
Category: More hoaxers
Tuesday, March 08, 2011
Strange Story Of Congressional Knox Supporter Apparently Becoming Over Aggressive
Posted by Peter Quennell
[Above: Portland, largest city in Oregon, David Wu’s constituency; Mount Hood at back there]
A few months ago Oregon Congressman David Wu wrote a mean and inaccurate letter on Knox’s behalf
Now his own Congressional staffers are having to restrain him from becoming too over-the-top on other matters.
Their concern had been spiking for weeks in tandem with the Oregon Democrat’s increasingly unpredictable performance on the campaign trail and in private. He was loud and sometimes angry, some of them told The Oregonian. He said kooky things to staff and—more worrisome with a tough election fast approaching—around potential voters and donors.
Earlier and gentler efforts had failed, so the tight-knit group of high-level staff took other steps, including quiet inquiries about the availability of beds in hospitals in Portland and Washington, D.C., multiple sources familiar with the effort told The Oregonian.
Several staff members confronted Wu for the final time on Oct. 30. Wu’s psychiatrist was brought into that meeting as well, joining the group at the Portland campaign headquarters by speaker phone. The meeting was held after four consecutive days of troubling behavior that led the staff to agree that Wu needed a higher level of medical care, according to people intimately familiar with the events of that period.
“This is way beyond acceptable levels and the charade needs to end NOW,” wrote Lisa Grove, a senior and long-serving campaign pollster, in an e-mail to colleagues that day. “No enabling by any potential enablers, he needs help and you need to be protected. Nothing else matters right now. Nothing else.”
Wu, however, remained defiant, sources said. He left the meeting and said he was going to a movie.
Unfortunate case. What a surprise.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Report Of The Decay Of The Hard Pro-Knox Party Line In West Seattle
Posted by Peter Quennell
Former HQ of West Seattle Herald
West Seattle Groupthink Under Strong Fire
The Seattle Salmon reports with some amusement on how the residents are increasingly speaking out.
They whisper at the local library branch, nod to each other in line at the Morgan Junction Starbucks, and even occasionally email their true feelings to each other. What is this secret society? It’s not the Masons, Scientologists or even the wily Northwestern Republicans.
No, this fearful group is West Seattleites who think Amanda Knox did it. By “it,” they are referring to the 2007 murder in Italy of which she was convicted. Knox was raised in West Seattle and the community has rallied around her claim of innocence with a fervor that straddles the militant/cult divide.
But some in the community are not so sure and not so talkative about their doubt. One resident who demanded anonymity told the Seattle Salmon, “It’s like a police state out here. You have to go to the legal defense fundraisers ““ like six last year ““ or else you are ostracized at the Westcrest Off-leash area.”
Another said, “The groupthink is terrifying. You step outside of it and you’re like the stupid Regular Seattleite who jaywalks through the all-way crosswalk at The Junction ““ you’re all alone and danger could come at you from any direction. Plus they’d light your ass up on the West Seattle Blog. You’d have to move.”
Perhaps no surprises there. It has been a long time since pro-Steve-Shay comments on the West Seattle Herald have been in the majority. Yesterday he made this ludicrous claim.
Meredith’s father, John, who believes Knox is guilty and has a lawyer in the courtroom fighting to insure she and her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito remain in jail.
These were the first two responses.
John Kercher’s lawyer is not ‘fighting’ anyone or anything. He has a legal duty to provide representation at the automatic appeal which Italy’s very liberal criminal justice system provides to all convicted criminals.
Your inflammatory, arrogant coverage of this legal process stinks. The US State Department doesn’t think there was anything wrong with the year-long legal process which convicted Knox and Sollecito of torture and murder, and neither do their victim’s family. Again, this doesn’t mean they are ‘fighting’, so grow up.
Mr. Shay atypically made only one glaring distortion in this article; The Kercher family lawyer is involved in the appeals process not to insure that Ms. Knox stay in jail, but rather to make sure the prosecution’s case is presented fairly and objectively, as was certainly done in the court’s verdict.
Not to make the lawyer sound one sided and intent on a path; there are way too many like Shay in the pro innocent Knox camp; this population has been known to lie and distort facts so as to exculpate their darling “West Seattle bred” Knox.
Nice work West Seattle.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Rocco Girlanda ♥ Rocco Girlanda And Amanda Knox ♥ Amanda Knox?!
Posted by Hopeful
A little dream and art interpretation….
Rocco’s dream of being in a taxi with Amanda driving to JFK airport symbolizes his attempt to “take off to great heights” with Amanda.
Joining her in the same destination, but fearing himself as JFK who literally lost his head due to his politics.
Amanda is like Jackie who survived and went on to marry the richest man in the world. Rocco is the one who is “sticking his neck out”. Political suicide or assassination fear.
The dream image of the pink I-pod that Amanda hands to Rocco is an emblem of how he had hoped for much information out of her but the I-pod plays only one thing: Beatles. So she is very limited.
The I-pod being pink is a feminine symbol of Amanda but the “I” could also be referring to Rocco, too. He thinks, “I hope to get a lot out of this Knox connection but maybe it is very limited”.
This “gift” is limited, deceptive, like the gift she gave to Italian police with more lies in it. Rocco may feel he himself is limited like rock “˜n roll, only one style of music. Rocco “˜n roll.
When two narcissists meet, the two “I’s” try to fly.
AK’s favorite aphorism, “I know I’m not alone even when I’m alone.”””Jovanotti. Well, there’s an “I-full”. Three “I’s” in that saying and Jovanotti’s name ends with an i. The ayes have it. Miss I-pod. Mister and Miss I-pod, say “I do”.
Rocco’s book includes Amanda’s colored drawings of what else, of course HERSELF, not once but twice, lest we fail to see the message. Why should anyone have expected her to draw a nature scene, a bird, flowers, anything outside herself?
The major message of the art: she shows the world her backside. Ha ha! Nothing new. Didn’t she show that in court? In this art, she gives us the back and the hand which equals a backhand.
She backhands us. She hides her face as usual. So, a slap in the face, or a backhanded compliment.
The hands are cut off yet still seem to be grasping or like they’re reaching out to squeeze something. “Cops wanna squeeze my brain” AK was overheard to say in early wiretapped conversations by police.
She colors the human figure (complete with German pigtails?) in a stained glass look. Pigtails represent a very childish hairstyle. It’s possible she wishes she could return to a time when she wore her hair that way.
Half the hair is pulled one way, half the other, a symbol her head (mind) is divided. The dots going down the back center part of the hair disturb me for some reason.
The many colors might represent many different emotions. Of course the figure is naked, the exhibitionist always.
Wasn’t she sending Rocco’s Italian-American organization childlike tracings of her hands in earlier correspondence?
Friday, November 05, 2010
Rocco Girlanda’s Very Criticised Book On Knox Is Discussed By A Panel In Rome
Posted by Clander
[left to right: Mangani, Girlanda, Gramaglia, Thomas, Esposito]
On Monday 14 February Yahoo News linked to this post but we suspect Yahoo actually referred to this post which is our many many question (never responded to) to the Amanda Knox apologist Italian MP Rocco Girlanda
Our previous posts on Italian MP Rocco Girlanda’s energetic involvement with Amanda Knox can be found here and here and here.
Rocco Girlanda’s Italian-American Foundation organized a panel discussion of his book “Take me with you - Talks with Amanda Knox in prison” which took place on Tuesday of last week at the Palazzo Marini
Beforehand I had lunch in a bookstore next to Palazzo Chigi. One hour later I realized I had read half of Girlanda’s book. It’s a really easy read. Too easy.
It’s all about “me, me, me and more me.” Sound familiar?.
Girlanda promotes himself (and his foundation) so much in the book that at a certain point I was not sure if the book was even about Amanda Knox. Girlanda and Knox are using each other.
Less than 40 people in total were present at the discussion. Sitting next to Rocco Girlanda were Giampiero Gramaglia (moderator, not involved in the case); Patricia Thomas (Associated Press), Pina Esposito (SkyTG24) and Cristiana Mangani (Il Messaggero)
Sabina Castelfranco (CBS) could not make it.
The Massei Sentencing Report was never once mentioned and rather extraordinarily it remained unclear throughout whether anyone on the panel had actually read it.
Meredith was first mentioned by name a full 35 minutes from the start of the debate.
I got the impression that Girlanda had read the negative comments about him that have appeared on the Internet - it almost seemed as if he was quoting from some of the comments I had read. His statements were watered-down compared to the stuff I’d heard from him in the last few days.
For example, when Gramaglia asked Girlanda if he thought that Knox was innocent, Girlanda said that he “does not know” and that “thankfully, it is not up to him to decide” reading this from his book.
We’ll see if that’s really his position on the case in the next few weeks.
Not once did he mention in the discussion that he wrote the book/is involved in the case because he thinks that he (or his foundation) has a role in US-Italy relations.
He said he recently purchased 4 laptops. Three were for his eldest children. The fourth one was for AK and he had it delivered to her a while back.
He had met yet again with Amanda Knox just two days before (that must be added to the number of visits) and he gave her a copy of his book.
The panel discussion had opened with a few sentences from Girlanda in which he explained that he started following the case after Senator Cantwell made her “anti-Americanism” claims.
Patricia Thomas stated that those remarks were “ridiculous” and that “anyone who has been to Italy or knows Italy knows they are not true”. In her words, “Italians simply love Americans” (vabbè, mo’ non esageriamo). Her spoken Italian is really good.
Girlanda stated that he is interested in the state of the prisons in Umbria and that is why he went to visit Knox in prison (in his words, his “first visit to AK was the first time I had ever entered a prison”) and that the book was written “by chance” after his numerous encounters with her.
He stressed numerous times that, as an MP, he has the right to visit prisoners.
We were told at the meeting that one American journalist has visited Knox in prison: Patricia Thomas. She was present during Girlanda’s very first visit to Knox.
Patricia Thomas described the prison. She said it is a lot better than many summer camps she had been to when she was younger. The food is amazing and she could not believe that they even have bidets in the cells. She said that she took a lot of flack for writing about this a few months ago.
Girlanda said in response that the men’s section of the prison is not as nice since it is overcrowded. He made no mention of whom he visited in the men’s section, if anyone.
Ms Thomas said she could not believe that Knox’s mom and sister were taking pictures of each other inside the Court (“as if they were tourists inside the Sistine Chapel”) only a few hours before the verdict.
She spoke very highly of the Kerchers. In particular, she spoke of Merdith’s siblings at the press conference after the trial. She described them as “beautiful, well educated and articulate”.
Gramaglia asked the 3 journalists sitting next to him how they would have voted had they been on the jury panel:
Patricia Thomas, who really did not want to answer this question, and showed no familiarity with the Massei report, said that she would have acquitted Knox and Sollecito.
Pina Esposito said that, based on the evidence, Knox and Sollecito are guilty. She would have voted guilty.
Cristiana Mangani, who showed no familiarity with the Massei report, said that Rudy Guede alone killed Meredith and that “Knox and Sollecito are in prison based on NOTHING” (yes, she said “nothing”, NIENTE). So, of course, she would have acquitted.
Ms Thomas said that Knox was “terribly handled by the PR firm and the lawyers”.
She said that in her opinion the lawyer Mr Della Vedova was hired for “opportunistic reasons” and that Mr Ghirga was “like a father who could not control his exuberant kid”.
She said that “AK’s PR efforts” should have focused on Italy and not on the US and she added that “it’s a good thing that this book has come out a few weeks before the start of AK’s appeal”.
At this point, the moderator Mr Gramaglia asks if anyone had any questions.
There was an ANSA journalist sitting in the first row who was really anxious to ask a question after Patricia Thomas made her remark about the book coming out “a few weeks before the start of the appeal”.
First of all he responded to Ms Thomas by saying that her statement that “it is good that this book has come out a few weeks before the appeal” is an insult to the Appellate Court. The ANSA journalist explained to Ms Thomas that the book would have no effect whatsoever on the Court.
He then asked Girlanda how he responds to those who are accusing him of exploiting the case and of being just another “puppy” in Knox’s hands (and by the tone of his voice and how he asked the question, it seemed as if he was one of those making the accusations).
Girlanda replied by saying that the proceeds of the book were going to his foundation and that he would not be involved when the board decides how that money should be spent.
Regarding the puppy comment, Girlanda replied “they can think what they want”.
Suddenly, no more questions were being taken.
[below Associated Press reporter Patricia Thomas who said she would have founnd AK and RS not guilty]
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Rocco Girlanda’s Strutting Manic Grinning Intrusion Seems A Major Danger To Sollecito/Knox Harmony
Posted by Peter Quennell
We will be having several posts on this whole new development.
They will go further than what is published into the politics (as Girlanda is a politician), and the law.(as Girlanda may be subject to reprimand, and legally liable if his intrusion weakens Knox in any way).
We have been observing during the legal process of the past two years a series of what our psychologists believe are minor sexual deviancies or perversions all masquerading as the Amanda Knox White Knights. None of them ever really help Amanda Knox, and all of them heap hurt on Meredith’s friends and her for-ever-suffering family.
The professional psychological take across the board seems to be that if Curt Knox and Edda Mellas take the notion of kind parenting seriously, they would certainly allow no more of these damaging posturing phonies - each with an agenda they cannot possibly fulfill - within 100 miles of their daughter at this time.
Amanda Knox is clearly somewhat emotionally fragile, and she will have a very tough time getting through her trial for slander and then her appeal. There is in fact very little wiggle room for the defenses within the very tough constraints set by Judge Massei.
The defenses have a tough enough time of it already. They don’t need these deviant White Knights repeatedly trying to leap to the front of the parade. We now have the ugly smirking intrusion of Rocco Girlanda, yet another one intent on buoying Knox up to think she is some sort of goddess on the point of stepping out into an adoring world. And he, Mighty Rocco Girlanda, is her savior.
And for what? For Amanda to then come crashing back down at her next hearing, or back in the grim environment of her cell. Lift her up, crash her down. Lift her up, crash her down. Lift her up, crash her down.
Way to make Amanda Knox a basket case for life. She could even become completely catatonic.
And then what, Mr Girlanda? Would THAT be good for your career?
For the sake of Knox’s threatened remaining sanity, her parents should put in place some serious expectations management. Dont believe us? Ask ANY good psychologist and they will tell Knox’s parents the same thing. She does NOT need all these phony promises - where everybody else gets rich and famous. And she lingers on in her cell.
And after the damage he has already done, Rocco Girlanda should make a point of going far away. And if he doesnt, his wife and five children should make him.
Friday, October 01, 2010
Knox Slander Hearing Adjourned: Her Lawyers Make It Sound Like She Might Crack - Too Late?
Posted by Peter Quennell
[Amanda Knox and her lawyer Luciano Ghirga in court last June]
The slander hearing was adjourned by Judge Matteini to Monday 8 November, after less than one hour.
Amanda Knox now knows she is not only facing the huge and detailed Massei Report and (vital to remember) the really huge volume of witness and expert statements and evidence exhibits and other documents to which it it links, which are for the most part only available in Italian.
Now she knows she is facing a bunch of hostile cops, as she was exchanging stares with all of them today in court. And if she continues to accuse them in court, she will be cross-examined, and pressed very hard to name which one or ones it was - while looking him or her or them right in the eye.
Quite some pressure. Mr Ghirga has just been reported as saying this about Amanda Knox’s state of mind.
“She has hardened herself, she has become more unhappy and less serene,” he said. “I hope we can help her to find her serenity back before Nov 24 and that she doesn’t lose her courage. This would not help us.”
And here is another report from another of her lawyers.
“She’s very down,” said her lawyer, Maria del Grosso of Rome. “I’ve told her to be tough. It won’t help to fall apart now. “
This all seems to imply that Knox just might decide to abandon the hard line encouraged by the PR campaign, which seems to be getting her nowhere except into more hot water, and move from her various conflicting stories and over now to something completely different.
Something credible and consistent that actually sounds like the truth? Who knows?
Coming so late in the process, with Meredith’s family and friends already put through deep pain for nearly three years, it may not happen - at least not yet. Still, one consistent story if believed could affect her sentence and the conditions of her stay in prison if she does not win her freedom at appeal.
And some peace of mind for all those who have been hurt. All except one: her family’s very precious Meredith. Stay tuned.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
The Ultimate Immorality And Intense Hurt Of Blaming A Victim
Posted by Emma
Recent comments on boards frequented by supporters of Amanda Knox have taken an ugly turn. In desperation some have started playing the lowest game of all - the “˜Blame the Victim’ game. Not content with championing the murderers of Meredith Kercher, they now seek to denigrate the real victim of this crime after her death. Comments made about how she “˜messed up’, about how she must have let Rudy in to the house and, unbelievably, even about her family’s accent, have shown the real class of the Friends of Amanda, clearly frustrated at the recent publication of the damning Massei report. It cannot be emphasised enough what a powerful impact the Massei Report has had on public opinion. Meticulously translated over many weeks by a group of professionals at the Perugia Murder File, the Report has shown up the lies being propagated by Amanda’s out of control supporters. A number of previous innocenti journalists have privately admitted to now believing in the guilt of Amanda and Raffaele having read the report, distribution of which via all channels is more than 7,000 and continuing. The word is spreading; the evidence is overwhelming. All that is left now for the FOA is the empty rhetoric and tired arguments which have been repeated over and over. The desperation is showing in the latest outing of the hopelessly ill-informed ex-FBI “˜expert’, Steve Moore, who seems to be following a different case altogether. In his recent ABC interview he was not even able to name the victim, preferring instead to call her “˜the girl’.
But let’s consider the morality of those who post against Meredith in support of Amanda Knox. These are people who are not beneath smearing the memory and good name of a young girl who was brutally murdered. How did Meredith “˜mess up’? How is it that she, or any victim, can be said to be “˜responsible’ for what happened to them? All the evidence suggests that Meredith merely wanted to return home for study that night, prior to her lecture the following morning. She borrowed a book that she promised to return to her friend the next day. She was tired, having been up into the small hours having fun at a Halloween Party. She wanted a quiet night in. But if she had let Rudy into the house, invited him in, shared a drink with him? How does this show her having “˜messed up’? How would she be to blame in any way for what happened to her? The answer, as any card-carrying member of the human race will testify, is that she would not.
Victims are a favourite target for some. They “˜must have’ invited the attention”¦if they hadn’t been walking home in the dark alone”¦on and on. The fact is that Meredith was wholly innocent. She made no mistakes, she lived a good life. She was kind, warm, funny, studious, with a firm sense of her own moral boundaries and many good friends who were left devastated by her death. Recent comments about how she couldn’t have screamed, and she didn’t fight are deeply offensive. During a violent assault it is common for victims to freeze entirely. Perhaps it is a biological protective mechanism, as often seen in animals who sense overwhelming danger. Maybe it is simply the logical response to a situation where one is simply unable to fight back. Being physically restrained by another human being, and realising there is absolutely nothing you can do is an emotionally overwhelming experience. The brain is “˜flooded’ with sensations of terror and horror, which it is impossible to process at speed. Victims speak of an almost near death sensation, of “˜leaving their bodies’ and escaping into their mind during an attack. The instinct for many is to submit, in the hope that the pain will be over soon, that it is their best chance of survival. Often this leads to feelings of deep shame and guilt if the victim survives the assault. Blaming themselves for their “˜weakness’ in not fighting back deepens already severe mental scars. Perpetrators also use the victim’s inability to fight back as a form of defence “˜I had no idea!’ etc. This is why the victim blame game is so harmful. In order for justice to be done, and civilised society maintained, there must be a supportive climate for victims. Otherwise crime will not be reported and violent criminals will walk free, endangering everyone.
For a man to subject a woman to a violent assault is the most cowardly of acts, as the woman has no ability to fight back. For three individuals to attack a woman is utterly repugnant, particularly when one is a woman herself. The evidence is that Meredith screamed. The evidence is that she was unable to fight because she had her arms held behind her back while she was beaten and stabbed, for the amusement of others. Terrified and confused she must have felt a deep sense of betrayal and incomprehension as this attack escalated. Make no mistake, Meredith suffered in a way that is almost too distressing to contemplate. But to truly put ourselves in the position of the victim - the real victim - then we should perhaps, in a strong moment, make ourselves go there. It is only then that we can truly accept the full horror of this crime, and that the sentence handed down to the three convicted murderers is the only correct response of a moral society.
After the reporting of a crime it is essential that no blame be apportioned to victims, already struggling to recover from the trauma of assault. Suggesting that victims of violent crime are “˜to blame’, that they “˜messed up’, can only deepen the mental anguish they are feeling. In the case of a murder victim such comments cause untold distress to their shattered relatives. It is a cruelty of the highest order. A second assault.
What sort of person would blame Meredith for what happened to her? You be the judge.
Thursday, September 09, 2010
Conspiracy Theorists Follow A Well Known Pattern - They ALL End Up Out Of Steam And Ignored
Posted by Stilicho
[above: conspiracy theorists don’t want you to believe that is an aircraft]
Conspiracy Theories And Those That Surround Meredith’s Murder:
What do the Apollo moon landings, the JFK assassination, the 9/11 attacks, and Meredith Kercher’s murder all have in common?
They have each attracted the vigorous cult-like attention of conspiracy theorists. Despite the cold hard fact that in each case there has been ample documentation to support what might best be called the official story.
We know from independent and highly credible and very respected sources that the Apollo missions were successful, that a lone gunman shot and killed the US president in Dallas, that a terrorist group was responsible for hijacking of four aircraft, that the World Trade Center complex was destroyed by the subsequent fires..
And that Knox, Sollecito and Guede attacked and killed Meredith in her rented room in Perugia on the first of November in 2007.
Among the dozens of similarities between the Meredith case conspiracy theorists and others, we will focus on those made most apparent by the words and actions of those advocating for Knox and (occasionally) Sollecito.
A Commonality: Lack Of Any Coherent Alternate Narrative:
The court was obliged to create a logical narrative supported by the evidence. That narrative, briefly, states that Knox and Sollecito encountered Guede after they found they had no obligations that evening, consumed drugs that lowered their inhibitions, and entered Meredith’s room.
What followed was a sexual assault upon the young British woman, the active participation of each of the three accused, Meredith’s attempts to scream for help, and the silencing of the victim by covering her mouth, throttling her and finally stabbing her in the throat. The three assailants then departed after locking Meredith’s bedroom door.
Her mobile phones and keys were taken by Knox and Sollecito to be discarded in a remote location. Once it was apparent that the authorities had not responded to Meredith’s screams, Knox and Sollecito returned to the cottage to stage a break-in and to obscure as much evidence of their presence as was possible.
Those advocating for Knox and Sollecito have never supplied a coherent narrative to refute the official story.
Similarly, 9/11 truthers have never been able to agree on much apart from their strident belief that the official story simply must be wrong. Various hypotheses have been advanced and withdrawn in the face of objections by scientists, engineers, and even rival truther factions.
There is a no-planer faction that argues there were no planes hijacked and that all the video and film evidence was created in a government production studio. There is a controlled demolition faction that argues government agents secretly wired unknown explosive devices in one of the busiest office buildings in the world while nobody noticed. There are others who believe the leaseholder of the site ordered the demolition because of concerns about asbestos replacement.
When asked how Guede gained entry to the cottage, conspiracy theorists promote three main theories without selecting the one they all agree upon.
They argue that Guede entered through Filomena’s window OR that Meredith let him in the house herself OR that he entered by unknown means and was there before she returned home at roughly 21:00.
Because conspiracy theorists are not constrained by the requirement for a logical narrative they will pick any of the three available and contradictory claims.
A Commonality: An Aversion To Respecting Good Science:
The Apollo moon landing hoaxes have a lot in common with the advocacy sites proclaiming the innocence of Knox and Sollecito.
Apart from the development of the atomic bomb, there has likely been no human technological achievement so intensively documented as the Apollo programme.
Among the many claims of the conspiracists is the position that late-Sixties technology and instrumentation was insufficient or too bulky to allow the moon landings to take place. They compare the size and power of 21st century computing hardware and software with that of 1969 and make their conclusions based on a perceived inadequacy of the previous era’s equipment.
In Meredith’s case there are several advocacy sites that criticise the scientific police on exactly the same basis.
The techniques employed by (mainly) Dr Stefanoni, in determining the presence of Meredith’s DNA on a knife found in Sollecito’s drawer, are attacked partly because the equipment had not been used this way before.
Just to be sure of their position, however, they add confidently that she simply could have faked the results or kept her tweezers in a beaker of Meredith’s DNA accidentally left in the laboratory. It matters little to the unscientific mind of the conspiracy theorist that Stefanoni’s techniques were fully documented and observed by an independent party as required by law.
A Commonality: Lack Of A Credible Alternate Suspect:
Wrongful convictions happen. There are dozens of them documented on a site operated by The Innocence Project, an American advocacy group. Its banner proudly proclaims that 258 convictions had been overturned.
The foundation seizes upon several important facets of wrongful convictions including DNA evidence and improper defence counselling. In almost all the 258 cases there is another common feature: a credible alternate suspect.
JFK conspiracy theorists have never been able to establish a credible alternate suspect - and neither have Knox/Sollecito advocates.
The latter have not yet gone so far as to accuse the Mafia, Fidel Castro, the Teamsters Union, LBJ, Nixon, the CIA and a man carrying an umbrella in Dealey Plaza. But their attempt to establish Guede as the sole perpetrator accomplishes the same thing.
Just in case the ‘lone wolf’ doesn’t make any sense, they are not beyond implicating even Filomena, falsely claiming that it is only her word against that of Knox that Meredith did not normally lock her bedroom door.
There was only one attempt to identify an alternate suspect and that was made by Knox herself. She told police investigators that Patrick, her boss, was the killer.
She is one step ahead of those proclaiming her innocence; she knew better than they that without another explanation it is she and Sollecito who remained the prime suspects. She also knows, more than her supporters, that naming Guede instead would invite reciprocation.
Conclusions About Conspiracy Theorists
As briefly illustrated above, the length and depth of those being falsely implicated by the mostly anonymous Knox/Sollecito conspiracy theorists, untethered by the 80,000 pound gorilla in the room, the Massei Report, now knows few bounds.
This has now reached such levels of absurdity that they are increasingly being laughed at or, for the most part, ignored. Nobody - really nobody - in either the Italian or American governments is paying them even the slightest attention.
Meredith’s case is showing to the clear-thinking and objective world that Italy has an enviable justice system, that it is very careful and very humane, and that its scientific and forensic techniques are among the vanguard in applied criminal research.
And with no obvious way of obtaining special gains for themselves (or for that matter of hitting back against the anonymous attacks) the very fine police and investigators and prosecutors and judges and juries in Italy are doing the very best they can for Meredith.