Category: Appeals 2009-2015
Knox PR Puppet Michael Heavey Sends A Pretentious Letter To President Obama Copied To Congress
Posted by Our Main Posters
Elected Washington State county court judge Michael Heavey was recently reprimanded for sending a misleading letter on official letterhead.
Oddly, he seems to have done it again. Click above to read the Open Letter from Michael Heavey to President Obama copied to members of Congress on what looks like official letterhead.
The Open Letter was dated 15 May but, unusually for an Open Letter, took some time to come to light. So far, we are seeing no official response.
Perhaps not surprising. Any quick call to the Italy Desk of Secretary of State Clinton’s State Department will reveal that not one of the claims made is on solid ground and several very, very widely already shot down in flames.
In our usual helpful way, we too will shortly write an Open Letter to President Obama, with a copy to the State Department and the Congress (where a lot of people especially Italian-Americans already think the Knox campaign is a real crock) explaining precisely how each claim made by Mr Heavey is wrong.
For example in quick summary, the consular office found nothing out of order, zero interrogation of Knox as a suspect ever took place without a lawyer, Mr Mignini never came up with any bizarre theories not already out there and anyway Judge Micheli and Judge Massei settled on theories of their own, and Mr Mignini merely recommended to Doug Preston (who was foolishly attempting to mislead him) to go get a good lawyer who speaks Italian. Not to run squealing back to Maine.
Previous posts on Mr Heavey’s many hapless and ineffective insertions of himself into the case can be read here.
Posted by Our Main Posters on 06/12/11 at 02:42 PM •
Permalink for this post •
Archived in Appeals 2009-2015, The legal followups, US etc related, The wider contexts, Italian context, N America context, Hoaxers from 2007, Knox-Marriott PR, Heavey, Bremner •
Comments here (30)
A Month Has Passed And Senator Cantwell Still Hasn’t Answered Constituents’ Hard Questions
Posted by Highly-Concerned Washington-State Voters
On December 9, 2009 five well-informed constituents of US Senator Marie Cantwell sent her an Open Letter.
It asked some questions about the reasoning behind her December 4th press release on the verdict in Meredith’s case.
The public release of this letter to Maria Cantwell garnered international attention, and it was quoted-from in various stories and reports published in Europe..
On December 10, a Cantwell Senate-office staff member in Washington DC, John Diamond, provided the one and only direct response to inquiries about it.
Mr Diamond claimed “Our staff has checked every possible in-box and not turned up the letter. We get lots of mail and email sent through to us every day, so I don’t know what the problem was. We now have your letter so it’s a mute point. We will get back to you.”
Rather bizarrely, on December 11th, Mr. Diamond then forwarded to the authors of the Open Letter a Knox/Mellas Family Press Release. It was issued by the paid Seattle PR man David Marriott, and Ms Cantwell’s office seemed to be endorsing it.
The release stated among other things, “We would like to publicly thank Senator Maria Cantwell for her support of Amanda, support of the family, and her continued work on our behalf.”
No other response has ever been received by the authors of that Open Letter, other than one auto-reply email from Mr. Diamond saying, “I will be out of the office through Labor Day.” (Labor Day is the first Monday in September, then a full nine months away.)
On December 15th the Seattle PI’s Andrea Vogt in her story “The debate continues over Knox’s guilt” reported that instead of repeating the harsh complaints of her press release, Cantwell’s spokesperson Katharine Lister was now saying this:
“Senator Cantwell believes that Amanda Knox deserved a fair trial, and now deserves a fair appeal by an impartial tribunal; all in keeping with the Council of Europe and the European Union’s treaties to which Italy has long been a signatory. While she certainly understands that the legal system and practice in Italy is different than in the U.S., she believes it is the responsibility of the U.S. government to press for fair treatment for any U.S. citizen facing legal jeopardy overseas. She will continue to press to ensure that Amanda gets a fair appeal, by an impartial tribunal.”
On December 24, 2009 the following new inquiry was sent to Senator Cantwell, reiterating the concerns of the original letter and a desire for a response from Senator Cantwell, and repeating the request to meet with Senator Cantwell herself or a senior member of her staff.
To this letter Senator Cantwell’s Seattle area constituents are still awaiting her reply more than two weeks later.
Dear Senator Cantwell:
Last December we submitted an Open Letter and had some contact with John Diamond regarding your press release concerning the Amanda Knox guilty verdict in Italy for the murder of Meredith Kercher. We have yet to receive a response other than an email from Mr. Diamond simply forwarding a press release from the Knox/Mellas Family. Five of your Seattle area constituents authored that Open Letter to question the reasoning behind statements made in your press release.
We did not feel as though we were well represented by that press release and are still awaiting a response to the issues we raised, including a request to meet with your Chief of Staff. Now that the holiday break is upon us I think it’s a great time to revisit these issues since we haven’t seen any additional press releases from your office and are left wondering if the situation has progressed or if you have adjusted your position on the issue of the Amanda Knox guilty verdict in light of ongoing events and news coverage.
As a recap, here are the key points from your press release and a few of our questions regarding the rationale behind your points:
1. “I have serious questions about the Italian justice system and whether anti-Americanism tainted this trial.”
If you are requesting a full briefing on the principles of Italian justice it seems that there are far better places to ask than in what might be construed as a xenophobic press release. To our eye, you seem to be suggesting that anti-Americanism in Italy is a serious ongoing problem and I am wondering what evidence you have to support this perception and, specifically, how it would apply to the Amanda Knox (American) and Raffaele Sollecito (Italian) murder trial.
2. “The prosecution did not present enough evidence for an impartial jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Knox was guilty.”
How can you justify making such a statement? You seem to be indicating here that you were following the case quite closely, but elsewhere you indicate that you weren’t. Do you state this as an opinion or as a fact? I am concerned because Curt Knox and Edda Mellas have been charged with defamation by the Italians for making similar unfounded accusations against the Italian justice system.
3.“Italian jurors were not sequestered and were allowed to view highly negative news coverage about Ms. Knox.”
What special knowledge do you have to make an informed critique of the Italian justice system? Our impression, having closely followed of the murder trial for Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, was that the jury behaved honorably and was somewhat restrained and lenient in issuing their ruling. We expect to find some justification for this impression in the lengthy and detailed summary of findings that the court will issue within 90 days of the ruling.
Regarding press coverage, our personal observation is that the media battle waged by the Knox family and David Marriott was, in fact, very effective in highlighting the concerns of the Knox family in outlets around the world, to the extreme point that whatever Curt Knox and Edda Mellas have to say about the murder case is reported verbatim, without question or verification. We also believe that media coverage during the lengthy trial itself focused heavily on the prospect of an “innocent” Amanda Knox and the weaknesses in the prosecutor’s case.
4.“Other flaws in the Italian justice system on display in this case included the harsh treatment of Ms. Knox following her arrest; negligent handling of evidence by investigators; and pending charges of misconduct against one of the prosecutors stemming from another murder trial.”
What specific systemic flaws are you referring to here, and in comparison to what system? We’re wondering what your specific recommendations would be to the Italian Foreign Minister and where you will find the time to research and author them.
While we’ve seen the claims of harsh treatment and abuse in the media we are unable to verify any of these allegations. We have noticed, however, that Amanda Knox has been charged with and investigated for making false allegations, and convicted in the instance of accusations made against her former employer Patrick Lumumba. Can you clearly detail any specific incident of harsh treatment Amanda Knox received, either before or following her arrest?
Can you provide specific examples of the negligent handling of evidence that clearly compromised Amanda Knox’s right to a fair trial? We have followed this case closely from the beginning and while certain investigative elements could have been better handled we are not aware of anything suggesting that the Italians are fundamentally incapable of properly documenting and evaluating a crime scene, or conducting a fully “fair trial” for that matter.
In addition, we would appreciate a detailed description of your understanding of the alleged charges against prosecutor Giuliano Mignini and the relevant connection you are trying to make between that legal proceeding and the Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito murder trial.
In regards to Amanda Knox, Mignini was one of two prosecutors in a case that involved the coordination of a variety of completely separate entities in Italian law enforcement and legal systems. According to our understanding of Italian legal processes, the charge against Mignini relating to the other murder trial case seems somewhat routine, rather insignificant, and could very well be dismissed later this month.
5.“I will be conveying my concerns to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”
What was Secretary Clinton’s response to you? It has been our understanding that the US State Department and US Embassy in Rome have been following this case from the beginning, have visited Amanda Knox in prison, and have attended court sessions.
We’re wondering what compelled you to insert yourself so publicly into an international situation when your press release gives the strong indication that you were not fully briefed before issuing it and appear to know very little about what has actually been going on with the case.
In the sole interest of providing you with our valid and informed perspective, we remain very interested in meeting with you and/or your Chief of Staff to discuss these issues in detail and share the facts as we understand them. As your concerned constituents, please us know if this will soon be possible.
[signed by five constituents in the original]
Posted by Highly-Concerned Washington-State Voters on 01/08/10 at 05:54 PM •
Permalink for this post •
Archived in Defendants in court, Amanda Knox, The officially involved, Appeals 2009-2015, The legal followups, US etc related, The wider contexts, Seattle context, Hoaxes against Italy, 3 No evidence hoax, 9 Mignini v Knox hoax, Hoaxes Knox & team, 16 Interrogation hoax, Hoaxers from 2007, Knox-Marriott PR •
Comments here (11)
US Overreaction: State Department (Foreign Office) Rebuts Senator Cantwell’s Claims
Posted by Peter Quennell
If Senator Cantwell or her staff come by looking for something to convince them fast please read this.
The same people who set the hapless John Q Kelly up (he has never been heard from again since that post) seem to have set Senator Cantwell up too.
Now Agence France-Presse (AFP) reports that her precipitate involvement in the case seems to be hitting a brick wall.
WASHINGTON, USA - The US government said Monday it had no signs that a court in Italy failed to follow the country’s laws when it found American Amanda Knox guilty of the murder of her British housemate.
However, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will discuss the verdict with Senator Maria Cantwell, who said it raises ‘serious questions’ about the Italian justice system, Clinton’s spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters.
‘I don’t have any indications to the contrary,’ Kelly said when asked if Knox was treated fairly under Italian law. ‘We haven’t received any indications necessarily that Italian law was not followed.’
He added: ‘I do know that our embassy in Rome was very closely involved in this. They visited Amanda Knox. They have monitored the trial.’
Kelly said he preferred to limit comment as the legal process continues, recalling that Knox has the right to appeal in 45 days.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/08/09 at 03:24 AM •
Permalink for this post •
Archived in Appeals 2009-2015, The legal followups, US etc related, The wider contexts, Seattle context, N America context, Hoaxers from 2007, Knox-Marriott PR, More hoaxers •
Comments here (6)