2014: The new appeal ends with the court reinstating the murder convictions of both Amanda and Raffaele. The court increases Amanda’s sentence to twenty-eight and a half years, while leaving Raffaele’s sentence of twenty-five years unchanged.

Martha Duncan clearly never actually read the Mignini/Knox transcripts of either December 2007, or of June 2009, or this would never have come out in her writing

However, contrary to her expectation, Mignini controlled the encounter, turning everything Amanda said into further evidence of her guilt.204 This certainty that one’s innocence is both obvious and protective is so common that it has been given a name in criminal law: “the illusion of transparency.”

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/netflixhoax_21a_omitted_This_very_telling_Knox_Questioning/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/netflixhoax_21b_omitted_-_this_very_telling_knox_questioning_2/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/netflixhoax_21c_omitted_-_this_very_telling_knox_questioning_3/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/netflixhoax_21d_omitted_-_this_very_telling_knox_questioning_by_dr_mignini_

Martha Duncan is clearly taken in by the whole Knox interrogation Hoax

In fact, false confessions were the fourth most recurrent cause of these wrongful convictions, preceded only by mistakes in eyewitness identification, perjury by prosecutorial witnesses, and “community outrage over a crime.” Not all false confessions are alike. According to scholars, they fit into three categories: (1) voluntary; (2) coerced-compliant; and (3) coerced-internalized. The first type, the voluntary confession, occurs when the suspect makes a false confession that is unsolicited, sometimes arising from mental illness or morbid guilt. The second type, the coerced-compliant confession, manifests itself when the suspect, unable to bear the torment of the interrogation any longer, breaks and admits to the crime; however, in a unique characteristic of this type, the suspect often retracts the confession once the interrogation ends. And finally, the coerced-internalized type occurs when the suspect becomes disoriented during the interrogation and ends up doubting her own memory and accepting a false story as true.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/The_Knox_Interrogation_Hoax_1_overview/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/The_Knox_Interrogation_Hoax_2_ficcara_2/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_3_ficcara_3/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_4_ficcara_4/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_5_napoleoni/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_6_sollecito/
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_7_zugarini
http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_8_donnino/
http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_12_proof_released/

This ‘‘professor’’ goes on and on about how Knox’s image was used against her.  She seems either unable, or unwilling to distinguish the difference between what was said in the press, and what was actually said in Court

Still, we are left with a question: how did the reporters, lawyers, and judges so easily make the leap from whore to murderer? One theory is that a woman’s virtue is closely tied to her chastity; thus, once she is seen as “easy,” promiscuous, or lustful, the idea that she could murder is not much of a stretch. A second is that in some eras and locales, murder by a woman has been considered “so unthinkable . . . that it [has] to be explained away as the action of a whore, witch, monster or madwoman.” And underlying both of these hypotheses is a third: the psychoanalytic concept of condensation.  A characteristic of primary process thinking311—the kind of thinking we do unconsciously,

Perhaps if she were remotely (and I do mean remotely) up to speed on the hard facts, not the media spin, the article would be more substantive.

And then there is this quote.  Pardon the length, but too absurd to omit.  Ms. Duncan is very Hellmann-esque in her belief that evidence should be viewed individually, rather than in its entirety.  Remember, it is one of the big reasons Hellmann/Zanetti got annulled in March 2013,

At the risk of annoying him, I raise the topic again. “A few minutes ago,” I say, “you referred to the overwhelming case against Amanda, but wasn’t there doubt over every witness, over the supposed murder weapon, the tainted bra clasp, and the footprints?” Stefano thinks for a minute before answering with confidence. “When the Supreme Court nullified the acquittal,” he says, “it was as if they had a puzzle with five hundred dots. Every single dot could be something else, but taken all together, the dots can only mean one thing.”

The argument is one I have heard before, during an exchange with a criminal law professor at the University of Florence. I am aware that in continental Europe, judges often employ the “holistic” approach to interpretation, whereas in common-law countries, they rely more heavily on the “atomistic” approach. Doubtless because of my immersion in the Anglo-American system, the “holistic” approach is unconvincing to me. I wonder how the sheer quantity of evidence can be compelling if every piece of evidence is ambiguous or compromised.

“I was very surprised at the second opinion,” Stefano goes on. “When the Court of Appeals acquitted, it claimed that if you take one piece out, the whole case falls apart. They took out the DNA from the bra clasp, which was contaminated, but DNA is not necessary to prove guilt.” His comment puzzles me, because the Court of Appeals had not merely challenged “one piece.” Rather they had questioned the credibility of witnesses, rejected the lower court’s analysis of the footprints and the motive, and declined to attach incriminatory meaning to Amanda and Raffaele’s behavior after the murder.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_real_catastrophe_for_the_defenses_that_was_the_supreme_court_rulin
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/a_summary_of_the_cassazione_ruling_on_annulment_of_the_knox-sollecito_
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/in_english_the_vital_supreme_court_rationale

To summarise:

(1) No clue of the actual hard facts or evidence

(2) Takes at face value the claims that it was puritan values that condemned AK

(3) No clue how thoroughly Knox interrogation hoax is rebuffed

(4) No clue how Knox and Mignini actually interacted

(5) Takes a Hellmann style approach, that evidence should be viewed in piecemeal fashion

Crap indeed

Posted by Chimera on 12/02/17 at 12:30 AM | #

Hi Chimera

Good quotes. “Takes a Hellmann style approach, that evidence should be viewed in piecemeal fashion”

Not just Hellmanesque. That’s been the entire apologist approach. Find a few things to shriek about and ignore the vast universe that is the rest.

Ted Simon (later a Knox lawyer, sort of) strongly warned in 2008 on NBC Dateline AGAINST what he called a whackamole approach.

Duncan did not realise of course that Judges Marasca and Bruno (neither of them experienced in murder cases) also wrongly followed that approach - though they should really not have gotten into the evidence at all under the judicial code.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/02/17 at 12:39 AM | #

I want to build on a previous comment of mine, the one above at on 12/01/17 at 10:30 PM.

1. Ms Duncan wrote:

At the risk of annoying him, I raise the topic again. “A few minutes ago,” I say, “you referred to the overwhelming case against Amanda, but wasn’t there doubt over every witness, over the supposed murder weapon, the tainted bra clasp, and the footprints?” Stefano thinks for a minute before answering with confidence. “When the Supreme Court nullified the acquittal,” he says, “it was as if they had a puzzle with five hundred dots. Every single dot could be something else, but taken all together, the dots can only mean one thing.”

The argument is one I have heard before, during an exchange with a criminal law professor at the University of Florence. I am aware that in continental Europe, judges often employ the “holistic” approach to interpretation, whereas in common-law countries, they rely more heavily on the “atomistic” approach. Doubtless because of my immersion in the Anglo-American system, the “holistic” approach is unconvincing to me. I wonder how the sheer quantity of evidence can be compelling if every piece of evidence is ambiguous or compromised.

“I was very surprised at the second opinion,” Stefano goes on. “When the Court of Appeals acquitted, it claimed that if you take one piece out, the whole case falls apart. They took out the DNA from the bra clasp, which was contaminated, but DNA is not necessary to prove guilt.” His comment puzzles me, because the Court of Appeals had not merely challenged “one piece.” Rather they had questioned the credibility of witnesses, rejected the lower court’s analysis of the footprints and the motive, and declined to attach incriminatory meaning to Amanda and Raffaele’s behavior after the murder.

Here is where the article I ‘‘want’’ to read starts, but this is as close as Ms. Duncan will get.

2. ‘‘Odd behaviour’’ is what she calls Knox: (1) falsely accusing an innocent person, aka Susan Smith; (2) false alibis and other lies to police; (3) blurting out details, such as cut throat, the scream and body being moved, which no one else could have known.  Rather these items reek of guilt.

3. Further I would add (4) the callous indifference Knox showed.  While not direct evidence, it stands the whole ‘‘she was my friend’’ on its head.  Shit happens, but let’s move on with life.

4. It would nice if Ms, Duncan would discuss the hard truths against Knox: (5) mixed blood; (6) bloody footprints; (7) double DNA knife; (8) woman’s shoeprint; (9) the mop story; (10) AK’s lamp being locked in Meredith’s room.  Rather she is a ‘‘law and gender’’ professor.  Apparently the actual facts and evidence are not relevant if one of the accused is an attractive American woman.

5. It would also be nice if Ms. Duncan could explain (11) how 2 men, Sollecito (Italian), and Guede (15 years in Italy), also were the victims of xenophobia and the Madonna-Whore divide.

6. It would also be nice if (12) she could explain AK’s April 2007 staged break in ‘‘prank’’ in Seattle on her roomies, in a way that doesn’t look like guilt.  After all there were (12) signs that the Perugia break in was staged.

7. The 1st Judge Knox faced was Claudia Matteini in November 2007. She supervised the case through 2008 and in effect Mignini. Are we to infer that it was sexism that caused her to remand AK?

8. It would be nice if Ms. Duncan could explain why Hellmann (2011) was justified on overturning Massei (2009), or the legal reasoning behind Cassation 1st Chambers (2013) annulling the Hellmann appeal.  Several poster here have done just that, at least regarding Cassation.  She could explain how the 1st Chambers directed Nencini (2013/2014), and why he ultimately confirmed the Massei trial verdict.  She could try to explain Bruno-Marasca (2015) fully.

But a law and gender professor has no interest in the actual arguments of the Courts themselves, preferring instead to focus on the media attention involved.  She quotes not the Judges’ rulings, nor any court documents, but generic media.

9. It would be nice if Ms. Duncan could explain how and why the media attention altered AK’s legal proceedings.  Rather than rambling on about historical discrimination against women, some actual research would have been appreciated.

Ms. Duncan ‘‘could’’ have done an article about how Knox received fair proceedings in spite of the media mess.  But she would have to have actual material, and she clearly did no research.

Crap article indeed.

Just a final thought from U.S. Chief Supreme Court Judge, John Roberts:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/03/21/chief-justice-roberts-reads-law-reviews-after-all/?utm_term=.abdb060a60c5

Pick up a copy of any law review that you see, and the first article is likely to be, you know, the influence of Immanuel Kant on evidentiary approaches in 18th Century Bulgaria, or something.

If the academy wants to deal with the legal issues at a particularly abstract, philosophical level, that’s great and that’s their business, but they shouldn’t expect that it would be of any particular help or even interest to the members of the practice of the bar or judges.

That is right.  The top Justice in the U.S. Supreme Court thinks academic legal articles are useless to practicing Judges and lawyers.

See why?

Posted by Chimera on 12/03/17 at 04:52 AM | #

Hello again,

For examples of fine articles that can be done if the author does research, here are 2 that Selene Nelson submitted in 2014.

Short, factual, and hard to argue down.

Not 80+ pages of rambling.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/selene-nelson/amanda-knox_b_5529905.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/crime/op-ed-finally-is-this-the-truth-about-amanda-knox/article/415955

Posted by Chimera on 12/03/17 at 05:00 AM | #

An interesting conversation over on PMF.net, link to it in the left column above.

hugo wrote:
Perhaps she’s a friend of Doug Bremner at Emory?

Ergon wrote:
Quite possible, Hugo, since they have similar areas of interest.

Faculty Profiles
J. Douglas Bremner, MD

Martha Grace Duncan

I see she even clerked for Judge Bortus at the Supreme Court. Yet it’s her interview with Knox and Madison Paxton at the restaurant when she lets her academic neutrality slip and comes like another media groupie. Sorry, but it detracts from her paper.

Hugo wrote:
Yes, and if you remember what a far-right nightmare her patron Judge Robert Bork was, it makes you think. She teaches a course on ‘law and psychoanalysis’ (good grief, is psychoanalysis still a thing?), so it’s unlikely that she isn’t pals with notorious Emory psychiatrist Doug ‘Brother of Anne’ Bremner, leading light of the FOA. She would appear to have failed to declare that interest.

Posted by James Raper on 12/03/17 at 07:31 AM | #

Hi James Raper. Thanks. Doug Bremner was profiled here - not a fount of coolheaded advice and even Anne once urged him to cool down.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/sad_to_see_anne_bremners_brother_doug_increasingly_the_hottest_of_the_/

Anne Bremner has often been corrected factually, by us, and by for example by Wendy Murphy on TV. Posts here correcting ex-Judge Michael Heavey generally also apply to her. She is said to have fallen out with Marriott: Bruce Fischer hijacked her FOA.

They all get in that echo chamber and jabber about haters instead of developing any depth at all. Bad move. Let’s see if they can give Duncan any defence, but a hard nut to crack, that, we already carry 50-plus reasons she is wrong.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/03/17 at 09:16 AM | #

Lots of great stuff here in response to Martha Grace Duncan. No time for a worthy rebuttal of her Knox-induced illusions, but she might look at the big picture, the simple reality.

In that objective reality we have PROOF of a cleanup. I won’t labor the details, but watered down blood and a missing footprint and all the blood washed off that Luminol detected should be a clue. So we have a cleanup.

But who was available to clean up?

Everyone was gone away from the cottage for days, everyone except Amanda. And she had a wild story of why she was seen on the front porch of the cottage with a mop and bucket.

Pressed for time, there is so much powerful stuff in posts and comments suddenly and hello, as Machine says more dispassionately than this but, hello Knox was NOT exonerated, no way baby, she was ruled not guilty due to INSUFFICIENT evidence. Two different animals.

Posted by Hopeful on 12/03/17 at 12:03 PM | #

Hi Hopeful

Yes Judge Micheli, in consigning Knox to trial, stands up pretty well after nine years…

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/understanding_micheli_4_the_staged_scene_who_returned_to_move_meredith/

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/03/17 at 02:28 PM | #

Report of some Irish lawyers now not looking before they leap….

http://trinitynews.ie/vedova-walks-through-his-vindication-of-amanda-knox/

The Supreme Court did not leave Knox “vindicated”. It confirmed her sentence of three years inside, and her $100,000 due to Patrick.

It placed her at the scene with blood on her hands…. As Hopeful above noted, cleaning up.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/03/17 at 02:43 PM | #

Major flaw in Ms. Duncan’s “pretty free-spirited girl envied” theory is that police came down just as hard on her boyfriend, and he wasn’t so winsome.

He quickly confessed to police that he was lying to cover for Knox, who had asked him to lie for her! Raffaele said that to police out of his own mouth.

Later his DNA was found on the bra clasp. Speaking roughly, there’s only a chance in a million it could get there by accidental transfer.

The not so lovely Raffaele was prosecuted just the same as Amanda Knox, so the Italians were not swayed by beauty or lack of it. They were interested in the 5 spots of mixed Knox DNA in the victim’s blood. Maybe that’s why Knox asked her boyfriend to lie for her.

Posted by Hopeful on 12/04/17 at 10:59 AM | #

p.s. Sollecito when told they found blood on his knife, instead of denying the possibility, made up a story of how blood got there innocently. He said he had once pricked Meredith with that knife.

Yes, he pricked her with his knife while he was cooking with her at his place.

And then it turns out she had never been to his apartment to cook with him, ever.

Posted by Hopeful on 12/04/17 at 11:08 AM | #

The “Peer-Reviewed” “Scientific”, and “Legal” “Literature”s are replete with b-s, such as that written by Martha Grace Duncan.

Its a sad fact of Life, and trying to correct the Authors and the Publishers is like p’ing against the wind, but we have to go on trying.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 12/04/17 at 03:05 PM | #

Hi Cardiol

No, in fact the great eye-opening could happen almost instantly - and we may all be able to sit back soon.

Duncan’s rabidly over-the-top attack on Mignini written FOR LAWYERS AND LAW STUDENTS is a real clue.

Okay. First step.

I repeat here my post this morning on PMF adding to what Jape posted on Dalla Vedova’s presentation and award at Trinity Law School in Ireland.

Jape: Interesting (and curious) that Vedova should choose to address the Dublin Law Society. Is this his first public speaking engagement on the case? I suspect he must have had a few in Italy but perhaps was disillusioned by the reaction.

Fast Pete: You can usually get some idea of speaking engagements by what appears on YouTube.

Could I put this slightly differently? Not a PUBLIC speaking engagement. An address before lawyers and student lawyers.

Anglo-Saxon lawyers are such gullible wussies and group after group is sitting still for this stuff (no offense Jape).

Italian lawyers are another question. They are a very hard sell on non-guilt now. They KNOW what is going on even if they dont write about it or show up at speeches about it.

They all know and respect Mignini who has the support of every top law professor in Italy - and gets their help in his cases. They know he got it right on this case and the Narducci 22 case.

But all of them even the brave Maresca know they have to watch their backs because they know precisely how the final outcome was tainted. There is no plus for them in speaking out and a possible terminal minus.

Its up to us to open the eyes of the Anglo-Saxons.

Okay. Next step.

The flamboyant Sicilian mafia (made over-macho by the Godfather series?) faded after the 1990s, and their huge wave of assassinations of police and prosecutors and the corrupting of politicians to bend laws and contracts to their advantage.

This was about the last great Don of the old lot. Toto Riina died in a prison hospital two weeks ago.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/sollecito_has_some_company_another_mafia_relative_is_broke_and_begging/

Okay. Next step.

It is the stealthy Ndrangheta filtering out of Calabria (the toe of Italy) that has filled the vacuum and more-so. They have been infiltrating the Perugia region for over a decade now, throughout the period of our case.

Okay. Next step.

We have often posted that a key tool of theirs is the discrediting in public eyes of police and prosecutors and judges. That is largely why they have been so active behind the scenes in this case, attempting to diminish Mignini, one of the brightest and most successful prosecutors in Italy.

Okay. Next step.

Same strategy of diminishment of justice in America and the UK and now Ireland. Sowing seeds of distrust in law enforcement and justice institutions among naive wussie lawyers can only be a good thing.

We have seen Knox spout her line before gullible lawyers in Kentucky, Florida and California who did not do their homework.

This is what happened in the UK - almost every lawyer in the UK was misinformed on the case by way of a huge one-year-long series in a law journal; James Raper may have made the guy blink in final episodes.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/problems_with_fred_davies_1_did_guedes_separate_trial/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/problems_with_fred_davies_2_his_claims_on_knives/

Okay. Next step.

Now we are seeing it in Ireland. Naive wussie Irish lawyers who did not do their homework gave the “Counsel for the Dons” David Dalla Vedova an award! Amazing, right?

Okay. Next step.

Martha Grace Duncan’s paper is about the most virulent attack ever made on Prosecutor Mignini. It is on a level with Preston’s and Heavey’s.  Duncan, Preston, Heavey and Knox, whether they know it or not, are valued tools now of the Ndrangheta.

Okay. Next step.

Let the US media and universities check this out with the right authorities (just initiated) and we can all finally sit back.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/04/17 at 03:46 PM | #

Pete, “…..we (Do) have to go on trying”

Posted by Cardiol MD on 12/04/17 at 04:44 PM | #

Hi Cardiol.

Yes for sure we going on trying; team effort; group ownership; justice still to be seen to be done; and no quitting before we agree it is the end of the end game.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/04/17 at 06:41 PM | #


Make a comment

If you are reading this please log in to post a comment.

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Why Smart Feminists Much Prefer To Keep Amanda Knox At Arms Length

Or to previous entry Netflixhoax 23 Omitted - The Case Against RS & AK Is Actually Getting Stronger