![](https://truejustice.org/ee/images/website/tjmkfrontpage.jpg)
Breaking news: In its August 9th report the Florence Court again explains why Knox is guilty of unprovoked calunnia against Patrick - and left him in prison for several weeks. Very hard line, hits back against the Supreme Court's overruling of Florence in 2015. We hope to have it up in English by month's end. So Knox's deeply dishonest smear of the investigators in court in June had zero effect.
Thursday, September 07, 2017
Being Reported: Significant Developments In The Sollecito Crime Family
Posted by Our Main Posters
1. The Sollecitos And The Rizutto Crime Family
Posted by Peter Quennell
This is all widely reported in the Italian and Canadian media and known to the average Italian.
That photo above was taken in a Montreal court in January of 2016. Rocco Sollecito’s son Stefano was being charged with a number of crimes, and Rocco the head of the Rizutto family was there to manage and observe.
Five months later, Rocco was dead, gunned down by a hitman still not identified, and Stefano was temporarily free on bail, but still facing numerous charges and soon to go back inside.
The Rizutto clan was possibly the largest mafia family in the world during the whole time of the Perugia judicial process, with operations in Canada, the United States, the Caribbean, and Latin America.
Rocco was believed to have muscled his way to the leadership of the clan not too long after this happened back in 2010.
On November 10, 2010, [crime boss Nicolo] Rizzuto was killed at his residence in the Cartierville borough of Montreal when a single bullet from a sniper’s rifle punched through two layers of glass in the rear patio doors of his Montreal mansion. His death is believed to be the final blow against the Rizzuto crime family.
Nice shooting. But it was actually not the final blow to the family clan. Today Stefano Sollecito and Leonardo Rizzuto, grandson of Nicolo, are considered to be the joint heads of the Rizutto clan.
The relevance to the judicial process in Perugia becomes apparent if you know that:
- (1) Prior to 2000 the Sicilian Costa Nostra was Italy’s dominant mafia force. After a big loss at trial in 1987 it even more ruthlessly kept law enforcement at bay, but considerable reaction was building.
(2) In the 2000’s the Ndrangheta of Calabria with the Rizutto/Sollecito clan in tow became the more dominant force. Bombings of the judiciary and tourist spots (and even churches) and reprisal against informants were largely phased out, in favor of political and business bribery and the corruption or the demonization of the Italian judiciary.
(3) The Ndrangheta had been moving into the region of Umbria starting shortly before the judical process in Perugia began, and was coming to dominate the drug trade there. There was major exposure of progress and pushback in 2014.
(4) Taking justice down a peg through threats and bribery is a constant top priority which police, prosecutors and judges must endeavor to guard against. The brave lead prosecutor in the Sollecito/Knox trial has a special status: he handles mafia cases, and so is a natural target for demonization.
(5) Several of those on the fringe of the Perugia judicial process have known mafia connections. They included the colleague of Doug Preston, Mario Spezi, who died in 2016. Two lawyers on the defense teams have mounted important mafia defenses. One of the witnesses at the 2011 appeal was a mafioso.
(6) The Dominican Republic is considered by the FBI etc to be the playground and drugs-throughpoint for various mafias and very useful waypoint for drugs headed to the United States, Canada, and even Italy.
(7) The Rizutto/Sollecito clan have dominated the eastern town for years there, and they have sizeable gambling interests there. The country has few extradition treaties, so it’s tempting as a mafia retirement abode.
2. Raffaele Sollecito visits the DR twice in 2013
Posted by Peter Quennell
This important post is vital reading here - it connects up the dots of the Perugia process to the wider Italian context.
Raffaele Sollecito first headed to the Dominican Republic quite ostentatiously - sending a threatening signal maybe? - in the summer of 2013, some months before the Nencini repeat appeal that the Supreme Court had mandated commenced in Florence.
Raffaele Sollecito then headed there a second time “secretly” (see below) right in the middle of that appeal when it seems to have appeared to him (correctly) that the outcome would go against Knox and himself.
Very tellingly, both Sollecito and his family tried hard to keep the destination of that trip a secret. But (again see below) the very curious Italian media finally figured it out (through not immediately why).
Here is how we reported that drama on 4 December 2013.
[Prosecutor Crini had finished summarizing the case against RS and AK unrelentingly over two days.]
Dr Francesco Sollecito was reported as being shocked by the unrelenting tone of the indictment. However, Sollecito’s plight is not nearly as bad as the ever-stubborn Amanda Knox’s.
Knox has already served three years and was fined heavily for obstruction of justice. She could face another year for that if it is found to have been aggravating. And as the post below mentions, she could face as many as three more charges for aggravating obstruction of justice.
Sollecito in contrast has respected the court by actually showing up, and, unlike Knox, has lately shown restraint in accusing his accusers.
However, the day after Dr Crini ‘s startlingly powerful summary of the case against him, it looked like Sollecito was hastily taking off out of Italy for somewhere.
La Nazione reported that police at Florence Airport had held back a fully loaded Air France flight to Paris while they checked with the prosecution that he was indeed allowed to leave the country. La Nazione said the prosecutors have some concern that he might skip and not come back, but he did voluntarily come back previously from the Dominican Republic, and his family has always ensured some presence in court.
But next TGCom24 reported that Sollecito’s father had claimed that Sollecito had already gone home to Bisceglie, although he is a free citizen still in possession of a passport and can travel anywhere if he wishes.
But then TGCom24 reported that he had indeed flown to Paris, but had turned around and come straight back again, to stay with family friends. And that on 8 December he will sit his final exams in computer science at the University of Verona.
However, soon after that La Nazione reported that Sollecito’s father had been contradicted by his lawyers, and his erratic son had slipped through his fingers and flown “for his work” back to the Dominican Republic. Translation by Jools:
1 December 2013 ““ SCOOP. Denials, lies, game by the defenders. But in the end it’s up to the lawyer Luca Maori to admit: “Raffaele Sollecito returned to Santo Domingo, as anticipated on Friday by La Nazione”
He embarked from Florence’s Peretola Airport and made a stop-over in Paris, from where he then flew to the Caribbean island where he spent the last few months that preceded the start of the new appeals process. “But there is nothing strange - minimizes the lawyer - Raffaele went back to pick up the things he left there, will be back in ten days for the final exams and to await the judgment. With anxiety, but self-assured.”
No escape, just a normal “work” trip. Permissible, since there is no measure that prevents the accused to leave Italy. But the departure of Sollecito, accused of the murder of Meredith Kercher along with former girlfriend Amanda Knox (already sheltered in the U.S.) caused some sneering. And even the agents of the Border Police, when they saw him in front of the [departure] gate, made a phone call to the Procura to be sure whether the journey in the midst of the appeal process was really “normal.”
IN FACT. Sollecito ‘s father, in an understandable effort to defend his already too overexposed son, slipped on the so-called banana peel, placing the young man within a few hours in various locations, but never in the true destination across the ocean: in Verona, preparing for the final exam in computer science in regard to the thesis, or in Paris, but just for a flash-stay from which he was back the day after. At Christmas, maintained the father, Raffaele will return from abroad. Maybe for the last break before the final rush of the Mark II process, which, according to calculations by the Assize Court of Appeal, could be concluded on January 15.
Meanwhile, the hearing on 16 December is for the remaining civil parties, then double date for the defence, (December 17 and January 9) and hearing on the 10 dedicated to counter-argument. With Sollecito in the courtroom, assures the lawyer.
Nothing strange?! Doctor Sollecito never explaining to the media where Raffaele went, or why he went there, or why it was a huge secret, should have official minds very seriously wondering why.
No prizes for guessing what Raffaele had to do so secretly in the Dominican Republic - where his notorious mafia relatives from Montreal occupy a town there.
What if the judge had stopped Sollecito from going to the Dominican Republic when the airport police called to check if that was alright with the court?
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.
3. Taunting New Tone From Sollecito Defense
Posted by Peter Quennell
It was observed among other things by those who do observing professionally that Amanda Knox and Sollecito and his lawyer Bongiorno became exceptionally macho upon his return and for the next 12 months
Sollecito was downbeat only briefly twice in 2014, first when he and his Italian girfriend scampered northward before Nencini’s verdict, and second when he was trying and failing to get American girls to marry him. Remember this and also this about the macho press conference in mid 2014?
Mostly the pair were exceptionally macho right through to the Fifth Chambers “mysteriously” being assigned the final appeal, and two judges inexperienced in murder cases mangling the evidence and breaking Italian law in the written judgement which sort-of cleared RS and AK.
That’s some of what is out in broad daylight so far. There is much more under official wraps for now. That both the Hellmann appeal and the Marasca/Bruno appeal were bent seem dead-certs to officialdom.
4. And More On The Saga
Posted by James Raper
I’ll add some summary points here which are considerably expanded upon in my book.
The 5th Chambers’ judgment, which had Knox at the cottage at the time of the murder, but not necessarily Sollecito, pretty much reflects Francesco’s own thinking.
Remember how intensely critical he was of Knox in private. She was the one who had something to do with it and had got his precious boy into trouble. In fact he would not have been that bothered if she had been convicted provided his son was acquitted.
He was going to deliver for his boy come what may, and whatever his involvement, and Bongiorno was to be his instrument.
- 1. Bongiorno : head of the parliamentary commission for legal reforms and whose most important client had been former Prime Minister Andreotti, charged with links to Cosa Nostra and the mafia murder of a journalist.
2. And where did Della Vedova, with his business links to organized crime, pop up from? Ghirga and Maori were positively provincial, straight-forward guys, by comparison. Vedova was not a criminal lawyer, and it showed as he messed up a bit in court, but with offices in Rome and stateside Washington he was a useful player and conduit for extraneous participants, for both the accused.
3. And where did Hellmann pop up from? Appointed to preside over the first appeal just one month beforehand? With little experience of criminal trials and replacing a judge, who had that experience, and just happened to be the prosecutor, disliked by Bongiiorno, in the Andreotti trials.
4. And where did Conti and Vecchiotti pop up from? Selected by Hellmann of course. And why did C+V hobnob with Francesco and produce such a biased, amateurish and unprofessional report?
5. How did Alessi and Aviello pop up all of a sudden and why did Aviello make, and then retract, allegations of improper inducements offered by Bongiorno for his testimony?
6. Bongiorno became supercharged, almost maniacal, the longer the case went on. Waving a knife around in court, pacing frenetically during recesses, the bizarre press conference with Raffaele (the first real wedge between the defendants positions - had she had the nod that this could work, even for both?), his, her and Francesco’s television appearances, the humungous final appeal recourse with Peter Gills’ misleading contamination hypothesi craftily, and quite unacceptably, included.
7. Rocco was murdered in May 2016. Francesco attended a private memorial service for him just outside Bari. Why would a pillar of the community, a respectable doctor, do that? Either he didn’t think he would be noticed or he didn’t care. If the latter, that’s some chutzpah! Are he and Rocco distant cousins? Rocco was originally from Bari. That’s where Francesco lives and Raffaele was born. I suspect that they share more than a surname and Raffaele’s sojourns in the Dominican Republic was more than a coincidence.
8. And the final, ludicrous, 5th Chambers Motivation, long overdue when it finally came out.
An aspect of the Italian judicial system that needs to be looked at, in my opinion, is the final stage of proceedings.The fact that each case has to be signed off by the Supreme Court places a considerable administrative burden on the system, which is why there are, at the last count, some 396 SC judges.
This allows IMO for a measure of under the radar judge shopping, inconsistencies in judgements, rivalries and factions, and judges who are susceptible to improper influence in a country where mafia influence and corruptability stretches even into respectable institutions.
You just have to know how to go about it, and Bongiorno and Vedova tick the boxes.
5. Footnote: The Latest News From Montreal
Posted by Peter Quennell
Meanwhile, back in Montreal, Leonardo Ri”Žzzuto and Stefano Sollecito remain locked up awaiting trial. Bail was denied them - no surprise there, the state does need its witnesses to remain alive.
Here as of a week ago is their trial status.
The last of the leaders accused of the mafia in Montreal, Stefano Sollecito and Leonardo Rizzuto, will be entitled to a mega-trial, which will be specially reserved [for them alone].
The judge Eric Downs has just confirmed that the two men, charged with gangsterism and conspiracy to traffic cocaine, will be judged separately from the 15 other accused in the operation Nest Egg… The dates of this trial will be held before a judge and jury, in Montreal, will be fixed within two weeks.
Stefano Sollecito, whose father Rocco has already led the clan Rizzuto, before his murder by a professional killer… had long sought a trial as early as possible since he is fighting a serious illness.
Note “fighting a serious illness”. Hmmm. The presumed end of that branch of the family as a fighting force. There is also another development of the maybe-not-good-news variety for Raffaele.
Events described above might have evolved quite differently if Sammy Nicolucci had not been put away a few year ago by the Canadians.
Both Sammy Nicolucci and Rocco Sollecito had once been on a career path to head the Rizzuto crime family. But Sammy was put away in prison, opening a clear way forward for Rocco.
As Rocco was gunned down, while Sammy walks free, maybe Sammy thinks he has the last laugh? Could he have Raffaele Sollecito looking over his shoulder these days, or at least not vacationing in Canada any time soon?
6. Implications For Sollecito Going Forward
Posted by Peter Quennell
Rocco’s silencing by death was clearly to Raff’s and Amanda’s advantage, even assuming they had no hand in it. It is likely if Rocco had managed to stay alive that the Italians would have figured out a way to nab him and squeeze him dry.
It’s their experience-based and effective way with the mafias: dont ever talk about it, just do it: keep up a relentless pursuit without ceasing until there are clear grounds to isolate and take down some bad guys. See this latest example and also this one here.
If you think about it, it’s a great pity for our case that Rocco did get gunned down. He got off easy and our case remains messy. Damn you Rocco!
The silencing of Rocco does close off the easiest way forward, of extraditing him to Italy and putting the screws on him. But it does not close off ALL roads forward. Work goes on. Someone will talk.
Stay tuned. It may take a while, but it ain’t yet over.
Friday, August 18, 2017
Kercher Lawyer Dr Maresca Slams Tin-Eared Knox Over “Inopportune Plans” To Visit Perugia
Posted by Hopeful
Dr Maresca welcoming Meredith’s family to trial court in 2009
1. Today’s Reporting
The Daily Mail headline today 8/18/17 says this:
Murdered Meredith Kercher’s family condemn Amanda Knox over “˜inopportune plans’ to revisit Italian town where the British student was killed
Subheading: Ms. Knox, 30, wants to return so she can overcome the trauma of imprisonment
The Kercher family lawyer, our dear Francesco Maresca, the lion of Perugia who never wastes words, condemns the nutter Knox, the eternal troublemaker that she is.
Knox told People magazine of her evil plans: “The only way that I’m going to come full circle is by physically, literally, coming full circle.”
Knox said, “I know that Perugia is probably the least welcome place for me in the entire world. And that’s scary, but it also means a lot to me, not to be afraid of a place and see Perugia through my family’s eyes.” (can you believe it, she uses her family as an excuse to return to the scene of the crime, unrivalled ingrate)
“My family lived in Perugia for years to support me and they made relationships. I made a relationship with the priest at the prison, and those things still matter to me.” (what gall, has she been to see a priest in Seattle since 2015?)
Francesco Maresca the Kercher family lawyer said that Ms. Knox is NOT WELCOME in Perugia. Amen to that.
Maresca told The Telegraph: “I believe Amanda Knox’s choice to return is totally inopportune because the death of Meredith was very painful for Perugia and people there feel they have never had a satisfactory response from the Italian justice system.”
Maresca said, “That is why Knox should think about her life without continuing to return to this sad affair from which she has been the only one to profit, both in terms of fame and money.”
2. My Commentary
What Insolence and Unbridled Triumphalism of Evil
The criminal always returns to the scene of the crime. Why? because he has so much invested in it of himself and his moment of power.
Knox is a moth to a flame, she can never learn.
The valiant Attorney Maresca condemns her motives and tells her in gentler words than mine to “GET A LIFE” and to not parade her sorry self through the streets she tormented and flout the Perugians who she ripped off of so much money to investigate her crime.
Perugia had to pay judges and police and lab techs and a myriad of costs, thousands and millions$ of euro to give that young imposter and troublemaker and promiscuous idiot her courtrooms and to house her and feed her in Capanne prison only then to be made the brunt of street riots and shouting mobs at doors of courthouse after verdicts were announced.
More importantly Perugia suffered the heartless loss of lovely Meredith in their formerly happy village. They suffered the jaundiced eye of the American PR steamroller trying to find fault with their sincere and earnest investigation. Perugia had endless patience with the animal known as Knox whose father and loudmouth mother paraded in and out of their decent streets while paying PR firms to paint Knox a misunderstood Madonna instead of the kicking goat they had raised.
Perugia got the awful reputation of the beautiful Meredith’s murder and the seamy underbelly of drug crime that Knox the dopehead brought to light.
Then the Sollecito family rose up to condemn the Perugian police and justice officials as country clowns, and after all the Perugians’ costly hard work to give Meredith peace and a just outcome to punish those who destroyed her, the American PR hydrogen bomb blasted over them like an evil Goliath before David put him down. I hope she meets a David in Perugia, the arrogant twerp.
I hope Knox gets more than she bargains for, much much more and worse if she sashays her shameless self once again in the town that she used as a platform to show her tail, and as Maresca says, to profit from all the fallout of her own evil, her ill gotten fame and some money with it. She still owes Lumumba, pay him if you walk by the crumbled Le Chic on your drunken journey with your foolish compatriot Robinson, a blind man if there ever were one.
She adds insult to injury and proves to the world she is an absolute moron yet a cunning and deceitful enemy who revels in the triumph of her will over others, her daring over what is right.
Maresca tells the beast to “˜GET A LIFE’ and stop cruelly dancing at the scene of the crime.
She was given mercy, not justice. Now she lies about the motive for her visit to Perugia, shielding herself by suggesting her family’s friends and the priest there mean so very much to her. Right. Has she been to mass twice since her release? Has she donated to Seattle Prep? Has she donated to the Catholic Church? let me guess”¦but now the tenuous relationship with the Priest of Capanne is the ruse she uses to excuse her return to Perugia to further slap them in the face.
Liar liar, don’t trust a word she says.
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
Where Should You Have Invested This Year? The US Or Italy?
Posted by Peter Quennell
Where should you have put your nestegg at the start of this year for maximum gains?
Sorry to those who picked the US (and Trumponomics).
(1) The chart above shows a bundle of Italian stocks (EWI) against a bundle of US stocks (DOW).
As of today US stocks have gone up around 10 percent - but Italian stocks (green curve) have gone up 12 percent above that.
(2) The chart below shows the dollar against the Euro (Italy’s currency).
As of today, the Euro is about 10 percent up on the dollar for the year.
So you would have been much better off in Italy. It wins hands down - it has gained overall about 20 percent compared to the US.
The overall value of the US - stocks and currency combined - is actually under water.
Wednesday, July 05, 2017
Why The Italian Court System Is Very Unlikely To Do Any Favors For Sollecito & Knox Ever Again
Posted by Peter Quennell
1. Context
By any standards the ruling by the Supreme Court’s Fifth Chambers in 2015 springing RS and AK was a confusing bit of legal work.
The statement from the Bench in March was unquivocal but the written report six months later was a lot less so.
We have taken it apart in numerous posts, for example here and here. Also here and here and here.
The other day we corrected the Kentucky Bar Association when, in promoting a talk by Knox, they stated that Knox was “definitively acquitted”.
No she wasn’t.
Read here. The Fifth Chambers was assigned the case through quite open defense manipulation. It does not normally handle murder cases, and neither the lead judge nor the writer of the sentencing report had previously handled murder cases. Their reasoning was torturous, evidence was cherry-picked, and it seems certain any experienced and trained murder-case judges would have found for guilt here.
Read here Knox was in fact found to have been at the scene of the crime, and with blood on her hands. The Supreme Court’s Fifth Chambers in fact handed down the weakest possible “not guilty” sentence, not guilty due to “insufficient evidence” (though see below; most of it they ignored, and the trial prosecution was not even at the Supreme Court) which allows an appeal if the prosecution or victim’s family wish to take up that option.
So the 2015 report was not THAT confusing, and really only gave RS and AK half a break.
2. New Development
So why is the Italian Court System unlikely to do any favors for Sollecito & Knox ever again?
In a nutshell: too many lies. In fact it is a crime in Italy to lie about a court outcome. Judgements are only ever issued in non-editable photocopies so they cannot be monkeyed with.
Knox and Sollecito and their foolish lawyers and apologists have been very publicly lying about the true outcome for two years. They have mangled a translation, cherrypicked repeatedly, and ignored half of the truth. They have made numerous claims like “definitively acquitted” which the report itself does not support.
This lying on a grand scale is believed to have finally touched a real nerve in the Italian courts. Just way too many lies. Already the defamations by Sollecito in his book had been ruled against by the Florence court, and some negative outcome seems to be in the works.
Now we see Sollecito’s appeal seeking major damages for having been locked up so very sharply shot down.
Any past mafia influence seems to have waned. And it looks like the incessant very public lying by Sollecito and Knox and their lawyers and apologists will cost them in future in court.
Amanda Knox’s numerous defamations and toxic PR are expected to cost her big soon too. Wise move? Mislead no more.
Monday, July 03, 2017
Here’s Something Important That Factors Into Our Interest In Cool-Headed Rational Communities.
Posted by Peter Quennell
Simple walking is rather startlingly proving to have health benefits beyond the obvious, and also major community benefits.
The main new finding for important health benefits is that the balancing required in walking adds neuron capacity to the hippocampus - a hybrid brain gland which also handles key components of memory, diminishment of which is behind memory loss and dementia.
Now there is also a new finding for the positive effects on community building and by extension better environmental and economic-growth prospects, as for both teamwork is vital.
The anti-twitter… !!
Cruising the US one can see in large areas decaying towns and failing communities. In places stark poverty. Often little mingling, and other than the local Walmart, no very enticing walking, either for locals or to entice any visitors.
Get walks going, guys?
Already there’s begun a big push in the US to open up many more trails for walking. New York city, one of the world’s most walkable, is still adding or enhancing walks like the elevated Highline Park and the paths around the edge of Manhattan.
Trails hundreds even thousands of miles long are being created - by way of the Hudson River and the Erie Canal one can already walk or bicycle from NYC to Toronto or vice versa (think about it Ergon!).
The economic effect all along the way of these trails is becoming obvious.
Italy probably remains a very smart and creative country not least because places like Rome and Florence and Perugia become more walkable even as they become less drivable.
Thursday, June 29, 2017
Sollecito Loses Supreme Court Appeal Against Florence Court Ruling Refusing $0.55M Damages Claim
Posted by Peter Quennell
No Big Bloodmoney Payday
Our previous posts on this can be seen here and here and here.
UK reporter Krissy Allen of Blasting News kindly summarises the Italian reporting.
Here are some excerpts. Emphasis is added to key sentences confirming a rebuttal of Knox claiming “vindication” in the post just below and in those earlier posts.
Raffaele Sollecito has today been denied any compensation for the four years he spent in prison, one year on remand, and three years until the final Supreme Court Appeal decision in March 2015.
The problem is, although acquitted, it was on the grounds of ‘insufficient evidence’ and not a straightforward exoneration.
After having to wait six months for the written reasons, in Sept 2015, Sollecito then had the way clear to put in a claim for compensation, which Italian law allows for wrongful imprisonment
However the statute that allows compensation for wrongful imprisonment specifically excludes defendants who lie to the police, described as ‘gross misconduct’.
In other words, the Florence Appeal Court in January this year dismissed Sollecito’s claim for this reason.
It deemed that Sollecito had committed ‘willful misconduct’ or ‘at the very least, gravely negligent or imprudent.’
It found it ‘implausible’ that he could not account for the movements of his then-girlfriend, Amanda Knox. It states that both he and Amanda Knox lied many times and that it was an ‘indisputable fact of absolute certainty’ that Knox was at the murder scene ‘when the young Meredith Kercher was murdered’.
Sollecito through his lawyer, Giulia Bongiorno immediately appealed to the Supreme Court, citing the fact of Rudy Guede’s shoeprint being mistaken for his. However, this was never the point of law for which Sollecito was refused his demand for the maximum 517,000 Euro compensation….
It means the written reasons of the Florence Court of 10 Feb 2017, stands. It is damning and scathing of the pair’s behaviour throughout the investigation.
In effect, it blocks any compensation claim Amanda Knox might have had her eye on from Italy….
Sollecito’s lawyer, Bongiorno has made a statement that he now plans to take it to the European Court of Human Rights. This would not be an appeal as the ECHR has no jurisdiction to overturn the verdict. Rather, it can make an award should it decide there was unfairness in the procedure.
The average award of the ECHR is circa 3,500 Euros - a far cry from the 517K Euros Sollecito was demanding.
Also in La Republica the increasingly hapless Sollecito claims that he is near broke and he is unable to find a job because of the cloud hanging over him.
Maybe we’ll see yet another burst of anger against Knox for dropping him in this. It may actually gain him some sympathy, though it is hard to see that paying any bills.
In his ongoing Florence book trial he is going to have to admit publicly that he lied and defamed - defamed both numerous people and Italy and its justice system - the felony crimes of diffamazione and vilipendio.
Either that or end up with a huge award against him, maybe leaving him deeply in debt.
Friday, June 23, 2017
Despite Her Claims, Knox Was NOT Exonerated By Italy’s Supreme Court
Posted by Our Main Posters
Kentucky State Capital and Supreme Court
1. Kentucky Lawyers Get Duped
The Kentucky Bar Association is the latest to get swindled by Knox. They have paid a ton of money to be lectured to by a fake exoneree.
The online notice of today’s talk by Knox at their annual conference says it all: it PROVES a complete lack of due diligence. It wrongly reads as follows:
On Friday 23 June the programming will be packed with fun and interesting sessions.. Topping off Friday’s schedule will be the featured presentation; AMANDA KNOX will share her story. She is the American exchange student who spent almost four years in an Italian prison, following her conviction for the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher, a fellow exchange student who shared her apartment. In 2015, Knox was definitively acquitted [aka exonerated].
2. But Knox Was NOT Exonerated
Knox’s sentence was merely vacated (she could be tried again) because under mafia influence the Fifth Chambers of the Supreme Court ignored most of the evidence - and then claimed there was not enough.
Read here. The Fifth Chambers was assigned the case through quite open defense manipulation. It does not normally handle murder cases, and neither the lead judge nor the writer of the sentencing report had previously handled murder cases. Their reasoning was torturous, evidence was cherry-picked, and it seems certain any experienced and trained murder-case judges would have found for guilt here.
Read here Knox was in fact found to have been at the scene of the crime, and with blood on her hands. The Supreme Court’s Fifth Chambers in fact handed down the weakest possible “not guilty” sentence, not guilty due to “insufficient evidence” (though see below; most of it they ignored, and the trial prosecution was not even at the Supreme Court) which allows an appeal if the prosecution or victim’s family wish to take up that option.
Read here. Knox was definitively found guilty of calunnia (criminal defamation) against her boss, Patrick Lumumba. The Supreme Court in her final appeal confirmed that she falsely accused Patrick Lumumba, a black man, of murder. She served three years in prison, and is a convicted felon for life. (To date she has refused to pay compensation of about $100,000, placing her in contempt of the Supreme Court. So much for Knox “helping” the wrongfully imprisoned.)
Read here. That book by Knox - in an expanded but unrevised 2nd edition - is one of the most dishonest ever written. It contains an estimated 400-plus provable lies and up to 100 possible defamations. See this example. For those Knox still faces multiple possibilities of prosecution.
Read here. Also read here. The evidence against Knox and her co-defendant Sollecito was in fact massive, and when correctly seen as a whole (as only the 2009 trial jury saw, not the several appeal juries) absolutely damning. Read also here. Thereafter the gaming of the system began, starting with the defense procuring ANOTHER judge not qualified for murder trials (Judge Hellmann, now edged into early retirement) for their first (2011) appeal.
Read here. If true to form Knox will again try to claim to your audience that police interrogators forced a false confession out of her. Again untrue. She was not interrogated on that night or any other night. In fact she was only ever interrogated twice, BOTH TIMES at her own request by Dr Mignini, in December 2007 and July 2009. She was given SIX court opportunities to get herself off before the 2009 trial - and she failed all of them.
Read here. The supremely fair Italian justice system comes out pretty well against other systems including the American system. Italy’s rate of incarceration is 1/6 that of the United States, and among Italians the system polls very positively.
There’s much more if your members are inclined to set up a task force. For the protection from fraud of bar associations everywhere, we would welcome that.
Monday, May 22, 2017
See Taormina In Sicily, Host Town For The G7 Summit This Next Weekend
Posted by Peter Quennell
This was of course the G8 group prior to Mr Putin being disinvited. Sorry about that Vlad. Mr Trump is being welcomed, sort of, though security is intense and satires in the media ever moreso. Sorry about that Don. Mr Obama is also in Italy, cycling around somewhere further north, with what seems like zero security detail.
Sunday, May 14, 2017
One Special Kind Of Journalism On the Grand Scale Italy Uniquely Inspires
Posted by Peter Quennell
If you keep a watchful eye on reporting on Italy, every few weeks you’ll see a report like this.
Jay Nordlinger went to Italy as a student - specifically to Milan - and just revisited it. He once again found a LOT to like.
There are many beautiful things in Milan, of course. Many beautiful works of art. But the city itself is a beautiful thing: a work of art. In my music criticism “” concerning both compositions and performances “” I often say, “Beauty isn’t everything. But it’s not nothing either.” The same is true of cities, I think. Beauty is not the be-all, end-all. But a little beauty “¦ can make a nice difference. I recall what Ed Koch said about cities: Paris, the most beautiful. London, the most interesting. New York “” his own “” the most exciting, or dynamic.
The Milanese have style. For heaven’s sake, they’re Italian: The Italians have style. There is often a casual formality about them. And, among the older people, a certain courtliness. Can they be drama queens? Well, they wouldn’t want to betray their nationality, would they? Many of the women look and act as though they consider themselves to be works of art “” and they are. Men in suits and ties, riding motor scooters, are a sight. I hear a dog not barking: I see just about no one wearing short sleeves, on a warm day.
Mirabile dictu, the window in my hotel room opens. How civilized. Unlike in America. Hang on, I will soon find out this is a mistake. The window is not supposed to open. Someone locks it. And I prevail on someone else to reopen it. Ah, civilization again. (I have promised not to jump out of this window.) (Much to the disappointment of my severest critics.)
Out my window, and all around the city, you hear the squeal of trams. It is a kind of music in Milan. Milanese risotto is a famous dish, yellow in color. I’m not sure what it is, exactly. But, when it’s good, it’ll bring tears to your eyes (not because it’s spicy). When I was a student, I practically lived on stracciatella “” not the soup, but the ice-cream flavor (which, in short, is their chocolate chip). It hasn’t gotten any worse “¦
Thursday, April 27, 2017
Multiple Attackers and the Compatibility of the Double DNA Knife (Exhibit 36)
Posted by James Raper
Our YouTube whiz DelPergola’s video of November 2010
Ed note: This evidence area is enormously compelling - but also emotionally difficult. It is why initially we did not publish our translation of the Micheli Report. And why a quarter of the trial was behind closed doors with the media excluded. That well-meaning decision has bedeviled the case ever since, because only the jury and others in court then - including the white-faced and tongue-tied accused pair - were exposed to the full power of the prosecution testimony.
Material from some of my previous posts on TJMK (link at bottom here) was incorporated into my Justice on Trial book. From Chapter 15, this is the second of several posts setting out further material.
Before looking at the forensic evidence, which is the final theme I identified earlier, it will be helpful to take into account the wounds suffered by Meredith, and whether these suggest anything as to the dynamics of the murder, and whether any of them were compatible with the knife recovered from Sollecito’s kitchen, Exhibit 36, called the Double DNA knife because the DNA of Meredith was found on the blade and the DNA of Knox on the handle.
As mentioned earlier the autopsy was carried out by Dr Lalli.
It was observed that there were no significant injuries to the chest, abdomen or lower limbs.
The significant elements in the examination were described as follows :
A fine pattern of petechiae on the internal eyelid conjunctive.
The presence of tiny areas of contusion at the level of the nose, localised around the nostrils and at the limen nasi [threshold of the nose].
Inside the mucous membranes of the lips, there were injuries compatible with a traumatic action localised in the inner surface of the lower lip and the inner surface of the upper lip, reaching up to the gum ridge.
Also found on the lower side of the jaw were some bruising injuries, and in the posterior region of the cheek as well, in proximity to the ear.
Three bruising injuries were present on the level of the lower edge of the right jaw with a roughly round shape. In the region under the jaw an area with a deep abrasion was observed, localised in the lower region of the middle part at the left of the jaw.
Once the neck had been cleaned it was possible to observe wounds that Dr Lalli attributed to the action of the point of a cutting instrument.
The main wound was located in the left lateral region of the neck. A knife would be compatible provided it had one cutting edge only which was not serrated. The wound was 8 cms in length and 8 cms deep. The width could not be measured because the edges had separated due to the elasticity of the tissues both in relation to the region and to the position of the head, which could have modified the width. The wound had a small “tail” at the posterior end. The wound penetrated into the interior structure of the neck in a slightly oblique direction, upwards and also to the right.
Underneath this large wound, another wound was visible, rather small and superficial, with not particularly clear edges, “becoming increasingly superficial until they disappeared”, in a reddish area of abrasions. The knife had penetrated both Meredith’s larynx and the cartilage of the epiglottis, and had broken her hyoid bone. A consequence of that damage is that Meredith would be unable to vocalise, let alone scream.
There was also a wound in the right lateral region of the neck, also attributed to a pointed cutting instrument. This was 4 cms deep and 1.5 cms wide (or long). It had not caused significant structural damage.
The presence of two relatively slight areas of bruising, with scarce colouring and barely noticeable, were detected in the region of the elbows.
On Meredith’s hands were small wounds showing a very slight defensive response. A small, very slight patch of colour was noticed on the “anterior inner surface of the left thigh”. Another bruise was noticed on the anterior surface, in the middle third of the right leg.
The results of the toxicological analyses revealed the absence of psychotropic drugs and a blood alcohol level of 0.43 grams per litre.
Tests of histological preparations of fragments of the organs taken during the autopsy were also performed. They revealed the presence of “pools of blood” in the lungs.
The cause of death was attributed to asphixiation and loss of blood, the former being caused by the latter.
There was nothing in the pathology which confirmed that Meredith had been raped, though we should recall that Guede’s DNA was found on the vaginal swab, though not of a spermatic nature. For Massei this was confirmation that she had been subjected to a sexual assault.
—————————————
There was argument in court as to whether Exhibit 36 was compatible with the main wound. There was no dispute amongst the experts that it could not have been responsible for the wound on the right. The knife had an overall length of 31 cms and the length of the blade from the point to the handle was 17.5 cms. The width of the blade, 4cms from the point, exceeded the width of the right hand wound. The wound on the right was more akin to a pocket knife, or perhaps a flick-knife.
I shall look at the arguments advanced by the defence as to why the knife would not be compatible in a moment, but before that there is a simple logical point as to incompatibility based on measurements.
A knife would only be incompatible if the length of the wound was greater than the length of the blade of the knife, or if the width of the wound was less than the width of the blade. Exhibit 36 was therefore a priori compatible.
On this basis I would also have to concede that a pocket or flick-knife is not a priori incompatible with the main wound, unless (though we would not know) the length of it”˜s blade did not exceed 8 cms.
It should however be recalled that the width of the left side wound was also 8 cms. That is over 5 times the width of the wound on the other side of the neck. The width of the blade on Exhibit 36, 8 cms from it’s tip - and being approximately 3.5 cms wide- was over twice the width of the blade on the “pocket knife”. This fact, and the robustness of the larger weapon, particularly with regard to the observed butchering at the base of the left-sided cut, makes Exhibit 36 a far more likely candidate, in my submission, than a “pocket knife”, and that’s without taking into account Meredith’s DNA on the blade.
We can also enter into a numbers game as regards the experts (8 of them) who opined on compatibility. Massei tells us that Dr Liviero concluded “definite compatibility”, Dr Lalli and Professors Bacci and Norelli “compatibility” whilst “non- incompatibility” came from the 3 GIP experts nominated at a preliminary hearing. The latter were Professors Aprile, Cingolani and Ronchi.
As far as I am concerned “non-incompatability” is not hard to understand. It simply means compatible.
Professors Introna, Torre, and Dr Patumi, for the defence, opined that Exhibit 36 could be ruled out. Their argument was twofold. First, the length of the blade was incompatible with the depth of the wound had the knife truly been used with homicidal intent. Indeed, if it had been thrust in up to the hilt then the point would have exited on the other side of the neck. Secondly, they said that the smaller wound or the abrasions beneath the main wound, mentioned earlier, were in fact caused by the hilt of a knife striking the surface of the neck. Obviously if that were so then the main wound was not caused by Exhibit 36.
Their argument does not consider, because we do not know, what may have been the actual dynamics of the knife strike. We cannot know what was the cause of the underlying wound or the reddish area of abrasions. As to that wound it may have been the result of the knife edge being run across the surface of the skin and the abrasions may have had a different cause in the prior struggle for which there is ample evidence. Hence their argument seems very weak.
We cannot leave the topic without considering that there may have been more than two knives involved. This possibility arises from the evidence of Professor Vinci, for the defence. He considered blood stains that were on the bed sheet in Meredith’s room. These stains very much resembled the outline of a knife, or knives, laid to rest on the bed sheet.
It was Professor Vinci’s contention that the bloody outlines (a dual outline from the same knife he said) was left by a knife with a blade 11.3 cms long, or a knife with a blade 9.6 cms long with a congruent blooded section of handle 1.7 cms long (9.6 + 1.7 = 11.3), and having a blade width of 1.3 to 1.4 cms.
Taking these measurements as read they may seem incompatible with a pocket knife (such as Sollecito had a proclivity to carry) and they certainly are as regards Exhibit 36. It follows, he argued, that one has to infer the presence of a third knife in any hypothesis and if a pocket knife and Exhibit 36 are already accounted for by Knox and Sollecito then a reasonable inference is that the third knife would have to be Guede’s. Professor Vinci’s blade is not incompatible a priori with either of the two wounds.
The problem, and without going into detail on the matter, is that Professor Vinci’s contention and measurements are somewhat speculative depending on what one thinks one sees in the stains. It is rather like reading tea leaves. One could just as well superimpose Exhibit 36 over the stains and conclude that it was responsible for them.
Massei only briefly commented about the bloody outlines on the bed sheet. He opined that the blood stains were certainly “suggestive” but insufficient to establish any clear outlines from which reliable measurements could be established. Clearly then he did not accord any reliability to Professor Vinci’s measurements.
—————————————————-
We can now turn to the issue of whether Meredith’s injuries tell us anything about whether her attacker was a “lone wolf” or not.
Massei believed that Meredith’s injuries lay at the heart of the matter. It seemed inconceivable to him that she would first be stabbed twice and that she would then be strangled. The amount of blood, being very slippery, would make maintaining pressure on her throat difficult. So Meredith was forcibly restrained and throttled first. The hypothesis of a single attacker requires that he continually modify his actions, first by exercising a strong restraining pressure on her, producing significant bruising, and then for some reason switching to life threatening actions with a knife, thereby changing the very nature of the attack from that of subjugation to that of intimidation with a deadly weapon, and finally to extreme violence, striking with the knife to one side of the neck and then to the other side of the neck.
Massei described the first knife blow, landing on the right side of her neck, as being halted by the jawbone, preventing it from going any deeper than the 4 cms penetration. The court considered that this was an action to force Meredith to submit to actions against her will. The same hypothesis could also, of course, in view of the injuries to the jaw, apply as to the lack of penetration with Exhibit 36 on the other side
What surprised Massei about Meredith’s wounds was that in spite of all the changes in approach during the attack she somehow remained in the same vulnerable position, leaving her neck exposed to attack.
Massei paid particular attention to the paucity and lack of what can be regarded as defensive wounds on her hands by comparison with the number, distribution and diversity of the impressive wounds to her face and neck. He found this disproportion to be significant, particularly with regard to what was known about Meredith’s physicality and personality.
Meredith was slim and strong, possessing a physicality that would have allowed her to move around with agility. She liked sports, and practiced boxing and karate. In fact she had a medium belt in karate. She would, had she been able to, have fought with all her strength. How then would a single attacker have been able to change hands with a knife to strike to both sides of her neck, let alone switch from one knife to another? He would have had to release his grip on the victim to do that, unless she had wriggled free and changed position, in which case he would have to subdue her all over again, but this time, if not before, she would be ready.
Since the attack was also sexual in nature, at least initially, how could a single attacker have removed the clothes she was wearing (a sweater, jeans, knickers and shoes) and inflicted the sexual violence revealed by the vaginal swab, without, again releasing his grip? It might be suggested, as the defence did, that Meredith was already undressed when the attack began, but for this to be the case one of three possible alternative hypotheses has to be accepted.
The first is that Guede was already in the flat, uninvited, and un-noticed by Meredith, which can only mean that the break -in was genuine but un-noticed by her. The second is that Guede was there by invitation and that their relationship had proceeded by agreement to the contemplation of sexual intercourse when Meredith suddenly changed her mind, unleashing a violent reaction from Guede. The third is that, having been invited in Meredith then thought that he had left, although he had not.
Having looked at the staging we can surely rule out the first hypothesis. As to the second, it does not fit with what is known about Meredith’s personality and the relationship she had been developing with Giacomo. As to the third it is difficult to imagine that in a small flat Meredith would not have checked before securing the front door and preparing for bed.
Massei found it was highly unlikely that one person could have caused all the resulting bruises and wounds by doing the above, including cutting off and bending the hooks on the bra clasp. The actions on the bra clasp alone would necessitate someone standing behind her and using a knife to cut the straps, requiring the attention of both hands from her attacker, during which time Meredith would have had the opportunity to apply some self-defence. It has to be conceded though that this could have happened when she was concussed, though there is no persuasive physical evidence of a concussive blow, or during or after she had been mortally wounded.
Massei concluded that there was little evidence of defensive manoeuvers on Meredith’s part, which to him meant that several attackers were present, each with a distribution of tasks and roles: either holding her and preventing her from making any significant defensive reaction, or actually performing the violent actions. He concluded that the rest of the body of evidence, both circumstantial and forensic, came in full support of such a scenario. He concluded that two separate knives had been used and that one was from Sollecito”˜s bedsit.
Although, at the trial, the defence had attempted to explain a scenario whereby a single attacker might have been responsible for the injuries, that there had been multiple attackers was not a scenario with which any court, other than the first appeal court presided over by Hellmann, demurred.