Friday, May 25, 2018

Telling Non-Development For Knox Re The European Court Of Human Rights In Strasbourg

Posted by Our Main Posters

1. New Non-Development

This is about Knox’s still unpublished “complaint” to the ECHR of 22 November 2013.

Knox apparently tried to claim to that court that Italy had violated one or several of her human rights.  As all legal power in Italy has moved to those Knox demonized, and as she has zero shot at a damages award, this is the one prospect Knox apologists still crow about.

This past Tuesday, under Chimera’s Burleigh post, Ergon posted this deflating message from the ECHR Press Unit (our emphasis added).

Dear Sir,
Thank you for your message and please find here the information we can provide in response.
1. Both parties’ observations have been received by the Court’s Registry.
2. No decision as to the admissibility of the application has been taken yet.
We hope this helps.
With best wishes,
ECHR ““ Press Unit

For ease of linking-to and continuity, we have moved the telling comments by James Raper (2), KrissyG and Peter Quennell that followed Ergon in the Burleigh thread to Part 5 of this new post.

2. Note The Big Media Fail

Ergon found out what all of the media could have found out via a single email. Sorry, BBC, but that is flat-out wrong. No excuse, though you are far from alone in this.

Knox apologists still repost Dalla Vedova’s wrong claim that the ECHR has already “accepted” Knox’s case. It has not.

Some even argue (as Avrom Brendzel tries to, with numerous errors of fact) that Knox’s felony conviction for life for framing Patrick will certainly be annulled. But it seems that was not even the subject of a Knox request (see Part 5 below for reasons why).

3. What’s Most Damaging To Knox?

Most damaging if the court does take the case would seem to be their figuring this out.  They could readily get there by analyzing the same documents we used for the Interrogation Hoax series (currently 21 posts) which are all now in English on the Case Wiki.

This is Italy’s trump card. ALL courts agreed that, charged and warned in front of witnesses that she should say no more without a lawyer, and under NO pressure, Knox pressed on and again framed her boss. 

4. Prior Posts Of Relevance

This post joins this group which are most of the series under the right-column link 24 ECHR Appeal Hoax.

1. Click for Post: Proof Released That In 5-6 Nov Session Knox Actually Worked On Names List

2. Click for Post:  Amanda Knox Lies Again To Get Herself Into Another European Court “But Really, Judge, Its Only PR” (Kermit)

3. Click for Post:  Note For Strasbourg Court & State Department: Knox Herself Proves She Lies About Her Interrogation (James Raper)

4. Click for Post:  Multiple Provably False Claims About “Forced Confession” Really Big Problem For Dalla Vedova & Knox (Finn MacCool)

5. Click for Post:  Knox Demonizations: Multiple Ways In Which Her Email To Judge Nencini Is Misleading (Finn MacCool)

6. Click for Post:  Supreme Court Confirms All Three Were There And Lied, RS & AK Apologists Desperate To Downplay That (Machiavelli)

7. Click for Post:  Knox’s Unsound Appeal To The European Court Of Human Rights Slapped Down By Cassation (Main Posters)

8. Click for Post:  Carlo Dalla Vedova, Is ECHR Made Aware Italian Law REQUIRES Lawyers To First File Local Complaints? (Main Posters)

9. Click for Post:  Carlo Dalla Vedova: Is ECHR Advised You Condoned Malicious Defamation By Knox Of Chief Prosecutor? (Main Posters)

10. Click for Post:  Bad News For Knox -  Buzz From Italy Is Spurious ECHR Appeal Will Probably Fail (Main Posters)

5. Comments Imported From Previous Thread

#1. By James Raper

Four and a half years down the line and still no decision as to the admissibility of Knox’s ECHR application.

Dalla Vedova argued two rather contradictory positions at the final appeal.

“How can we tolerate in Italy that trials can go on forever?” he asked the Court. Another was that he requested an adjournment of the appeal pending a decision from the European Court of Human Rights on his client’s complaint of a violation of her basic human rights ensured by the European Convention on Human Rights.

Had the court acceded to the request for an adjournment, we would still be waiting.

Was Bongiorno keeping the Knox camp in the dark as to the fix, or using him for cover?

Posted by James Raper on 05/24/18 at 04:51 AM | #

#2. By KrissyG

Delaying a trial is an old trick.  We saw that with Henri Van Breda: it took a year for police to even charge him (for the murder of his mother, father and brother with an axe) and he has remained free for another two years as the trial dragged on, adjourning for medical reports, etc.,etc.

The Knox ECHR hasn’t even reached the admissible stage.

(a) she applied too early.  You are not supposed apply until all channels are closed.

(b) she didn’t complain about supposed violations and torture at the time.

Her great hope is in Boninsegna’s MR.  However, that doesn’t really deal with her claims, but is in fact to do with police claims.  It was them who brought the charges, which was mandatory, given the press were told and still are being told of illegal “˜53 hour interrogations’ and being swatted across the back of the head.  But she didn’t report it so there is no third party verification it ever happened.

Boninsegna criticised the police for being “˜maternal’ and for hugging her in sympathy with her sorry plight.

AIUI the ECHR decision as to the admissibility of a case can coincide with their coming to a verdict at the same time.  However, as this is quite complex, it would likely be listed for another date, if admissible.

If it fails the admissibility test (whether it qualifies for their jurisdiction) then that will be the end of the matter.

Posted by KrissyG on 05/24/18 at 05:56 AM | #

#3. By Peter Quennell

Hi Ergon, James R and Krissy G:

Yes, strong signs of passive aggression against Knox and especially her PR (1) seemingly by the ECHR, (2) pretty well definitely (long-term) by her own lawyers, and seemingly even (3) by Boninsegna himself (see below for who he is) and (4) by the Supreme Court’s Marasca & Bruno, who bluntly labeled this ECHR appeal dead on arrival right there in their report.

On (1) the ECHR is very tired of the enormous flow of frivolous complaints from Italy at the appeal stages designed to lean on future courts. They back-burner almost all complaints from Italy.

On (2) here is the defense lawyers’ problem. None of them have really profited from this case, as the outcome was unpopular and the bending of three courts pretty obvious. In their books RS and AK hardly did them any favors. Bongiorno has pretty well given up law for politics. Guede’s lawyers walked away from him; Viterbo Prison legal help and a Rome group took over. Mignini was able to take a tremendous swipe against Maori in a complaint against him.

In 2009 they had publicly complained against the Seattle PR; back in 2008 they had publicly complained about Knox herself incessantly lying - possibly sparked by the fact that (as Chimera has long shown) she cannot lie CONSISTENTLY. (Passive aggression even by Knox against Knox? Our psychologists think so.)

So it has long leaked out of their chambers that this ECHR appeal is really a big fat nothing.  There could be no mention of the claim of hitting and not only because of the reason KrissyG mentions (no paper trail at the time) but also because:

(a) They had made those public complaints about Knox and the PR back in 2008 and 2009.

(b) If they had ever taken Knox’s claims seriously, under law they would be required to report them; if not done, both Knox herself and Italian prosecutors could charge them and at minimum their law licenses would be history.

(3) On Florence Judge Boningsegna. We know the ECHR asked for information on his ruling so this is the context. It’s complicated.

(a) This was a mandatory investigation and trial of allegations against the police Knox made on the stand in 2009 - KrissyG is right, only the police, Knox tried to include Mignini but had to concede he was not present.

(b) Knox would have lost in a heartbeat if the trial was held in Perugia. Knox lawyers shopped judges till they found one foolish enough to order that the trial should be held in Florence and Mignini (for no obvious reason) should be attached to it.

(c) Boninsegna is known as a mafia judge; he is actually in the Florence courts for that reason, having been moved from Calabria where he had way too many mafia chums.

(d) Sign of a leaned-on Italian judge, Boninsegna seemingly quite deliberately wrote nonsense. The transcripts of all Knox’s pre-arrest questionings we finally finished posting recently strongly dont support him.

(e) So as KrissyG noted, in the Boningsegna report the police (actually the Republic of Italy) lost because the police were accused of being too NICE to Knox! How exactly do they take THAT with a straight face through the appeal stages to the Supreme Court?! And how does that ruling help Knox with the ECHR?

(4) On Marasca & Bruno. Another sign of leaned-on judges (apart from their placing RS & AK at the scene of the crime). Marasca & Bruno essentially told the ECHR to piss off as the case had evolved beyond their mandate.

The defenses (not sure if Marasca & Bruno would give them a win) had tried to delay the final outcome until after the ECHR ruling. Bizarrely, this would have created a Catch-22 situation as the ECHR cannot rule until all legal processes are done with, thus placing RS & AK in legal limbo. The defense lawyers would have known that. More passive-aggression?

So there you have it. Passive aggression against Knox, in Perugia, Florence, Rome, and seemingly Strasbourg. Nice going.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/24/18 at 08:38 AM | #

#4.  By James Raper

On the 25th November 2013, just as the Prosecution were preparing to present their closing argument to the Court of Appeal in Florence, Knox presented the media with the following announcement -

“Today my lawyers filed an appeal of my slander [sic] conviction with the European Court of Human Rights.” (ECHR)

The appeal was in fact lodged on the 22nd November.

It was not, of course, a slander conviction but something far more serious. The Calunnia conviction was due to the fact that, and before officials charged with an investigation and bringing to justice those who had been responsible for Meredith’s murder, Knox had fabricated evidence against Lumumba knowing him to be innocent. She had blamed Lumumba for the murder, effectively as a witness present at the time.

She appealed her conviction to the Hellmann court and it dismissed the appeal and increased her sentence.

She appealed the conviction again, this time to the Supreme Court, and the 1st Chambers dismissed her appeal at the same time as annulling the Hellmann outcome. Her conviction for calunnia was therefore definitive.

The 5th Chambers nailed that conviction down even further, not only in a passage effectively telling the ECHR to piss off but by also by it’s finding that Knox was indeed present at the time of the murder. That disposes of any argument that Knox could not have known that Lumumba was innocent.

So what are we left with? The ECHR does not have the power to quash her calunnia conviction and the Italians are not going to re-open it. It is extremely unlikely that the ECHR would even suggest this.

So what was the point of the application? Given the timing of the application I have no doubt that it was an extra-judicial PR strategy to undermine, in the event of the Florence court dismissing her appeal against her murder conviction, any attempt to have her extradited back to Italy, particularly were there to be any ruling by the ECHR that her human rights had been abused.

In the event of any such ruling she might get some compensation (so as to be compliant with the Convention) but given what happened to Sollecito’s application for compensation for wrongful imprisonment, I can’t see it as being anything other than nominal, and there is still the not insignificant matter of her not having paid, as ordered, the compensation due to Lumumba.

On the matter of Knox’s acquittal on the long-standing charge of defamation concerning her allegation of mistreatment by police officers, there was not in fact any finding of fact as to mistreatment by Boninsenga. He acquitted her on the grounds, he said, that the correct procedure had not been used at the police station; that she was already a suspect and the law required her to have a lawyer present. Had that happened then no allegation of mistreatment during her questioning would have surfaced anyway. She was therefore immune from prosecution concerning defamation of the police officers.

Knox, of course, repeated the same allegations (being cuffed a couple of times) during her trial testimony, but she wasn’t on oath and the reason for that is that defendants can be expected to lie to save themselves. They are immune from prosecution there as well.

One might ask whether the Boninsenga rationale would also apply to the calunnia conviction as well. An interesting point but clearly, under Italian law, the answer is no, and I don’t think any sane legal system would countenance that.

I can’t see that the Boninsenga judgement, which is contentious anyway (Knox repeated her allegations of mistreatment and regarding Lumumba, in her Memorial, written when not being questioned), will help at the ECHR.

Posted by James Raper on 05/24/18 at 06:44 PM | #

Posted by Our Main Posters on 05/25/18 at 03:13 AM in



It is conceivable that not a single ECHR judge has yet set eyes on Knox’s complaint. This is clearly still at the level of the backroom staff, getting relevant info to make the file complete.

The ECHR is not a “super-court”. It has no legal sway over Italy. It can issue advisories, no more. Member nations then decide what to do.

The ECHR can apply no penalty if they simply shrug. As Cassation pre-emptively already has done. ECHR judges know they tread a fine line. They need a high acceptance rate.

The documentation for 2-5 November comes down solidly on the Questura side. No sign Knox was already a suspect, and there is this telling evidence against.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/25/18 at 06:34 AM | #


Detect a pattern here?! (Clue: not one headline is accurate.)

1. Click for Post:  “Amanda Knox Can Sue Italy Over Murder Trial Misconduct, Euro Court Says (Clyde Hughes)

2. Click for Post:  “Amanda Knox’s case against Italian police that she was mistreated during questioning is accepted by Europe’s Court of Human Rights” (Simon Tomlinson)

3. Click for Post:  “European Court of Human Rights grants Amanda Knox appeal over claim police ‘slapped her in custody’ ” (Nick Squires)

4. Click for Post:  “Amanda Knox’s case against Italian police that she was mistreated is accepted ” (Jasmine Wright)

5. Click for Post:  “European court accepts Amanda Knox’s case against Italian police” (Kipp Robertson)

6. Click for Post:  “Amanda Knox granted right to sue Italy for unfair trial” (Staff Writers)

7. Click for Post:  “Amanda Knox Can Sue Italy Over Murder Trial Misconduct, Euro Court Says” (Clyde Hughes)

8. Click for Post:  “Amanda Knox granted appeal over ‘slapping’ case against Italian police” (Clyde Hughes)

9. Click for Post:  “Strasbourg accuses Italy over Knox trial” (ANSA Staff Writers)

10. Click for Post:  “Amanda Knox allowed to launch legal action against Italy” (Staff Writers)

Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/25/18 at 02:25 PM | #


Copy of a tweet correcting the main hoaxer on this issue among the Knox apologists. (He identifies himself widely on the net as a scientist, not a lawyer.)

Avrom Brendzel clearly clueless on FACTS of Knox witness sessions 2-5 Nov 2007.



Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/26/18 at 03:03 PM | #


Knox is further disadvantaged by the fact that perps in Italy have (uniquely) the automatic right to appeals at two levels.

HUGE gaming of the justice system goes on at those two levels. We have seen a ton of proof of this. Many among the public and in parliament (and in prosecutors’ offices and the courts) would like to wind that right back a bit. Our lawyer Cardiol has often touched on the need for this.

But there are just enough corrupt politicians in Italy (despite being small fry by US standards) that legal reforms get stuck in parliament or are nodded through without a budget or execution mechanism.

A major component of that gaming is the tidal wave of appeals to the ECHR actually designed to lean on future appeals courts, or as in our case the gullible US and UK media (see comment #6 for how US & UK media were “used”).

Knox’s appeal is thus like a fly on an elephant.

The ECHR has 47 members and each member supplies a single judge. Italy could well walk away from the ECHR as this gaming is such a nuisance.

But it never seems to have threatened this. In contrast consider where the UK seems to be headed right now - considering reducing human rights, and thus not likely to stay in the ECHR.

Pity. The court’s concept is excellent. If thousands of perps like Knox were not gaming it, there is so much good work it should be doing.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/26/18 at 05:41 PM | #


Very interesting video.  Short and to the point.  By my count, she is inadmissible on at least 4 grounds:

(1) No domestic remedies sought, even though it was mandatory

(2) No significant disadvantage shown.  AK would have been nailed anyway

(3) Needs to be brought within 6 months of final decision, not while the appeals were still ongoing.

(4) No victim status, though AK would always disagree on this point.

Posted by Chimera on 05/28/18 at 10:25 AM | #

Hi. I’m back in the land of the living after weeks of vicious flu, a major family loss and computer problems that blocked all my fave websites. Meanwhile it’s good to see TJMK has not missed a beat since mid-March 2018—but has stayed laser focused with more info than ever.

I’m way behind but a quick perusal shows posts in depth about the Innocence Project and its myopic view of Knox due to Flom, Scheck, and the Knox-loving Greg Hampikian; a look into Nina Burleigh’s book, and word that Knox has become shriller than ever on Youtube.

The current post reveals that Knox’s greedy grasping hand to get ECHR to validate her petty complaints will fail. Her complaints are insignificant.

Recently, David Marriott has died (may he rest in peace). His efforts to whitewash Knox merely bought her some time. The PR fantasy boomeranged and now that her David protector is gone, the PR juggernaut may backfire on her as Knox daily grows more and more unlike the airbrushed portraits Daddy and Marriott presented to the public. 

I now have AT&T internet and am able to access TJMK again since troubles of mid-March. Good stuff to catch up on, and I hope everyone had a good Memorial Day.

Posted by Hopeful on 05/29/18 at 05:26 PM | #

Hi Hopeful! Glad the problems are no more. Yeah we are on our endgame now. Glad you are back to help.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/30/18 at 02:03 AM | #

New developments in Italian politics of possible relevance to our case. Five Star may favor legal reforms; the other group? Not so sure.

The President of the Republic did not see the last election as a vote to pull away from the EU though both lead parties reflect that popular mood.

The EU was meant to be pro-growth but structurally it has ended up all wrong. I feel bad for all concerned.

In the US the single currency works at the cost of huge transfers out of high-earning states to those states where the dollar is in effect too high.

Tonight I get to hear Bill Clinton talk. When in the UN I was dragged into the White House (my only time) to explain some development point to him.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/30/18 at 05:00 AM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry The Single-Attacker/Lone-Wolf Hoax: How It Is Annihilated By The Forensic Evidence

Or to previous entry Knox Sings Pro-IRA Song In Bizarre Irish TV Chatshow Appearance