Tuesday, July 19, 2011

What Might Come Up In The Final Days Of The Current Appeal

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters

There have been nine appeal hearings since last November and there might be a further half a dozen.

Court will meet on July 25 and 31 and August 1. Then will come the August break, and then further hearings and an appeal verdict. At the last hearing on 27 June, Judge Hellman assigned the next three court dates for the DNA report and its rebuttal.

The only other sure thing accepted for discussion is the prosecution’s intention to revisit the mitigating circumstances Massei allowed and argue that they should be disallowed and the sentences of RS and AK increased.

The judges and jury have available to them not only the Massei and Micheli reports but all of the 10,000 plus pages of evidence from both trials plus all the court transcripts.

Our main posters James Raper, a lawyer, and Kermit will be posting a Powerpoint presentation after the DNA court sessions which will explain all of the tough questions that are still lurking in plain sight.

If the appeal court is to overturn the original verdict Judge Hellman would have to convince the Supreme Court of Cassation that Massei, Micheli, Guede’s first appeal judge and the Supreme Court itself that they all got it wrong and that the evidence suggests there was either only one perpetrator or another two.

But the existing evidence including the mixed blood, the mismatched alibis, and the strange pattern of phone calls does not fit either scenario.

Each of the discussion items in the appeal so far seem to have been quasi-disappointments for the defenses, and Giulia Bongiorno seemed to signal that at the June 27 hearing when her frustration over the failure of either Alessi or Aviello to convince became obvious.

Guede on the stand saying that Sollecito and Knox murdered Meredith had to have been a hard blow, and there would be no reason obvious to the court why he would lie.

Our Italian lawyers think the defense on appeal has been misconceived and too hard-line, too zero-sum-game, not very smart.  In the appeal hearings Knox and Sollecito have not had the opportunity to exercise either any innocent charm or any show of repentance, and Knox’s statement on 11 December blaming a whole lot of others could have seemed to the jury rather unpleasant.

Our lawyers don’t see an acquittal in the cards barring some huge surprise, such as Sollecito or Knox getting up on the witness stand and surviving withering cross-examination in convincingly putting across one or other of their alibis.

If they don’t get up on the stand, the judges and jury are meant to not make anything of that. But they surely would wonder why.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters on 07/19/11 at 01:09 PM in Trials 2008 & 2009Hellmann 2011+

Tweet This Post


Mixed blood is fatal.  It’s fresh blood, menstrual blood has been rejected.  As one expert has it, Amanda is bleeding as Meredith is bleeding: she is present at the murder.

And Guede’s testimony must have been “a hard blow.”  He won’t further incriminate himself: Guede is a lover, not a rapist despite bruises at the vulva. But “I know what I know & I saw what I saw,” he says in so many words: the words of a participant convicted beyond all appeal.

One becomes impatient: this is my point.  I wonder that the defense does not simply collapse. What in God’s name do they pretend to stand on?

(Hopeful, I have liked your recent posts.)

Posted by Ernest Werner on 07/19/11 at 05:04 PM | #

Dear Ernest
Just like the OJ Simpson case or this last week Casey Anthony. The simple answer is fame and money. These particular legal leaches who represent Knox and Sollecito have a common denominator because while there are fund raising events in Seattle they will continue this farce.

Stange to relate though the human condition dictates that once people have turned over a financial contribution to the Knox Regime or any others, they are not too impressed to be asked a second or third time. Therefore I predict that the financial support will eventually dry up.

As to Casey Anthony etc; I can see several books coming out and perhaps another made for TV movie.
Members of the jury in this case have indicated that they will certainly cash in on this case and that is with the full backing of the intervewers Nancy Grace for example. Don’t forget too, that
Amanda Knox has become a cash cow/cottage industry for so many avaricious disgusting people who wish to make either fame or fortune upon the back of the real victim namely Meredith Kercher and her family.
Sincerely Grahame Rhodes

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/19/11 at 05:28 PM | #

Tough times these days for the “railroaded” paradigm and we don’t know of even one smart lawyer who remains bought in. We are getting a few emails a week from Knox supporters pleading, mostly nicely enough, that we see things their way. Here is one exchange, the writer asked that we “tell the world” the answers to the questions he raised.

Q: If Amanda bled, where was she wounded?

It WAS her blood. No-one challenged that. Several locations are possible. The neck wound is obvious.

Q: If Amanda was in the room, where is the evidence?

There is forensic evidence that AK and RS were in the room - DNA on the bra clasp; mixed blood elsewhere in 4 locations including Filomena’s room, and footprints in blood in the bathroom and corridor with some missing proving a cleanup in progress. Plus the obvious staging of the scene in Filomena’s room.

Q: When did Guede tell the truth? In Germany? To his mates in prison? Or when Magnini read the statement for him?  Why wasn’t he subject to cross examination?

He only testified late June to rebut Alessi and has still not told the whole truth. Each of the 3 tried to implicate the others including both RS (which still stands) and AK. Guede was cross-examined, see our shot of Bongiorno is his face.

Q: If the three were there at the same time, why can’t the prosecution produce viable witnesses or forensic evidence placing them together? Why do they all deny it?

Why do they all deny it? Sorry but are you serious?

Q: Why isn’t there blood in the starch of the kitchen knife? How do you allow submission of evidence when found wanting by an expert?

Various very good experts on the prosecution side found the DNA evidence to be quite valid. All evidence gets weighted.

Q: If Guede is such a lover what about evidence presented of him threatening a victim with a knife?

That is unproven and Judge Micheli threw it out with sharp words for the “witness”.

Q: If Amanda murdered her, what was the motive?

Motive for what? For a hazing of Meredith? Perhaps the missing money or AK insecure about her job or just drugs or a mental condition.

Q: What makes your scenario of declaring mixture of victim’s and accused declaration in the common area that they were mixed at the same time over expert after expert that you can’t time such situations ?—Amanda was there before and after the murder.

Expert after expert did not testify to this. They testified that the blood of both Meredith and AK was fresh and mingled. Defense dont even try to explain that.

Q: How much credibility can you give to evidence collected in the slipshod manner noted by challenging experts?

Many of the claims are exaggerated or made up and there are many other areas of evidence left unchallenged.

Q: If you and your outliers had an ounce of integrity, you would recognize that you have been duped by the prosecution and call for freedom for both Amanda and Raffaele.

If you read Massei and Micheli, you will see that they made their minds up on the whole body of evidence, and each did not accept the prosecutors’ scenario. So did the Supreme Court. And there were two prosecutors, and Mignini had no reason to create a frame-up.

We are not outliers and we do have great integrity. We have very good lawyers and other experts who see the truth here. Almost all of Italy has accepted guilt and moved on.  Few really post now claiming a conspiracy, and each seems to use some or many screen names. They are really the outliers.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 07/20/11 at 03:53 PM | #

upon re-reading Knox’s written statement analysis I was struck by the claim she made concerning the leak under the sink (See first alibi) when she said that she and Sollecito had no mop, but there was a mop at Via della Pergola.

Was this mop comment ever followed up? Did the investigators find this particular mop because if it was missing that would be a red flag. On the other hand how was the cleanup managed. i,e paper towels for example since that alone would have taken many of them. If rags were used then there must be other evidence. Blood is really difficult to get rid of when it comes from a fresh wound particularly the carotid artery.

I have a feeling, a hope really, that more evidence for the prosecution will be forthcoming. As to the Knox apologists, they seem to be divided into two camps, either the immature (she looks innocent so therefore she must be) bunch. or the Steve Moore/or/less type who looks like his collar is too tight. That and the immediate family who I suspect must lie wide awake at 4am and wonder if she really is guilty only to dismiss the thought as being impossible. Such is the self deception so rampant in Seattle and elsewhere.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/20/11 at 04:29 PM | #

Thanks for the Q&A, Peter. I’d say though, that the abrasion on Amanda’s neck could not possibly have caused her to bleed, so it probably was from a hit to the nose.

The girls fight over the missing money (that would also account for the abrasion); violence escalates from there.

Bottom line: Amanda and Meredith were in the cottage that night, and the mixed blood is one of many strong proofs of guilt.

Posted by Ergon on 07/20/11 at 04:33 PM | #

Hi Ergon.  It’s possible of course, the escalation I mean. but more likely the scenario promulgated by Miss Represented in ‘Lies Our Mother Told Us’ would be more factual. http://missrepresented.net/blog/

It’s well worth the time it takes to wade through it. Imagine my dismay though when after reading the first page I discovered that there is a second one equally as large which I’m reading right now.  Cheers G

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/20/11 at 04:50 PM | #

With you on the nosebleed probability, Ergon. Nosebleeds can result in a loss of a lot of blood.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 07/20/11 at 05:05 PM | #

OK I found out about the mop. It’s in the email Knox wrote home. however it raises another red flag because she states at one point that “There was a leak under the sink” but in the email she states that “Raphael spilled a lot of water on the floor.” This was the night of the 1st November so why leave a large puddle on the floor that would require a mop anyway instead of just cleaning it up with a towel?

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/20/11 at 05:24 PM | #

btw, July 31 is a Sunday. The court will be meeting then? I understand Hellmann made an accomodation to meet on Saturdays as a courtesy for defense attorney Bongiorno.

Posted by Ergon on 07/20/11 at 05:32 PM | #

Helo Peter
      Hope you are keeping cool in all this sweltering heat.
Just one last thing. Was Knox’s email home ever published in the original? I ask because I believe it would give more insight into how her psychosis has developed.
Cheers and thank you G

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/20/11 at 05:34 PM | #

Re your 07/20/11 at 09:29 AM:  “….Blood is really difficult to get rid of when it comes from a fresh wound particularly the carotid artery….”

True enough, but potentially misleading because when Meredith’s airway was slit-open, it was her Right Superior Thyroid Artery [RSTA] that was transected and it was this arterial injury that lead to her death.

There was no injury to either Carotid artery.

The RSTA is a branch of the Right External Carotid Artery, which itself is a branch of the Right Carotid Artery.

So it was actually blood from a relatively minor artery, a branch of a branch of a carotid artery, that sprayed over the crime scene and over Meredith’s killers.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 07/20/11 at 09:01 PM | #

Ah thank you for the clarification.
Cheers G

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/20/11 at 09:53 PM | #

Hi Grahame,

Re: Was Knox’s email home ever published in the original?

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/20/11 at 10:34 AM

Found it! Here it is:



Posted by Cardiol MD on 07/21/11 at 05:16 PM | #

WOW!  Thank you Cardiol. I just tried to read it and this is from a supposed English major. Good God! How in heavens name did she ever pass?

Looking at this just underscores what I had suspected and that is that this piece of drivel is so far below university standard that I understand just how intimidated AK was/is by those living around her.

Apart from the usual US universities, Yale/Harvard/SMT etc; the standard in US universities seems to be well below that set by the rest of the world. I don’t mean to be insulting but if this is the standard from Seattle then it’s quite pathetic.

Point is, Meredith plus all the other girls in the cottage were so far ahead of AK in just about every department except perhaps sexual knowledge that this is just another tick in the jealousy column.

The other observation I see is that like all true sociopaths AK dos not see other people as being quite real but just people put on this earth to be used to gain an advantage. In other words I believe she is quite mentally ill. this does not excuse her though in any way shape or form however.

Surprisingly I see others coming from Seattle and elsewhere who trumpet her defense exhibiting similar traits and indications of hysteria. David Anderson is a case in point, plus all the others of course

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/22/11 at 12:03 AM | #

@ Grahame Rhodes
As far as I remember Knox was an Italian/German major ? Below university standard nevertheless ,I agree.

Posted by aethelred23 on 07/22/11 at 02:11 AM | #

Hi there aetheired23
              Thank you I stand corrected. It is fascinating nevertheless.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 07/22/11 at 03:46 AM | #

Yes, thanks to Cardiol I have read at last the e-mail home as well as her story, Baby Brother, on that same page. As already noted here, Amanda Knox is no great shakes as a writer of simple English prose.

Baby Brother is not the story of a rape but of a rapist (namely, Baby Brother grown to manhood) & his older brother on whose welfare & living space he depends.

So the rape is in the past but when older brother reminds him of it (“Did you even know her name?”) the exchange leads to a blow.  Baby Brother is the heavy-weight of the two.  He has put aside his calculus book, reluctantly, for this conversation & knocks his brother to the floor. With an injured jaw described in some sort of razor-sharp metaphor of cutting, big brother orders him out & he goes.  But yes, he’ll be back & he will be taken in again…

Why this softness toward Baby Brother?  When his brother as a little boy gets his first view of the newborn baby, baby-brother’s soft face reminds him of the soft face of his third-grade teacher who had shown him a great kindness…

Revealed in the “flashbacks” interspersed in the story are strange injuries or wounds in the older brother as a child. His teacher is sympathetically aware of these & the implication (although nowhere clear) is that he may have been cutting himself…

Amanda’s metaphors go wildly out of control in this story, suggesting an uncritical wildness of imagination, but she does show a “story” talent for keeping interest alive.  She is a woman of various gifts—voice & artistic talent among them.

So COULD she purge herself & write a total confession, tracing everything back to its roots in her life?—as in her story she traces big brother’s softness back to his childhood & third grade teacher. She could, but not yet.  And given her proclivities, maybe never.

A third find on that valuable page, reference given by Cardiol, is the surreptitiously recorded conference between Amanda & her two (real) parents, evidently in her jail cell.  It is too obvious that her parents are here coaching Amanda, who stumbles into an admission that she was present in the house—which brings an immediate caution from her father.  She is to say nothing, write nothing!  Amanda’s guilt is irrelevant: her freedom is the sole & primary aim.

Posted by Ernest Werner on 07/23/11 at 06:42 PM | #

OT but I imagine we all grieve for poor Norway, attacked by a desperate radical, dreadful losses.

@ Ernest Werner,
this is the best analysis of “Baby Brother” story I’ve ever seen. Thank you.

Your last point is good, too.

I agree: “Amanda’s guilt is irrelevant: her freedom is the sole and primary aim “(of her parents)

This reminds me of Mimi’s metaphor of drowning. The Sea of Truth would drown a liar, the sea of goodness would drown a baddie, so they struggle in its waters to grab a breath of falsehood on which to live, to escape prison.

Random water thoughts:
There was a line of poetry once that said, “Lie back and the sea will hold you.” Isn’t that beautiful?

Waters symbolize the great unconscious. In Scripture the seas represent the nations, churning but prescribed to a set boundary by the shore, the tides, gravity. Always seething with change and energy but not able to overflow the land. One day the sea will be no more (John’s revelation?)
Back to idea of Amanda’s sole goal is freedom, irrespective of innocence:
I suspect about 75% of families visiting jail cells have the same “let’s get you home, all else is irrelevant” philosophy.

You pointed out in Amanda’s story her tenderness toward the baby brother linked to his soft appearance like her third grade teacher. This might be Deanna looking soft and round in the face like Edda (a guess).

Thank you for a good exposition of the short story, interesting. I could never make heads nor tails out of it, except to see that parents were nowhere important in it. The author’s world seemed all about sibling struggles with each other’s bad behavior, the stance of scolding. I don’t think I’d realized about the possible cutting images.

In Amanda’s story the well of truth was outside the home in the world of education. Despite the fact Edda is a teacher, I doubt the teacher in this story symbolizes her.

You bring out a vital quote, “Did you even know her name?” Well, we’ve seen how often Amanda speaks Meredith’s name, as rarely as possible.

Posted by Hopeful on 07/23/11 at 09:33 PM | #

Posted by Giselle on 07/31/11 at 03:07 AM:

“Does anyone have a link to Knox’s email she sent to friends and family days after the murder? I have someone who would like to read it - I used to have a link, but it doesnt work anymore… This would be much appreciated.”

This works:

Posted by Cardiol MD on 07/31/11 at 11:21 AM | #

Tweet This Post

Post A Comment


Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Is the Conti-Vecchiotti DNA Review Defamatory? Stefanoni Believes So and May Sue

Or to previous entry Respected Journalist Carl Bernstein Criticizes “Murdochism” For Debasing News Reporting