Tuesday, September 15, 2009

New York’s The Daily Beast Reports Knox’s Lawyers Preparing Her For A Guilty Verdict

Posted by Peter Quennell

[click above for a larger image]

Barbie Nadeau reports on the fallouts from yesterday.

On a mistrial for the withholding of some of the DNA evidence.

Denied their request for a mistrial due to mishandled evidence, Amanda Knox’s lawyers promise “bombshells” in the murder trial””but prep her for a guilty verdict….

The defense requested that the indictments against Knox and her co-defendant, Raffaele Sollecito, be thrown out””essentially asking for a mistrial…..  But the request proved futile.

After more than an hour of deliberation, the judge ruled that the trial should go on as scheduled, dealing a crushing blow to the defendants. Even though the defense’s gambit was a legal long shot, the lawyers hoped that, at very least, it might have triggered a mistrial….

Although the defense’s request was denied, they risked nothing by making the request. In fact, the judge’s denial could set the stage for an appeal if the two are convicted. In Italy, an appeal is an automatic part of criminal trials.

And on the down-to-the-wire situation triggered by Guede’s appeal dates.

Rudy Guede, who was convicted for his part in Kercher’s murder, is appealing his guilty verdict, and the race is on now to finish the Knox trial before his appeal begins November 18.

Because his appeal is pending, Guede chose not to testify in this trial, but anything he says at his own appeal hearing can be considered as evidence in the Knox-Sollecito case””and Guede has indicated several times that he was in the house when Kercher died but that he did not kill her.

He has said through his lawyer that Knox and Sollecito were also there that night.

Guede has several times hinted that in his appeal that he will finally tell all. Presumably a self-serving version, but we suspect any confession might be much-hoped-for by Meredith’s family and her Perugia friends.

We have heard conjecture that Guede offered to tell it like it really was at the present trial of Knox and Sollecito but the prosecutors rejected a deal. Perhaps feeling that his proffered version then did not add very much to what they felt was an already-strong case. And seeing no reason why Guede should not serve his full 30 years.

If Rudy Guede does now finally tell all, we sure hope that he does know the meaning of “all”.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/15/09 at 07:51 PM in The officially involvedThe defensesTrials 2008 & 2009Amanda Knox

Tweet This Post


What are the odds that wearing a shirt which panders to the victim’s home audience and to the hub of U.S. media was not a transparently cynical attempt to game the PR once again. It is truly sickening to think of her PR firm giggling and chortling as they concoct more image games, now for the Italians whom her posse continues to smear unabated. May the Italians give them a final kick in the culo.
The picture of Sollecito and his attorney resembles a middle-schooler telling the skeptical principal that his classmate accidentally fell on his knife during recess while peeling an apple.

Posted by jennifer on 09/16/09 at 04:23 AM | #

She seems so flipant about the whole affair - her attire, her manner in court, the constant grinning - and it’s not just photographers capturing a brief smile, video shows she’s grinning from ear to ear for long periods.

In my opinion, this could only be the actions of a guilty person. If you’re guilty the only way is up so if you think you’ve got a fighting chance of beating the rap then you would be feeling fairly upbeat.

If you’re innocent you would be only looking at the negative - 30-years in jail. Anyone with a right mind would surely not even be able to raise a smile at the prospect of that if they were innocent.

Amanda’s smile is the real deal. She seems to be loving every second of the attention.

Posted by mikeyverve on 09/16/09 at 06:24 PM | #

The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Edda Mellas and Amanda Knox seem to me both bold, arrogant and insensitive.

CBS, June 22, 2009

Here you can see Edda Mellas’ (new foreign correspondent for CBS live from Perugia?) high quality coverage of the case. Almost unbearable. The comments made throughout the case by Edda Mellas must be a nightmare, additionally to what the Kercher family is already going through.

To hear in court about the indisputable evidence in this case and to step outside the courthouse, to see Edda Mellas giving interviews contradicting everything against better knowledge, must be a quite unique experience.

Posted by Nell on 09/17/09 at 07:01 AM | #

The one thing I have noticed of innocent people is the shocked look on their face when they are arrested.

Patrick look so confused when he was arrested. After the Virginia Tech Massacre, the police tackled an innocent Asian student.
I will never forget the bewildered look on his face too! 

And now, I look and see video of another man, soon to be arrested for the brutal murder of Annie Le, a Yale Grad Student. He was taken into custody for DNA samples.  His face tells the story.  No confused look, only the look of a person who is scared and guilty. 

Amanda, she just smiles and flirts.  Not a care it seems.  But if you catch her eyes, they seem to be that of a cold-blooded killer.

Posted by BARBM on 09/17/09 at 10:38 AM | #

We’ve heard repeated whining from Knox’s family about the cost of their full-time misinformation campaign from their Seattle PR firm, and the countless junkets to Perugia and media centers for interviews. We haven’t seen audited financials of how much they have raked in from their web sites,interviews,tabloid, book and movie deals,etc. It’s hard to discern where their marketing/merchandising ends and concern about facts and evidence begins. One could easily conclude there is a powerful fibbing gene at work in mom and AK from all available interviews and statements.

Posted by jennifer on 09/18/09 at 03:13 AM | #

I have a question for someone who knows the courts in Italy.  Let’s they are convicted.  It’s reported everywhere that an appeal is part of the process in Italian Justice Systems.  Is it a completely new trial?  And, what are the chances of it being successful, and how long does it take?

Also, it seems to me that because of all the media attention to Amanda, Raffaele is over looked.  My gut tells me he is the instigator because he so quickly abandoned Amanda and their story at the police station.  Had he been under her spell, so to speak, he would not have done so.  She remained loyal to their story until he jumped ship first.  Raffaele is wrong. He seemed to have his wits about him more than Amanda and seemed much more willing to try and explain things away.  Something about him is menacing, which by no means leaves Amanda as a by-stander.  I just wonder if Guede really talks, what he will say about the leader of this little group of murderers.  And, if he does talk, how reliable is anything he says.  That’s the problem with the disturbed, they lie as easily as they tell they truth.

Posted by karenkay on 09/18/09 at 07:50 PM | #

Amanda might have remained more loyal then Raffaele because she had more to lose. Raffaele did not had arguments with Meredith - that was Amanda. Raffaele did not lose his job to Meredith - that was Amanda too. Raffaele has not been criticised by Meredith - that was Amanda again. That might have motivated the attack.

Who might have been participating more actively then others in the attack remains a mystery even though the DNA found on the handle of the murder weapon is Amanda’s and might indicate that it was her who silenced Meredith.

I believe that the reason why none of the three defendants have come forward with the truth is that they are all guilty of something that will leave them for many years in jail. It actually does not matter who restrained her, who slit her throat and who left her in the locked room to die, they still would be all found guilty. The evidence suggests that all three suspects have been present in the house when Meredith was attacked with the knife. It is telling that none of the defendants has come forward with the truth so far. They still hope their lawyers can fix this. Damage control.

Rudy Guede is the only one who has tried to distance himself from AK and RS. He said from the very beginning that they would try to frame him and asked for a fast track trial. Even though he got convicted, the “lone wolf” theory is contradicted by the evidence.

Posted by Nell on 09/19/09 at 03:50 AM | #


  What you say rings true.  I am curious if you feel the murder was pre-meditated or do you believe the reports of a “game gone bad”?  Something was pre-meditated evidenced by the phones being turned off.  If Meredith lived, she was going to be able to say something to someone, and no one believes she was a willing participant in any of this, so, what do you think?  I do believe Guede was set up to take the fall.  And, if you have the time, how does the call to Meredith’s bank factor in?

Posted by karenkay on 09/19/09 at 05:43 AM | #

Hi karenkay,

I believe that this crime was pre-meditated at least partially (if we suppose that Meredith shouldn’t have died at the end). There is every indication that Meredith was restrained by her attackers and at their mercy. I think that if there would have been an argument or a fight before, there would have to be an indication for it (like DNA under her fingernails, bruising on the attackers, shouting etc.), but it seems, her attackers were quite prepared. I think it is possible that the plan - whatever it was - got out of hand when Meredith screamed so loud, you could hear it in the neighbourhood. I think that was the moment when they had to “re-think” what to do. Rudy just took off and went later to the disco in order to provide himself with an alibi. And Raffaele and Amanda possibly used the time to think of an alternative ending, which resulted in the clean up of the crime scene and leaving Rudy’s traces behind. Surely, it is possible that this was the plan from the beginning and Meredith’s scream just interrupted them for some time. At this stage we cannot know that.

I think all “suggestions” of what might have happened and how the night of the murder exactly evolved is all speculative for now. The only thing sure, is that all three suspects were at the house when Meredith was attacked and know exactly what happened, but prefer to remain silent about it or to lie. In my opinion that already speaks volumes. There are so many things I could imagine have happened.

Regarding the phone call to the bank, I just cannot recall what that was? Did Meredith call the bank? Please fill me in.

I too would be interested in knowing about how the appeal works in Italy.

Posted by Nell on 09/19/09 at 08:29 AM | #


I have looked through everything on the cell phone activity on this site and can only find where Meredith’s phone called at 10:13 when it was most likely being discarded by the murderer.  I thought I had read about a call to her bank, and if I did, it wasn’t here, which would make it rather suspect anyway.
My focus on Raffaele stems from growing up in a town where Ted Bundy ran amok killing girls at the local University.  My junior high,(which I was attending at the time) was merely one mile south of this campus and we had classes in gym on how to scream, how to describe what someone is wearing, and do not ever go with someone who says he is a police officer unless he has a police car and a partner to prove it.  To say the least, I followed Mr. Bundy’s tale up unto the end and just before he was put to death in Florida he granted our local authorities an extensive interview and actually helped recover a few more bodies of young girls he had destroyed. Bundy also touched on pornography and the horrific effects it can have on certain persons and their ability to control themselves.  That has stayed with me, which is why I am inclined to believe Raffaele is one of these persons Bundy referred to. 
Watching the parents of these girls on television all those years ago pleading for help from the public, is not something you forget.

Posted by karenkay on 09/20/09 at 01:18 AM | #

In my opinion Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox will raise or fall together. With the evidence from both, it is hard to believe that one of them was a mere bystander.

I honestly cannot think of any reason why someone would help cleaning up a crime scene of which he/she wasn’t part of.

I think that both - Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito - had different motives to participate in this crime. In case of Amanda Knox it seems to be jealousy, while Raffaele Sollecito seems not to have a personal motive.

Posted by Nell on 09/20/09 at 04:57 AM | #

10/5/09   Clothes Make the Man?

Amanda, after being criticized for wearing a Beatles t-shirt in courtroom Feb. 2009? (“All You Need Is Love”), defiantly flaunts another Beatles’ sweatshirt as soon as she returns to court after summer break: Sept. 26, 2009. I see it as a sign of pent-up hostility from her long, hot summer behind bars.

4 famous people are pictured on this red or coral-colored (on my PC)sweatshirt. I think 4 people were at the cottage the night of Meredith’s murder. 4 faces are on this sweatshirt, and 1 of the Beatles was murdered. This sweatshirt, worn the day knife was presented in court, is a zip-up parka with hood. In an early interview, I think Amanda said she was wearing a grey and black sweatshirt with hood on Nov. 1, 2007. That was day Meredith was killed (correct me if I’m wrong.)

I noticed the first shirt Amanda wore into court as the trial began was a black, white, and gray striped tee, with a grey hooded zip-up parka over that.

The words “Shea Stadium”, “All Star Show,” and “In Person” are printed on the back of Amanda’s red sweatshirt. Shea Stadium was in New York City. Shea was dismantled in 2008, the first full year Amanda spent in prison. The screams of Beatles’ female fans were so loud during the Beatles’ opening concert there, that police and security workers had to cover their ears. “Let It Be” was the last song Paul McCartney sang at Shea . Amanda sang that song in prison.

On a different note, her red sweatshirt reminds me of the rumored red coat she was seen wearing in Perugia. “The redcoats are coming! the redcoats are coming!” was the cry of American soldiers during Revolution when they sighted British troops. (Amanda dearly longs to be British. I understand. I do, too! Meredith had that good fortune.)

Perhaps redcoat image means, “Tally-ho! we’ve spotted the fox!” Ha!ha! Is she the hunter or the hunted? She is a cunning one. English fox hunters and foxhounds are famous. I think Foxy Knoxy will soon be treed.

They say foxes are so crafty they’ve been known to jump on a sheep’s back to mask their scent. They run up & down streams to confuse the foxhounds. They do a lot of doubling back, and try to muddle the dogs.

Foxes are solitary and don’t form packs. One very old meaning of the word, “fox”, is “sword”. That might appeal to Raffaele, the knife-meister.

If I were Amanda, I’d have been cautious how I dressed for court. I know she’s at a disadvantage with clothes, being a prisoner, but she certainly wore white the day she testified. Crazy like a fox.

Posted by Hopeful on 10/06/09 at 12:31 AM | #

Tweet This Post

Post A Comment


Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Trial: Defense Expert Tries To Claim Sollecito-Sized Footprint Is Guede’s

Or to previous entry Trial: Judge Massei Rejects Feeble Defense Bid To Throw Out DNA Evidence