Breaking news. VICE Media have apparently hired the mother of all demonizers. For what? To compere a program about demonizers! Statute of limitations on demonizing Knox book still has several years to run. Sollecito has conceded in court his own book lied and demonized.

Tuesday, November 14, 2017

Knox v Knox: How She Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies That Could Stand Up In Court #2

Posted by Chimera





(Long post, click here to go straight to Comments.)

Knox’s Unpromising Legal Context

Sollecito has just shown Knox her probable way forward.

He has just lost a Supreme Court appeal for compensation for his four years in prison, because he provably lied to the cops. And he has just agreed to confess publicly that he provably lied in his book.

Pending an outcome of mafia investigations which may provide further proof that two courts were bent, Sollecito seems to have had his final day in court. Those pesky lies….

What of Knox? She just might get a very minor financial award if the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) sees any merit in her claims that she was denied a lawyer on 5-6 November 2007.

Oh yes. The night she talked her head off to investigators and was difficult to stop. 

There’s no way her calunnia conviction can be overturned, the Supreme Court made quite sure of that in 2013, and again in 2015. She is a convicted felon for life. (Oh, Netflix did not mention that?)

And there is no sign that her team have even asked the ECHR for a retrial on the calunnia, surely knowing her claim was incredibly weak - leaving Patrick languishing in prison for several weeks was not a smart legal move.

So going forward Knox has only the same two unpromising legal initiatives to look forward to in which Sollecito just bombed out so bad:

To lose a case for a damages award for the one year she waited for trial, and to lose a case for all the copious defamation in her book. Those pesky lies….

Please see my framing of this series here and in particular this:

... amazingly more than four out of every five critics who reviewed her book on the Amazon site accepted what she said, word for word. And more than four out of every five critics who reviewed the Netflix report accepted what she said, word for word.

This series matches claims by the ever-talkative Amanda “Waiting To He Heard” Knox with claims in her remarkably foolish book (new title “A Bridge Too Far”?) to show how they contradict. These posts are almost courtroom-ready for when Knox’s next legal event begins.

Knox Contradicts Knox #1

AK:  You know, there was so much confusion during the night, and so many hours of interrogation, that my sense of time was gone.
CP:  When you wrote the memorandum, were you hit by police?
AK:  When?
CP:  When you wrote the memorandum. Were you hit by police?
AK:  No.
CP:  Mistreated?
AK:  No.
CP:  Did the police suggest the contents?
AK:  No.
CP:  You gave it to them freely?
AK:  Yes.
CP:  Voluntarily?
AK:  Yes.

[WTBH, Chapter 11, Page 129]  I had so many questions that I didn’t ask aloud. But my main thought was If I’m going into hiding, I need to make sure the police understand that I’m not sure about Patrick. I’d caved under the police’s questioning. It was my lack of resolve that had created this problem, and I had to fix it. I needed to say that I had doubts about what I’d signed, to let the police know they couldn’t rely on my declarations as the truth.

[Comments] The logic Knox claims here is rather difficult to follow.  If you were to follow the June 2009 testimony and book, you would think that AK freely wanted to write statement to claim that she wasn’t sure anything she had previously said was true.  Police statements try to get people saw they saw/heard/did something specific, they don’t couch everything with ‘‘maybe’‘.  It still also doesn’t explain that if AK thought that the police considered her and Sollecito suspects, why would they get her to finger someone else completely?  If anything it would hurt any potential case]

Knox Contradicts Knox #2

CP: But in fact, you were sure that Patrick was innocent?
AK:  No, I wasn’t sure.
CP:  Why?
AK:  Because I was confused! I imagined that it might have happened. I was confused.
CP:  Did you see Patrick on November 1, yes or no?
AK:  No.
CP:  Did you meet him?
AK:  No.
CP:  Then why did you say that you saw him, met him, and walked home with him?
AK:  Because the police and the interpreter told me that maybe I just wasn’t remembering these things, but I had to try to remember. It didn’t matter if I thought I was imagining it. I would remember it with time. So, the fact that I actually remembered something else was confusing to me. Because I remembered one thing, but under the pressure of the police, I forced myself to imagine another. I was confused. I was trying to explain this confusion, because they were making me accuse someone I didn’t want to accuse.

[WTBH, Chapter 11, Page 129/130] In naming Patrick, I’d unintentionally misled them. What if they thought I did it on purpose? They’d wasted time on me when they could have been out pursuing the real killer.

[Chapter 11, Page 139] I was consumed by worry for Patrick. I felt that time was running out for him if I didn’t remember for sure what had happened the night of Meredith’s murder.

[Comments] In the trial testimony, AK claims (and yes, they are talking about the 3rd statement) that she was confused.  However, in the book she claims to have wanted to write the statement in order to clear things up.  Not at all the same thing.  And again, please read the statement, and this fine work from Peter Hyatt, and decide if this is meant to ‘‘clear up’’ anything at all]

Read Peter Hyatt here.

Knox Contradicts Knox #3

CP:  Did you ever tell your mother, in English, that you felt horrible because Patrick was in prison because of your fault?
AK:  Yes, so many times.
CP:  Did you say it on November 10?
AK:  I don’t remember the dates, but I talked about it with my mother, yes.
CP:  So if you were perfectly aware that Patrick was in prison by your fault, that he was innocent, why didn’t you tell the penitentiary police?
AK:  Well, it’s true that after several days in prison, I did come to realize that what I had imagined was nothing but imagination, not a confusion of reality. So I realized that he wasn’t guilty of these things, and I felt really really bad that he had been arrested.

[WTBH, Chapter 15, Page 175]  “I didn’t come up with those things on my own” I said. “I told them I’d been with Raffaele all night at his apartment. But they demanded to know whom I’d left to meet, who Patrick was, if I had let him into the villa. They insisted I knew who the murderer was, that I’d be put in jail for thirty years if I didn’t cooperate.” “Amanda,” she said, her eyes wide, “I can’t believe you had to go through that by yourself.” I told her that I had signed the witness statements out of confusion and exhaustion, that as soon as I had a few minutes by myself, I realized that what I’d said under pressure might be wrong. “I thought I could fix my mistake by explaining it in writing,” I said. “Instead, they arrested me.” Mom listened, pulling me close. There was never a moment when it seemed that my words weren’t reaching her.

[Comments] AK doesn’t mention telling her Mother on the phone that PL is innocent.  Instead, the closest thing we get is a personal visit where she ‘‘explains’’ her so-called interrogation.  Odd that the phone call is left out entirely.

Knox Contradicts Knox #4

CP:  In the memorandum of the 7th, why didn’t you mention Patrick?
AK:  I think I thought that everything would be clear since I had written that everything I had said in the Questura wasn’t true. So that meant also the fact that Patrick—
CP:  But you didn’t mention Patrick.
AK:  I said what I had done myself, and that was the important thing. The fact that I hadn’t been with him, for me that showed that I couldn’t say what had happened that night, in the house. I could only say what happened to me, and the fact was that I wasn’t with him.

[WTBH, Chapter 13, Page 155] And then, right after the nun had left, detail after detail suddenly came back to me. I read a chapter in Harry Potter We watched a movie. We cooked dinner. We smoked a joint. Raffaele and I had sex. And then I went to sleep. What I’d said during my interrogation was wrong. I was never at the villa. I’d tried to believe what the police had said and had literally conjured that up. It wasn’t real.

[WTBH, Chapter 13, Page 156-159] The actual letter…. It read: Oh my God! I’m freaking out a bit now because I talked to a nun and I finally remember. It can’t be a coincidence. I remember what I was doing with Raffaele at the time of the murder of my friend! We are both innocent! This is why: After dinner Raffaele began washing the dishes in the kitchen and I was giving him a back massage while he was doing it. It’s something we do for one another when someone is cleaning dishes, because it makes cleaning better. I remember now that it was AFTER dinner that we smoked marijuana and while we smoked I began by saying that he shouldn’t worry about the sink. He was upset because the sink was broken but it was new and I told him to not worry about it because it was only a little bad thing that had happened, and that little bad things are nothing to worry about. We began to talk more about what kind of people we were. We talked about how I’m more easygoing and less organized than he is, and how he is very organized because of the time he spent in Germany.

It was during this conversation that Raffaele told me about his past. How he had a horrible experience with drugs and alcohol. He told me that he drove his friends to a concert and that they were using cocaine, marijuana, he was drinking rum, and how, after the concert, when he was driving his passed-out friends home, how he had realized what a bad thing he had done and had decided to change. He told me about how in the past he dyed his hair yellow and another time when he was young had cut designs in his hair. He used to wear earrings. He did this because when he was young he played video games and watched Sailor Moon, a Japanese girl cartoon, and so he wasn’t a popular kid at school. People made fun of him. I told him about how in high school I had been unpopular as well, because the people in my school thought I was a lesbian.

We talked about his friends, how they hadn’t changed from drug-using video game players, and how he was sad for them. We talked about his mother, how she had died and how he felt guilty because he had left her alone before she died. He told me that before she died she told him she wanted to die because she was alone and had nothing to live for. I told Raffaele that wasn’t his fault that his mother was depressed and wanted to die. I told him he did the right thing by going to school. I told him that life is full of choices, and those choices aren’t necessarily between good and bad. There are options between what is best and what is not, and all we have to do is do what we think is best. I told him that mistakes teach us to be better people, and so he shouldn’t feel nervous about going to Milan to study, because he felt he needed to be nearer to his friends who hadn’t changed and he felt needed him. But I told him he had to be true to himself.

It was a very long conversation but it did happen and it must have happened at the time of Meredith’s murder, so to clarify, this is what happened. Around five in the evening Raffaele and I returned to his place to get comfortable. I checked my email on his computer for a while and then afterward I read a little Harry Potter to him in German. We watched Amelie and afterward we kissed for a little while. I told him about how I really liked this movie and how my friends thought I was similar to Amelie because I’m a bit of a weirdo, in that I like random little things, like birds singing, and these little things make me happy. I don’t remember if we had sex. Raffaele made dinner and I watched him and we stayed together in the kitchen while dinner was cooking. After dinner Raffaele cleaned the dishes and this is when the pipes below came loose and flooded the kitchen floor with water. He was upset, but I told him we could clean it up tomorrow when I brought back a mop from my house. He put a few small towels over the water to soak up a little and then he threw them into the sink.

I asked him what would make him feel better and he said he would like to smoke some hash. I received a message from my boss about how I didn’t have to come into work and I sent him a message back with the words: “Ci vediamo. Buono serata.” While Raffaele rolled the joint I laid in bed quietly watching him. He asked me what I was thinking about and I told him I thought we were very different kinds of people. And so our conversation began, which I have already written about. After our conversation I know we stayed in bed together for a long time. We had sex and then afterward we played our game of looking at each other and making faces. After this period of time we fell asleep and I didn’t wake up until Friday morning. This is what happened and I could swear by it. I’m sorry I didn’t remember before and I’m sorry I said I could have been at the house when it happened. I said these things because I was confused and scared. I didn’t lie when I said I thought the killer was Patrick. I was very stressed at the time and I really did think he was the murderer. But now I remember that I can’t know who the murderer was because I didn’t return back to the house. I know the police will not be happy about this, but it’s the truth and I don’t know why my boyfriend told lies about me, but I think he is scared and doesn’t remember well either. But this is what it is, this is what I remember.

[WTBH, Chapter 15, Page 159]I was a little girl again. I was doing what I’d done since I was seven years old, whenever I got into trouble with Mom. I’d sit with a Lion King notebook propped up against my knees, write out my explanation and apology, rip it out, fold it up, and then either hand it to Mom or, if I wasn’t brave enough, put it somewhere I knew she’d immediately find it.

[Comments] AK writes another statement on November 7, and Carlo Pacelli is correct, it actually doesn’t mention PL at all.  AK, in what might be a surprise bit of honesty, tends to write out explanations when she gets into trouble.  Doesnt seem to work here though.

Knox Contradicts Knox #5

GCM: Excuse me, avvocato. To just return to this question. The defense is expressing his perplexity and we also feel it. You are saying: “I didn’t know if Patrick was innocent or not.” This is on the 6th and the 7th. But on the 10th, you essentially say that he’s innocent. So what the defense lawyer is asking is, what happened in between to make you change your mind? To change your conviction about the role of Patrick? It’s this.
AK:  Well, yes. I knew he was in prison uniquely because of my words. At first I didn’t know this. I thought the police somehow knew whether he was guilty or not. Since I didn’t know, I was confused. But in the following days I realized that he was in prison only because of what I had said, and I felt guilty.
CP:  Why didn’t you tell the police this in the following days, or to the PM?
GCM: Excuse me, avvocato? The days following which day?
CP:  I’m talking about the 10th of November. The day of the conversation with her mother? Why didn’t you ever tell the police or the publicco ministero?
AK:  I had clearly written down in the memorandum that everything in my declarations couldn’t be true because I didn’t really remember them. And then, whenever police came to talk to give me paper or anything, they treated me like “Oh, so you have another truth now.” So this was my way of telling them that nothing I had said in the Questura was usable.

WTBH, Chapter 27, Pages 321-327] AK gives a very abbreviated version of this, and leaves out the contradictory statements altogether.

[Comments] AK leaves out the phone call on November 10 in the book.  She also seems to intentionally garble whether or not she knew the accusation was false.  Carlo Pacelli rightfully asks why she was so unsure on November 6/7, but she is so certain on November 10 that PL was innocent.  What changed?  But a clear answer is never given.

Knox Contradicts Knox #6

CP:  I think I’m talking about November 30th. On November 30, you were in front of the Tribunale degli Esame. Why didn’t you declare this circumstance, that Patrick was foreign to all this, totally innocent?
AK:  So, that date is when I arrived here, to the Camera di Consiglio?
CP:  Yes.
AK:  That’s it. So I said, I made a spontaneous declaration in front of those judges, saying that I was very upset about the fact that Patrick had been put in prison because of me. I said that. If I’m not mistaken.
CP:  Listen, the first time you ever actually said that Patrick had nothing to do with it, when was it? Do you remember? Of these people you told, was it to your lawyers? Or was it your mother on the phone on the 10th?
AK:  That Patrick had nothing to do with it? I imagined that he was innocent because—

[WTBH] in the book AK skips over the November 30, 2007 hearing altogether.  This was the 3 Judge panel, headed by Massimo Ricciarelli.  3 weeks after Judge Claudia Matteini had denied them release, AK/RS were able to challenge it.  At this point though, the police had a much stronger case, and Guede had been caught.

Knox Contradicts Knox #7

CP:  Excuse me, but apart from your mother, who else did you tell about this?
AK:  I wrote it down, and I also told my lawyers.
CP:  Can you be a bit clearer about this?
AK:  You mean about whom I told?
CP:  I mean about the fact that Patrick had nothing to do with the crime and was in prison because of you. As you yourself said. Who did you tell besides your mother?
AK:  I also told my lawyers.

[WTBH] Yet another claim that doesn’t appear in the book.  AK does include several scenes where Dalla Vedova and Ghirga are frustrated she and RS can’t be release (since it would be an admission of jumping to wrong conclusions).  But nowhere in the book does AK clearly and unequivically say to her lawyers that PL is innocent.  Probably a good thing for them, since leaving an innocent man in jail would end their careers.

Knox Contradicts Knox #8

GCM: Excuse me. Before you told your mother, did you tell anyone else?
AK:  Yes, I wrote it in my memorandum of the 7th, and then when I discussed the situation with my lawyers, I explained why I had said these things. And I explained the fact that I couldn’t talk about the guilt of this person. I thought that, at a certain point, thinking about how Patrick was, I thought that it wasn’t even possible that he could be guilty of something like that, because he wasn’t like that. But I wasn’t actually in the house seeing anything, so I couldn’t actually state whether he was guilty or not.
GCM:  Yes. But before you told your mother on November 10th in that recorded conversation, did you tell others? That Patrick, as far as you knew, had nothing to do with it?
AK:  I had explained the situation to my lawyers, and I had told them what I knew. Which was that I didn’t know who the murderer was. That.
CP:  But listen, in the memorandum of the 7th, you did repeat that Patrick was the murderer. Do you contest that? You expressly say “I didn’t lie when I said Patrick was the murderer. I really did think he was the murderer.” So in the memorandum of the 7th, you confirm—

[WTBH, Chapter 18, Page 207] Carlo and Luciano went from saying that the lack of evidence would prove my innocence to warning me that the prosecution was out to get me, and steeling me for a fight. “There’s no counting on them anymore,” Carlo said. “We’re up against a witch hunt. But it’s going to be okay.”

[Comments] Again sticking the knife in her own lawyers.  In the trial testimony she claims that she told Ghirga and Dalla Vedova were told PL was innocent, yet did nothing.  In the book she leaves that out but claims they knew Mignini/Comodi were trying to frame them with falsified evidence, yet did nothing about it.  And just to clarify, LG and CDV are DEFENSE lawyers.

Knox Contradicts Knox #9

CP:  Signorina Amanda, did you accuse Patrick to save yourself?
AK:  No!
CP:  Well then, why?
AK:  Because the police suggested—

[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 116] Everyone was yelling, and I was yelling back. I shouted, “I don’t understand what the fuck is happening right now!” A beefy cop with a crew cut thought I’d said, “Fuck you,” and he yelled, “Fuck you!” back. They pushed my cell phone, with the message to Patrick, in my face and screamed, “You’re lying. You sent a message to Patrick. Who’s Patrick?” That’s when Ficarra slapped me on my head. “Why are you hitting me?” I cried. “To get your attention,” she said.

[Comments] In the June 2009 testimony, at least in this part, AK claims that she gave up the name because of suggestibility.  In the book, however, she claims it was forced and beaten out of her. Not the same thing at all]

[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 120] 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.”

[Comments] Slightly off tpoic, but her AK acknowledges that PM Mignini wasn’t there for the first interrogation, but that he came in later.  So that part of AK’s original claim is false obiously.

Knox Contradicts Knox #10

LG:  And then something happened to the faucet of the sink?
AK:  Yes. While Raffaele was washing the dishes, water was coming out from underneath. He looked down, turned off the water and then looked underneath and the pipe underneath “got loose” [in English, the lawyer translates “broke” (si e rotto), the interpreter translates “slowed down” (si e rallentato)] and water was coming out.
GCM: Can you say what time this was?
AK:  Um, around, um, we ate around 9:30 or 10, and then after we had eaten and he was washing the dishes, well, as I said, I don’t look at the clock much, but it was around 10. And…he…umm…well, he was washing the dishes and, umm, the water was coming out and he was very “bummed” [English], displeased, he told me he had just had that thing repaired. He was annoyed that it had broken again. So, umm…
LG: Yes. So you talked a bit. Then what did you do?
AK:  Then we smoked a joint together. What we did is, we said all right, let’s find some rags, but he didn’t have a “mop” [in English] how do you say “mop”? [The interpreter translates “lo spazzolone”, the lawyer “il mocio”] he didn’t have one, and I said don’t worry, I have one at home, I’ll bring it tomorrow, the leak is in the kitchen, it wasn’t like it smelled bad or anything, we could just forget about it for the night, and then think about it tomorrow. So, we went into his room, and I think I, yes, I lay down on his bed, and he went to the desk, and while he was there he rolled the joint, and then we smoked it together.

[WTBH, Chapter 5, Page 62]  After the movie ended, around 9:15 P.M., we sauteed a piece of fish and made a simple salad. We were washing the dishes when we realized that the kitchen sink was leaking. Raffaele, who’d already had a plumber come once, was frustrated and frantically tried to mop up a lot of water with a little rag. He ended up leaving a puddle.  “I’ll bring the mop over from our house tomorrow. No big deal,” I said.

[Comments] First, didn’t Raffy’s Dad call around 8:30, and they mentioned the leak then?  Second, if there is just a ‘‘small puddle’’ why would it be necessary to grab a mop the next day?  Seems like an excuse just to cover the possibility of being seen with a mop.

Knox Contradicts Knox #11

LG:  Now we come to the morning of Nov 2nd. What did you do the next morning, when you woke up?
AK:  So, when I woke up, I don’t remember what time it was, but I think around 10, 10:30, I was there and I saw that Raffaele was still sleeping, so I watched him for a little while, then I said, okay, I’m going home to take a shower and change, and when I come back, we’ll go, because we had this plan to go to Gubbio, because it was a holiday that day, there was no school for me, or anyway I was going to skip it. [Laughs.] Anyway, I wanted to go see Gubbio. So, I left his house, and when I got near my house, I saw that the door was open. And I thought, strange, because usually we had to lock that door, but I thought, if someone didn’t close it properly, obviously it would open. I thought maybe someone had gone out very quickly, or just downstairs to get something, or to take out the trash, or something. When I went in, I called out “Is anybody there?” and no one answered, so I closed the door, but I didn’t lock it, because I thought maybe someone would come, maybe they had just gone out to get cigarettes or whatever. Then I went into my room, um, and I changed, well no, I made a mistake, I went into the bathroom. I had these earrings, I had a lot of them, I like earrings, I had had them pierced recently, and I always had to wash them carefully because one was a little infected, and I had to take the earrings out and clean the ear, and that’s when I saw some drops of blood on the sink. At first I thought they had come from my ears. But then when I scratched the drops a bit, I saw they were all dry, and I thought “That’s weird. Oh well, I’ll take my shower.” Then when I got out of the shower, I saw that I had forgotten my towel, so I wanted to use the bathmat to get to my room, and that’s when I saw the bloody stain that was on the bathmat. And I thought “Hm, strange.” Maybe someone had a problem with menstruation that didn’t get cleaned up right away. I used the mat to kind of hop over to my room and into my room, I took my towel, and I used the mat to get back to the bathroom because I thought well, by now…then I put the mat back where it was supposed to go, then I dried myself, put my earrings back, brushed my teeth, then I went back into my room to put on new clothes, I took—no!
LG: You dried your hair–
AK:  Then I went into the other bathroom to dry my hair, because there was no hair dryer in my bathroom. So I went there, I took the hair dryer, I was drying my hair, and then when I put the hair dryer back, I saw that in the toilet, which was that kind of toilet that isn’t really flat, it’s like this, kind of ew, that there were faeces on that upper part, and that for me was the strangest thing of all. In fact [swallowing], of all the things I saw, in the bathroom of Laura and Filomena who are very clean people, for me it was strange, and I thought, “What? What could this be?” Okay, so I didn’t know what to think, but it was strange. Then I took this mop that was near my room that was in a closet thing near my room, and I went to Raffaele’s house, locking the door behind me, because all the time I was doing these things, nobody had come back to the house. So um, I thought, strange, okay, let’s see what Raffaele says, because I didn’t know what to think, and so I wanted to talk it over with him. When I got back to his house, I…he was in the bathroom, and I started to clean up the floor in the kitchen, but it was by now almost dry, just a bit of water left because it had evaporated. Then he came out and we made breakfast, and while we were preparing it and drinking coffee, I explained to him what I had seen, and I asked him for advice, because when I went into my house, everything seemed in order, only there were these little weird things, and I couldn’t figure out how to understand them.

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 65]  0n that cold, sunny Friday morning, I left Rafael asleep in his apartment and walked home to take a shower and get my things together, thinking about our romantic weekend in the Umbrian hills. In hindsight, it seems that arriving home to find the front door open should have rattled me more. I thought, That’s strange. But it was easily explained. The old latch didn’t catch unless we used a key. Wind must have blown it open, I thought, and walked inside the house calling out, “Filomena? Laura? Meredith? Hello? Hello? Anybody?”  Nobody. The bedroom doors were closed.  I wasn’t alarmed by two pea-size flecks of blood in the bathroom sink that Meredith and I shared. There was another smear on the faucet. Weird. I’d gotten my ears pierced. Were they bleeding? I scratched the droplets with my fingernail. They were dry. Meredith must have nicked herself.  It wasn’t until I got out of the shower that I noticed a reddish-brown splotch about the size of an orange on the bathmat. More blood. Could Meredith have started her period and dripped? But then, how would it have gotten on the sink? My confusion increased. We were usually so neat. I went to my room and, while putting on a white skirt and a blue sweater, thought about what to bring along on my trip to Gubbio with Raffaele.

I went to the big bathroom to use Filomena’s blow dryer and was stashing it back against the wall when I noticed poop in the toilet. No one in the house would have left the toilet unflushed. Could there have been a stranger here? Was someone in the house when I was in the shower? I felt a lurch of panic and the prickly feeling you get when you think someone might be watching you. I quickly grabbed my purse and coat and somehow remembered the mop I said I’d bring back to Raffaele’s. I scrambled to push the key into the lock, making myself turn it before I ran up the driveway, my heart banging painfully.

By the time I was a block from home I was second-guessing myself. Maybe I was overreacting. Maybe there was a simple reason for the toilet being unflushed. I needed someone to say, “, you’re right to be scared. This isn’t normal.” And if it wasn’t okay, I wanted someone to tell me what to do. My skittering brain pulled up my mom’s mantra: when in doubt, call. Forgetting the nine-hour time difference between Perugia and Seattle, I pressed the number sequence for home. My mom did not say hello, just “, are you okay? What’s wrong?” It was in the middle of the night in Seattle, and she was worried.

“I’m on my way back to Raffaele’s,” I said, “but I just wanted to check in. I found some strange things in my house.” I explained my reasons for worrying. Then I asked, “What do you think I should do?”  “Call your roommates,” she said. “Go tell Raffaele, and call me right back.”

[Comments] So AK sees blood, assumes someone had their period, and doesn’t think to clean it up?!  She also sees (and probably smells) that the other toilet hadn’t been flushed in several hours and doesn’t think to flush it?!  She does however, remember to that there was a small puddle of water from RS’ sink the night before, and grabs the mop, but didn’t think to check to see if the puddle was still there?!

[Comments] So AK sees blood in the sink, realises it wasn’t from ‘‘dripping’’ and that it might have been from her earrings.  Yet she doesn’t think to clean that up either?!

[Comments] And taking your earrings out of ‘‘newly pierced’’ ears makes no sense as it causes: (1) infection; and (b) the risk of the holes closing over.

[Comments] AK claims that she used the bathmat to hop across the floor because it was wet.  Okay, if water is so dangerous, why not have the mop in the bathroom to remove what I assume was a lot of water?  Remember, she took the mop back to deal with that ‘‘small puddle’’ at RS house.

[Comments] And using the bathmat to hop across the floor?! So if she looked and bent down to grab it, then presumably she saw the bloody ‘‘orange’‘.

[Comments] If AK is so blase about finding blood in her bathroom, unflushed toilets, and she knows the front door doesn’t lock properly, then what exactly is there to be so worried about?

[Comments] If AK did call her mother to report these things, why did Edda not just say: (a) clean up the drips; (b) flush the toilet; and (c) close the door?  Seems like a reasonable parent response.

[Comments] If everyone is supposedly gone for the long weekend, why would seeing an empty house be disturbing?

[Comments] Both the book and the trial testimony leave out that AK would have encountered Filomena’s broken window as she approached.  Either she never noticed, or broken windows are just something that happens.  Nothing to see here people…

[Comments] A contradiction here.  In the book she claims to have left RS asleep.  In the trial she claimed he had woken up, and she told him she was leaving.  Not the same thing

[Comments] To re-iterate, how could AK be so indifferent about: (1) blood in the sink; (2) blood on the bathmat; (c) showering in a bloody bathroom; (d) hopping across a bloody mat; (e) unflushed toilet; (f) the smell of unflushed toilet; (g) door wide open; (h) Filomena’s broken window, yet be so careful as to grab the mop for the leak under RS sink?!

Knox Contradicts Knox #12

LG: How worried were you when you left your house?
AK:  Well, I had this strange sensation like, “What?” and it was a bit like that, I didn’t know how to explain it in my mind. That’s why I wanted to ask Raffaele. So he suggested I ask my roommates. So first I called Meredith, who didn’t answer, and then I think I called Filomena, and she explained to me that Laura was in Rome, and that I should call back Meredith and then return to the house to see if there was anything stolen. I told her, look, everything seemed to be there, not as if someone entered and took things away, because my computer was still in my room, I saw that the television was still in the living room. For me, I hadn’t even thought that there was a robbery. I thought maybe someone went in and out really quickly, because if someone leaves faeces in the toilet, maybe something had happened and they had had to leave really really fast. Maybe. So Raffaele and I went out and went to my house to look around and see how things were. This time we opened the doors, for example the door to Filomena’s room, and I saw that her window was broken and there was a big mess. That’s when I thought, oh gosh, it was a robbery. And I was running around everywhere.

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 66] I felt a lurch of panic and the prickly feeling you get when you think someone might be watching you. I quickly grabbed my purse and coat and somehow remembered the mop I said I’d bring back to Raffaele’s. I scrambled to push the key into the lock, making myself turn it before I ran up the driveway, my heart banging painfully.

[Comments] AK claims in the 2009 trial testimony not to be scared, but rather to have merely found things odd.  In the book, however, she claims to have been freaked out, yet still able to grab the mop.

Knox Contradicts Knox #13

LG: How did you interpret the fact that Meredith’s door was locked right then? Did it seem to you something normal or abnormal? Did it happen sometimes or very rarely?
AK:  Well, it happened to me sometimes to find that her door was locked, for example if I called Meredith and she had just gotten out of the shower, and wanted to change her clothes, and I would get near the door, I would notice it was locked. But, then she was inside. She also locked it when she went to England. But the fact that it was locked then, I didn’t know if she had gone to England, and if it was locked and she wasn’t inside, for me that was strange and I didn’t…
LG: Okay, so that gives some clarification about Meredith’s locked door.

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 69] I kneeled on the floor and squinted, trying to peer through the keyhole. I couldn’t see anything. And we had no way of knowing if the door had been locked from the inside or the outside. “I’m going outside to see if I can look through her window from the terrace.” I climbed over the wrought-iron railing. With my feet on the narrow ledge, I held on to the rail with one hand and leaned out as far as I could, my body at a forty-five-degree angle over the gravel walkway below. Rafael came out and shouted, “! Get down. You could fall!” That possibility hadn’t occurred to me. “Please come in before you get hurt!” As soon as we got inside, we went back to Meredith’s closed door. “I can try to kick it down,” Rafael offered. “Try it!”

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 71] “Not as far as we can tell,” I said. “But Meredith’s door is locked. I’m really worried.” “Well, is that unusual?” they asked. I tried to explain that she locked it sometimes, when she was changing clothes or was leaving town for the weekend, but Filomena wheeled around and shouted, “She never locks her door!” I stepped back and let her take over the conversation, Italian to Italian. The rapid-fire exchange stretched way past my skills.

[Comments] in the trial testimony, AK claims it was no big deal, yet in the book she claims to be freaked out.  She later dials it back, as if trying to cover both versions.

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 69/70] I called my mom again. “Mom,” I said. “Someone broke into our house, and we can’t find Meredith. What should we do?” “, call the police,” she said. My stepfather, Chris, yelled into the speakerphone, “, get the hell out of the house, this instant!” While I was talking to them, Raffaele called his sister to see what she thought. She was a police officer in Rome. Raffaele dialed 112—Italy’s 911—for the Carabinieri, which was separate from—and more professional than—the Perugian town police. As soon as he hung up, I said, “Let’s wait for them outside.” Even without Chris’s insistence, I was too spooked to be in the house. On the way out I glanced from the kitchen into the larger bathroom. The toilet had been flushed. “Oh my God!” I said to Raffaele. “Someone must have been hiding inside when I was here the first time—or they came back while I was gone!”

[Comments] Just an observation here. AK seems to insert her Stepdad, Chris Mellas, into the 2nd phone call with her Mum.  However, there doesn’t seem to be any mention of him in the trial transcript.

Knox Contradicts Knox #14

Then we went out of the house, because I was taken by this…I don’t know, I felt really strange. I don’t know, the situation was too strange, I didn’t know what to think. So we went out of the house, also to look from outside at that window, and while we were outside, two people from plainclothes police came up to us and said “Ciao, we’re the police”. So I immediately thought that they were the people that Raffaele had called,

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 70] We ran out and waited on a grassy bank beside the driveway. I was shivering from nerves and cold, and Raffaele was hugging me to calm me down and keep me warm, when a man in jeans and a brown jacket walked up. As he approached us he said he was from the police. I thought, That was fast. Another officer joined him.

[Comments] Keeping with the discrepency in urgency, AK tells the Massei Court that she and RS went outside since they were perplexed and thought that going outside might give answers.  IN the book, she claims that she and RS were freaked out by the prospect of a burglar, and ran outside.  Just a thought, perhaps the book was distorted with all the freaking out just for editor’s purpose.

Knox Contradicts Knox #15

I had taken a really quick look to see if the faeces were still in the toilet, and they had gone down a bit, whereas when I saw them they were on top, the fact that I didn’t see them, I thought mamma mia, someone flushed the toilet. I didn’t really look inside, just from the entrance to the bathroom. . So then I was taken by this sense of fear, because I thought mamma mia, while I was taking my shower, someone was here in the house!

[Chapter 6, Page 70] In court, AK adds the details tthat she took a look to see if the s*** was still in the toilet.  (Again, why anyone wouldn’t flush a toilet after 12 hours is a bit beyond me, unless they knew something).  In the book, she goes directly to the break in

Knox Contradicts Knox #16

AK: Yes, because I told them, look, the door is locked, and Filomena was going Mamma Mia, it’s never locked, it’s never locked, and I said no, it’s not true that it’s never locked, but it is strange.

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 71] “Not as far as we can tell,” I said. “But Meredith’s door is locked. I’m really worried.” “Well, is that unusual?” they asked. I tried to explain that she locked it sometimes, when she was changing clothes or was leaving town for the weekend, but Filomena wheeled around and shouted, “She never locks her door!” I stepped back and let her take over the conversation, Italian to Italian. The rapid-fire exchange stretched way past my skills. Filomena shouted at the Postal Police officers, “Break down the door!”

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 69] I kneeled on the floor and squinted, trying to peer through the keyhole. I couldn’t see anything. And we had no way of knowing if the door had been locked from the inside or the outside. “I’m going outside to see if I can look through her window from the terrace.” I climbed over the wrought-iron railing. With my feet on the narrow ledge, I held on to the rail with one hand and leaned out as far as I could, my body at a forty-five-degree angle over the gravel walkway below. Rafael came out and shouted, “! Get down. You could fall!” That possibility hadn’t occurred to me. “Please come in before you get hurt!” As soon as we got inside, we went back to Meredith’s closed door. “I can try to kick it down,” Rafael offered. “Try it!”

[Comments] AK tries to paint herself as the voice of reason in court and on page 71.  She forgets that she wrote on page 69 she was freaked out.

More to come.

Posted by Chimera on 11/14/17 at 12:34 PM in


Comments

She has an excuse for absolutely everything - “one of my ears was a little bit infected”.
She remembers the salad, the late late late meal, the conversations with Sollecito. It’s all extraneous stuff.
In filling in details of what she did I think she just makes herself look more and more guilty.
And absolutely zero concern for Meredith.

And what exactly did she do for the hour that she spent at the cottage?

Posted by DavidB on 11/16/17 at 08:03 AM | #

In her letter of the 7th Nov Knox plays her get out of jail amnesia card. “Oh my God!... I finally remember…I remember what I was doing with Raffaele at the time of the murder. We are both innocent!”

Except, of course, there never was a bout of amnesia.

She had pounced on Anna Donnino’s suggestion of amnesia as an excuse for fabricating her accusation against Patrick, effectively making herself a witness to murder, and knowing that she could later claim it was all imaginary because she had indeed been suffering from amnesia. When, conveniently, her memory returned she could claim (as she does here) that she had not been at the cottage.

Or so she had thought.

The problem here is that she had from the start claimed that she was not there, giving the police a precise explanation of where she had been. Furthermore she had clearly spent a lot of time and thought on her e-mail, recording in detail what she wants the reader to know she had been innocently doing from the 1st to the 2nd Nov - precisely by way of an alibi.

Are we really supposed to entertain the notion that Knox ever contemplated amnesia as a serious possibility? Confusion?

Give over.

Posted by James Raper on 11/16/17 at 06:21 PM | #

Hi James Raper

She was indeed erratic in her claims of amnesia. To her considerable annoyance Sollecito was even more so.

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

Here is I believe Sollecito’s last word - in effect where his being erratic currently rests.

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

Even in their submissions to the Marasca/Bruno court they tried to edge one another between themselves and the fire.

In the 3,650 or so days since Meredith’s death, they have been fully on the same page in precisely none of them.

Well, maybe in Sollecito’s book - the content of which he was pretty vague about on American TV. The “Honor Bound” to Knox thing.

He said the prosecution tried to separate them out! Ironically that is one of the defamatory false claims to which he must publicly confess. 

Whither the now patently absurd title of his book now?  All these Knox and Sollecito personas - they could fill an entire bus.

***

James covers the 2009 trial and the Knox book in his own excellent overview.

https://www.amazon.com/Justice-Trial-Evidence-Analysis-Meredith-ebook/dp/B01JB6XMDA

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/17/17 at 09:46 AM | #

It’s a shame the ECHR has to waste time on Knox’s spurious case. I hope she doesn’t receive a penny.

Chimera rightly says that Knox couched her speech in “maybe”. She did that on purpose for easy deniability. She was very slick, a natural waffle and obstructionist. How unfair that she put an innocent man in prison on her words alone, yet wants to cry foul about how she was treated.

The ECHR should make short shrift of her fake case. Raffaele showed the same arrogance. He lied to police and then wanted compensation for confusing them! Both twerps need to go jump.

And as someone suggested that Knox might offend again just to remain in the spotlight, it’s quite possible. Her guilty conscience might make her stumble into some new legal battle because secretly she might feel she deserves more punishment than she received despite her howls to the contrary. Her subconscious knows the truth about what she did to Meredith. It may try to settle the score. Never trust a liar.

What makes me so angry is that Knox used Father Scarabatolli the prison priest and then the nun to strengthen her resolve, her resolve not to do right but to keep lying. It was after the nun spoke with her that she suddenly “remembered” oh so clearly that she was not at the cottage at all, how convenient. She felt better by saying that because it did release Patrick from prison, with her no longer claiming to be an eye witness to his presence at the cottage. It also allowed her to invent the “I was at Raffaele’s place” alibi which she stuck with from then on.

Who in the world would believe that even drugs and alcohol would render her memory so blasted that she could not recall which house she was in on the fateful night? I am unfamiliar with such drunken or drug induced mental blackouts. Does such amnesia truly occur? Wouldn’t the general sense of Place and Where I am still be clear to the inebriate, even if other details are forgotten? Seriously, how likely is her brain fog to be real? The bloody female footprints seen by Luminol suggest she was certainly at the scene.

Posted by Hopeful on 11/17/17 at 09:47 AM | #

Hello all,

In addition to the vast amount of contradictions, it can’t be stated strongly enough how Knox tries to advance many conflicting stories in her book

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/revenge_of_the_knox_series_4_exposing_the_tortured_logic_that_permeates_1/
http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/revenge_of_the_knox_series_4_exposing_the_tortured_logic_that_permeates_her/

(a) The evidence overwhelmingly points to Guede.
(b) The police and CSI are grossly incompetent and followed no ‘‘international standards’‘.

If (a) and (b) are both correct, then it is logical to assume that the evidence against Guede is also contaminated.  Shouldn’t Knox be trying to get Guede free as a ‘‘wrongly convicted’‘?

(c) The police asked AK to ‘‘imagine’’ what could have happened.
(d) The police have all this evidence of what happened, and Guede is known as a knife wielding thief.
(e) Careers were to be made or broken

Here, if (c), (d), and (e) were all true, then the police would have to have known Guede was likely the perp, but with careers on the line, decide instead to browbeat Knox into ‘‘imagining’’ what could have happened.

(f) The police and prosecutors properly dealt with Guede.
(g) The police and prosecutors are corrupt and tried to railroad AK/RS.

For these 2 statements to be true, there would have to be a complete Jekyll and Hyde here.  Likewise, Judge Paolo Micheli ran a ‘‘farce’’ with AK/RS, but properly presided over Guede’s expedited trial.

(h) Knox knew only a most rudimentary Italian in 2007, and remembers little of what was said.
(i) Knox gives long quotations of conversations in Italian, years later.

For (h) and (i) to both be true, Knox would have to have some super memory, and only figure out years later what people were actually saying.  Or, these conversations were largely made up.

These are not my quotes, or my context.  Knox is trying to push many conflicting and impossibly compatible narratives.  Tortured logic indeed.

A few quotes I could dismiss as sloppy editing, but this goes far beyond that.

Posted by Chimera on 11/19/17 at 12:10 AM | #

As for all of the Amazon and Netflix reviews, I would wager that Knox herself wrote most (or all) of them under various aliases.

Posted by Chimera on 11/19/17 at 12:41 AM | #

Sanity and the wisdom of Solomon from Prosecutor Crini. Italy can be proud of his flawless reasoning. I refer to the post I saw this morning November 19, 2017 by The Machine at PMF.net of Machiavelli’s tweets from the Florence courtroom.

Prosecutor Crini is my new hero. He did the most careful and precise reasoning of the myriad facts of Meredith’s murder.

It’s a breath of fresh air, a mountain range of fresh air. The Prosecutor is sharp.

Crini presented 16 “chapters” of reasoning that point straight to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as the culprits who killed Meredith in a group dynamic.

The short, compact form of the tweets helps one follow the logic which Crini has distilled.

To summarize his thoughts:

Crini says RS has no alibi since he was not using his computer on the night of the murder like he said. Crini cites a computer expert and the log files of Fastweb.

Crini says RS left his DNA on the bra clasp which was cut with a small sharp knife in 3 places for removal.

Crini says Meredith’s DNA was indisputably on the knife found in Sollecito’s apartment.

Crini says the C/V report was junk.

Crini says AK mixed bits of truth in her calunnia so she would be believed.

Crini says AK guessed how her blood got on the bathroom tap, yet she was surely aware she had been bleeding; why be inaccurate?

Crini laughs to scorn the Three Stooges reasoning that the Luminol footprints of a female were made by fruit juice, bleach or things other than blood.

Crini says AK’s DNA was on the knife between the blade and the handle.

Crini says AK’s dreamlike component was a liar’s strategy in the calunnia.

Crini says AK knew about the sexual violence before it was known by investigators.

Crini rejects any reasoning based on unconfirmed timings.

Crini regards Curatolo not as a super witness but as a reliable pointer who was reliable in previous cases.

Crini suggests the cause was “an aggression, clash, impetus of rage” and cites the harsh bruising on Meredith’s jaw and mouth as an attempt to block her screams.

Crini takes each element of the case and draws the most logical conclusion.

What a super synopsis Crini gives us of all the major facts and the only possible inferences.

Here’s a big shout out of thanks to The Machine for this list of tweets sent from the courtroom. It proves Crini paid close attention and made an extremely disciplined examination of all the details and facts of Meredith’s case. The facts prove AK and RS lied about fundamental things and were at the murder scene.

Crini asserts that Guede’s hands were free of weapons and that two knives were used, but not by Guede.

Crini absolutely concludes there was a cleanup

(then one occupant was seen on the premises the very morning the body was discovered with a mop and bucket, I add).

Cleanup plus staging of crime scene means this was not a typical burglary.

Crini quotes RS who said Romanelli’s bedroom door was wide open when he entered the cottage with an alarmed Knox.

The only conclusion about that door open (my reasoning) is that if Knox’s crazy story was true about her going alone to the cottage to shower (all of that story is crap, IMO) she must have seen the broken window.

She denied it.

You might say her story has a hole in it, a large window hole with glass strewn on another roommie’s floor.

Crini says Knox’s lamp was the only lighting in her bedroom. (one can conclude that its removal and placement in the murder room would not have gone unnoticed by an innocent Knox? my reasoning)

Prosecutor Crini left no stone unturned in assessing the particulars of Meredith’s murder.

Crini concludes it was not a lone wolf attack. On the contrary it was group dynamics which gave rise to the violent attack after Meredith rebuked the rowdy roommate with her party buddies and complained, Meredith alone being sober and the other three high on substances.

Crini says irritations in the household had been documented on paper; Laura Mezetti also testified to it and Meredith had communicated with her father John Kercher about conflicts over Knox not cleaning.

However, motive need not be ascertained to discern who committed a crime.

Crini says Quintavalle did see AK in his store the morning after the murder very early in the morning.

AK lied about this.

Posted by Hopeful on 11/19/17 at 02:30 PM | #

Hi Hopeful

Indeed a blazing performance; and a smart move by the Machine to post that to help Jackie on that PMF thread.

We reposted tweets from others in the courtroom on the several days Crini laid out the case as well.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/appeal_session_4_today_lead_prosecutor_alessandro_crini_summarises_the/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/appeal_session_5_prosecutor_alessandro_crini_proposes_30_years/

A deeply shaken and panicking Sollecito actually could not face more of this in court on the second day. He remained holed up in his hotel.

In this post Cardiol MD picked up on a very telling point made by Prosecutor Crini that was easy for the unversed to miss.

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

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/19/17 at 05:09 PM | #

PS Hopeful:

It was RIGHT AFTER THIS that Sollecito took off like a rabbit for the Dominican Republic, there to make nefarious arrangements with his mafia relatives to eventually get him off.

He and his family tried very hard to keep that destination a secret but, as these very important posts describe, the Italian media winkled it out (though not why).

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

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

From that second post, here is a description of the huge opportunity the prosecution unknowingly missed.

Had the prosecution stopped Sollecito from going to the Dominican Republic when the airport police called to check if that was alright, it now seems certain that RS and AK would be sitting in prison, the Kerchers would have some peace, and none of us would be laboring away here.

Jawdropping, right?

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/19/17 at 07:02 PM | #

I’ve always been intrigued with what happened to what must have been the very bloody clothes/shoes of both Knox and Sollecito. They can’t have burned them as that would have drawn too much attention. Were they simply washed in a hot boil wash or were they deposited in someone else’s refuse bin? Unless they had a tumble dryer, then the clothes would still have been damp when Meredith was discovered so the risk would have been great. Were the clothes in the washing machine in the girls’ cottage ever DNA tested?

I’m unsure of the refuse collection arrangements in Perugia but presumably they could simply have put their bloody items in bags and then walked a few streets away and deposited them in someone else’s trash? Or were they hidden or buried somewhere else, just waiting to be discovered?

Similarly the mop which was claimed ridiculously by Knox to be taken back to Sollecito’s place to clean up the tsunami from the sink. As Chimera says above, this story was clearly made up in case anyone reported her transporting a mop between the cottage and Sollecito’s apartment. Was this legendary mop ever returned to the cottage? Was it ever tested to make sure that it was consistent with the detritus in the cottage? Or was the cottage mop, which may have been used in the clean up, replaced with Sollecito’s mop which would have, had it been tested, shown that it had only been used in his apartment? Or when they initially vacated the apartment after the murder, did they just bring Sollecito’s mop back with them to perform the clean up and then discard it with the bloody clothes etc?

Did the police or postal police report a smell of bleach at the cottage? I know they did when they found the knife in Sollecito’s apartment? Were Knox and Sollecito clever enough to open windows and air the cottage thoroughly after their clean up so that any strong bleach smell would have dissipated by the time the police arrived? Presumably the mop used for the clean up was also broken up and placed in someone else’s trash.

And Knox tells her defence lawyer that the lake which had been in Sollecito’s kitchen the night before was, by her own admission, “almost dry because it had evaporated” next day when she began to mop it up. She seriously expects sentient human beings to believe that she wouldn’t have checked the status of the spill before she left for the cottage to ensure that a mop was still required. Or that she wouldn’t just call Sollecito from the cottage to ensure that it was still needed if she had genuinely forgotten to look before she left. Surely this is how a normal innocent person would act, rather than carrying a mop around unnecessarily?

There is nothing about any of Knox’s fantasy which rings true, other than the bits where the moron implicates herself because she’s such a terrible liar.

I can still remember the pub (The Quarter Gill) I was sitting in with a friend during a night out in Glasgow when news of this astonishing miscarriage of justice was announced to a disbelieving world.

I had a pint of Guinness in my hand when I saw Knox’s face on the pub TV. I assumed that her sentence had merely been confirmed and the final appeal thrown out. It took my friend to advise me upon my return from the toilet that she had been found not guilty. The realisation that this was the final word on it hit me in the pit of my stomach. God knows how Meredith’s family must have been feeling at that point but I immediately felt for them. Not since I had watched the OJ verdict come through live in my hotel room during a holiday in Miami had I felt so negatively affected by the trial of a complete stranger.

It ruined what had otherwise been a great night out with an old friend. If Knox ever has justice visited on her, I will be phoning my old friend and meeting up for another few beers. I owe him a decent night out after my mood swing during the one ruined by Knox’s verdict.

Posted by davidmulhern on 11/24/17 at 06:03 AM | #

@davidmulhern, I think many people felt like you did at the Scottish pub. What a kick in the gut, to learn that Knox and Sollecito would walk despite their lies and the physical evidence against them. So much truth thrown out of the window and those two perps wriggled out due to fear or favoritism or what?

What a kick in the teeth. Thanks for sharing your honest reaction to the “innocent” verdict, may you get back four times more than the devil stole from you and some more Guinness fresher and colder with more friends.

You were not alone in being outraged and perplexed to the max. That decision came in March 2015 iirc and stunned the world. I’d left my home state for half a year, was taking classes at a Catholic university near Charlotte, North Carolina. My only comfort that day was listening to Willy Nelson sing “Uncloudy Day” and hope for future justice in this labyrinthine quagmire. Truth takes time.

Posted by Hopeful on 11/29/17 at 04:37 PM | #

This was 2011 or 2015?

In 2011 the prosecution had been signalling strongly that the case had gone wrong.

It was the new chief prosecutor for Umbria Dr Galati who didnt want to anger the chief judge who appointed Hellman (a business judge) and so helped to cause the shock outcome.

He restrained Mignini and Comodi from making an immediate appeal to the Supreme Court.

Galati had just come from the Supreme Court himself and he knew the judges in the First Chambers there. He was pretty sure they would reverse - and they sure did.

In 2014 the warning signals were also there, this post and James Raper’s list underneath explains what some of them were.

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

The CSM did act, to make sure politically appointed judges with fishy background like Marasca and Bruno could never again make it to the Supreme Court.

The mafia angle is under the microscope.

Amazingly after all this time fine people in the justice system continue to work this case and the Kerchers still have some hope.

RS and AK have no real jobs. His godfather bit the dust. Many others on the defense side have not fared too well. Hellman in gone, Conti and Vecchiotti were shown up, the fraud case against Mignini was stridently criticized by the Supreme Court, Sollecito lost two cases this year.

Cheer you up? A 1/4 gill is 1/16 of a pint. Have at least 2 of those on me next time.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/29/17 at 06:45 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 Netflixhoax 24 Omitted - State Department Monitored Knox 2007-11; No Framing Of Knox Reported

Or to previous entry Knox v Knox: Incriminating Contrasts Between What Knox Said In Her Book & In Court #1