Knox Appeal: Judgment Day (Part 2)

On the 16th anniversary of the O.J. Simpson acquittal, Amanda Knox stood in the courtroom waiting for her fate to be read. The verdict was read and just like O.J., Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were acquitted of all charges except the defamation charges for accusing Patrick Lumumba of being the murderer (released on time served)—and somewhere, the ghost of Johnnie Cochran was smiling (If a portion of the DNA doesn’t fit, you must acquit)! Immediately, some of those who had predicted that Knox was guilty had changed their tune. Many celebrated; others mourned and geared—as this was clearly a win for injustice and only for injustice.

Did the Italian court cower to political or media pressure? How could they have discounted the mountain of evidence—including other DNA evidence against Knox—based on two pieces of DNA evidence that were contested in the appeal? One piece of evidence (the knife) and the other (the bra clasp) were the only two pieces of physical evidence being contested by the defense in the appeal. Were those—and of course, Anthony Curatolo’s testimony—the only evidence that originally convicted Knox and Sollecito, as the media would have you believe? Of course not. The media’s misinformation is well documented and rampant on this case…HERE is just a portion.


So, how did they discount the most convincing evidence of all—the 5 mixed DNA/blood spots of Knox and Kercher (Read Analysis 1 HERE & analysis 2 HERE)? Well, we will only know in 90 days, when Judge Hellmann’s motivation report is published. This decision was certainly historic, and proves that money, a good PR campaign, and media spin can get you anything. The lies of Knox and Sollecito—which I and many others have detailed so often—the mountain of evidence against the two, judge Massei’s 427 page report detailing their guilt (along with judge Micheli’s report detailing their guilt) has all been discounted by these two judges and six jurors.

Now Know has returned to the states and will undoubtedly benefit substantially from the shortcomings of the Italian court system. The saving grace for the two defendants was certainly the fact that Sollecito never took the stand, as he would have clearly imploded under the weight of his multiple lies. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist or even a forensic specialist to know that people who lie several times have something to hide. This is of course aside from the physical and circumstantial evidence against them as well.


Public figure, Nancy Grace, is finally speaking out on this case—saying that there is NO innocent explanation for Knox’s second written confession placing her at the house (with Patrick Lumumba) and including observations that only someone who really was there could have known. When asked about the verdict, Grace said:

“I was very disturbed, because I think it is a huge miscarriage of justice,” Grace said. “I believe that while Amanda Knox did not wield the knife herself, I think that she was there, with her boyfriend, and that he did the deed, and that she egged him on. That’s what I think happened.”

In Knox’s final statement Monday, she told the court that she was not present the night Kercher was brutally murdered in their shared apartment. Grace said she did not think Knox is telling the truth. “I believe her original statement to the police - that she was there in the home when her roommate was murdered was true,” Grace told Access Hollywood. Knox should pray that Nancy Grace does not get on her case the way she still is on Casey Anthony’s, because she could use the facts of the case to turn the American public against her, and that would be a different type of jail sentence for Knox.

Even CNN, who have been outspoken, staunch supporters of Knox, posted an article after the verdict asking: “Is she a two-faced she-devil, angelic and compassionate to some but Satanic and Lucifer-like to others?” It seems as though after the verdict has been read, the story of her innocence has slipped a bit, and the tide is slowly turning towards: What really happened and is Knox actually innocent? In other words, many media sources are now jumping on the controversial band wagon, as they do so often, because they know it draws readers.

No American media outlets wanted to hear anything from sources believing in Knox’s guilt before Monday’s verdict, because that wasn’t “news.” This will all change soon, and the opposing views (or controversial views) will be welcome soon, if not already (ala Nancy Grace). The fact that Nancy's comments have been so widely reported and popular now, but were ignored months ago when she basically said the same thing on "The View" and her own program before speaks volumes for "what's hot" in media at the moment. Google reveals that her recent comments are on about 38,000 Sites.


But there is so much more to this story than just Knox's spontaneous statement. For anyone ignorant to the facts and true evidence of this case looking for clarification, you would be wise to read the Massei report (read entire report HERE and summary HERE) or visit www.truejustice.org, or of course you can read Study Abroad Murder, which details all 50 days of the original trial and analyzes all the evidence in detail.

Justice is not always done in the courtroom. Even though the statue of Lady Justice wears a blindfold, humans look at the faces. Yet, this is the system we have, whether in Italy or in the U.S., we must deal with the mistakes, particularly the high profile cases, which come under much more scrutiny, but many times faulter to public and political pressures—the O.J. Simpsons, Casey Anthonys, and now the Amanda Knoxs of the trial world.


Surely the prosecution will appeal to the Supreme Court of Cassation, but they can only retry the case if something was done incorrect or wrong, which may be the case, as much of the evidence of the first trial was discounted without even being reexamined. The 90 day motivation report by Judge Hellmann will be very interesting to read and highly anticipated. This story is far from over!

Knox Appeal: Judgment Day (Part 1)

PART 2

The day has finally arrived: the day that will decide the fate of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. The last session has already begun and is currently underway. Luciano Ghirga started off the proceedings today with his closing argument rebuttal. Ghirga spoke firmly to the court, declaring Knox’s innocence. Sollecito took the floor after Ghirga. He started off by saying that he would “…never hurt anybody.” Raffaele pleaded to the court to release him, telling mostly of the horror he has endured over the last few years.

“I’ve never met Rudy Guede before the trial,” he adamantly protested. Although he spoke freely today, he refused to testify and face cross-examination in this appeal or the original trial. Sollecito did not speak of the circumstances surrounding the murder or his involvement or lack thereof. He didn't spend any time talking about the details of his "innocence;" he only seemed to play the sympathy card and how horrible the last few years have been for him while in prison. He went as far back as meeting Knox, but then he skipped the details of where he was during the murder and went right to the police interrogation in his speech, which I believe is very telling on his part.

Moreover, he actually said:

“No one ever asked me to testify and I don’t know why. But I was ready to talk in front of you, in front of the court to explain any doubt, but nobody—not in this process [the appeal] or the previous one [the original trial] has asked my examination. So I am here, in a way, to say freely the facts, what I’ve gone through and who I am.”

This is a very strange statement to say the least, as he surely knows and was advised that he could take the stand, but refused. Wearing a “free Amanda & Raffaele” bracelet, Sollecito used symbolic, ritualistic theatrics, saying that he has never taking off the bracelet since he received it sometime ago. He said, “Now is the time to take it off,” and he did so as he closed out his plea for freedom. He also appeared very unemotional, and he even smirked once when he began talking about the “free Amanda & Raffaele” bracelet, as if he was making a profound statement or a bad joke.


Amanda Knox addressed the court immediately after Sollecito, at 4:30am Eastern Time in the United States. She stepped to the mic with no written speech; perhaps deciding to speak off-the-cuff; perhaps committing an earlier speech to memory. Speaking in fluent Italian, Knox addressed the court in a shaky voice, starting off by explaining that she was nervous. As she got rolling, her hand gestures became very animated. “I am not what they say I am: perversion, violence. I have not done the things they say I’ve done; I wasn’t there that night!” Amanda reiterated many of the things that she has said over the years. She said she was friends with Meredith; she wasn’t at the cottage during the night of the murder; she is innocent, etc.

“I want to go back home, I want to go back to my life. I am innocent; Raffaele is innocent; and we deserve to be free.”

Judge Hellman then warned the audience. “This is not a football game. There is no room for gossiping. We have to remember that a beautiful girl has died a horrible death and that the lives of two young people are in play. So when I am reading the verdict I want respect and silence.” Judge Hellman announced that he does not expect to return back with a verdict before 8pm local Perugia time (2pm eastern time U.S.). And with that, the judge informed that deliberation would start at that time: 4:41am.


There are four possible scenarios in regard to today’s outcome. It will take a majority vote of the six jurors and two judges to throw out the conviction. If they are evenly split, Knox and Sollecito will be free. The second is that the court could decide to uphold the conviction and reduce their sentences. Thirdly, the court could uphold the conviction and honor the prosecution’s request to increase Knox’s sentence to life in prison. Lastly, and in my opinion: the most likely; the court could choose to uphold Knox's original conviction and order her to serve the remaining 22 years of her sentence in Italy. Regardless of the outcome, either side could appeal the verdict to Italy's Supreme Court.

A press conference was then set up outside the courtroom, where the streets were filled with journalists and spectators. Sollecito’s lawyer, Giulia Bongiorno addressed the audience, continuing her declarations of innocence. No one knows what time that the verdict will be read. Even Bongiorno told the media that it is impossible to predict how long that the deliberation will be.

Knox and Sollecito were whisked away in a police van. They were brought back to prison to await the verdict. They will be notified when a decision is reached and brought back to the court to hear the reading.

PART 2

Knox Appeal: The Prosecution Strikes Back

Amanda Knox entered the courtroom today for the second day in a row. This time she was wearing olive green satin blouse and black slacks, and gave a smile to her father, stepfather, and best friend as she was led to her seat. Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni (above) took the stand again today to dispute the DNA results given by the two court appointed experts, Professors Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti.

Yesterday Dr. Stefanoni was armed with 119 PowerPoint slides to explain her analysis. During her presentation some had a hard time staying awake in the dimly-lit, hot courtroom; even Knox seemed to nod-off a bit. As Dr. Stefanoni took the stand, Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellmann joked about it saying, “I’m glad to see you have no slides,” he said with a wry smile. Still, Dr. Stefanoni did, however, use more slides. Under questioning by prosecutor Manuela Comodi, Dr. Stefanoni defended the methods and equipment used in the investigation.


Dr. Stefanoni told the court that the machine used for the DNA examination was clean, and she rejected suggestions that the clasp had been contaminated. Dr. Stefanoni said the knife was tested in a lab six days after investigators had analyzed a trace of Kercher’s DNA, and she insisted that contamination did not occur.

Dr. Stefanoni also insisted that during period of 46 days after the killing that it took to collect the bra clasp, “nothing from outside the victim’s room was brought inside.” She insisted that out of 133 specimens analyzed in the house of the murder—including 89 in Kercher’s room—Sollecito’s genetic profile was only found in a cigarette butt in an ashtray, mixed with Knox’s. “If Sollecito’s DNA had somehow traveled from the butt to the clasp, then there would be Knox’s DNA as well on the clasp,” she said. This is something that I have posited and discussed long ago (SEE HERE for further explanation).

Also called to the stand by the prosecution was Giuseppe Novelli, an expert on human genetics at Rome’s Tor Vergata University. Novelli said he reviewed the prosecution’s procedures and he “absolutely excludes” contamination on the knife and bra clasp. Then he made a very valid point of common sense. “If the origin and vehicle of contamination is not proved, this is just a hypothetical theory,” Novelli said, adding that experts did not state precisely how the two items may have been contaminated with DNA.

The prosecution also called Francesca Torricelli, the director of a Genetical Diagnostic Center at the University of Florence. She argued that the DNA evidence was credible, and she had looked at the data and came to the same conclusions as Dr. Stefanoni. Professor Torricelli assured the court that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade of the double DNA knife.


Vecchiotti (above w/ Conti) testified in an earlier hearing that the knife tested negative for blood and the amount of DNA said to be Kercher’s was so low that it could not be examined again with any conclusions. But Torricelli refuted this claim, saying that she had witnessed the work of Vecchiotti and Conti, and that the machinery they used during their investigation could check extremely low quantities of DNA. Meanwhile, Novelli told the court that for him, and others, it was not a question of “quantity of DNA, but rather quality” to carry out a successful examination.

Outside the courtroom, prosecutor Comodi said she considered that Stefanoni and Novelli had clearly proven the good work they had done.

Knox Appeal: Guede & Two Other Inmates Provide Shocking Testimony

Today’s courtroom proceedings lived up to the hype, and once again provided a shocking new twist. Three more inmates took the stand today—one of them was Ivory Coast drifter, Rudy Guede, who has been convicted along with Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Guede was called as a witness to deny the story of convict, Mario Alessi, who told the last hearing that Guede had told him that Knox and Sollecito were not involved. Guede entered the courtroom in handcuffs and sat 15ft. away from Knox and Sollecito.


Guede denied that he had said Knox and her former boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito were not involved in the killing, and he read aloud the letter that he had written back in 2010. In the letter, Guede also denied the claims of Alessi, writing that (convicted child killer) Alessi’s claims were “the ravings of a sick and twisted mind, his ravings are the dreamed-up, untrue declarations of a monster.” Guede ended the letter by writing that the murder was “…a horrible homicide of a splendid young girl, Meredith Kercher, by Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.”

Defense lawyers said they did not know of the existence of the letter from the spring of 2010 before it was read in court today. This is quite shocking because it was something that I and TJMK had reported last week (TJMK has also posted this letter about a year ago as well). How could such high-profile defense teams not have known of this evidence?

Under cross-examination, Guede said he had written what he always believed. “The truth is what I wrote in that letter,” Guede said, but it “is not up to me to say who the killer was.”


Throughout Guede’s testimony today he was eyeballed by Knox and Sollecito. At one point Knox tried to interrupt his testimony and make a statement; but Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellman said she would have to wait until Guede was done and had left the courtroom. Judge Hellman denied Knox the right to confront Guede directly. He said that she would have to wait until Guede was done and had left the courtroom.

After Guede had been escorted out of the courtroom, Knox stood up and made a spontaneous statement in Italian. “I am shocked and anguished by these declarations....he knows we weren’t there,” she told the court. “He knows we had nothing to do with it,” Knox said. “The only time that Rudy Guede, Raffaele Sollecito and I were in one room together was in a court room...He knows what the truth is. I don’t know what happened that night,” she added.

Sollecito stood next and addressed the court. “I've never seen him, don't know him...don’t know how he indicates me with Amanda Knox,” asserted Sollecito. He said that he and Knox have been fighting “these shadows” for four years. “[Guede] has destroyed our lives," Sollecito said and asked, “What position am I meant to defend if this boy doesn't answer (questions)?”


Each hearing thus far has had moments of the bizarre and surreal. Today, this would be provided by the testimony of two other Inmates—Alexander Illicet and Cosimo Zaccari—called as witnesses for the prosecution. Both inmates claimed that, while in prison, they overheard other inmates speaking of a plot among to testify in exchange for money and benefits; those other inmates, they claim, were the ones who came forward to testify at the last hearing. The person they heard was arranging things, they said, was Sollecito’s attorney, Giulia Bongiorno, who heads up Italy's parliamentary justice committee.

Inmate Alexander Illicet from Serbia Montenegro said Luciano Aviello had agreed to pin the murder on his brother “in exchange for 158,000 Euros—money Aviello desperately needed to pay for a sex change he had been wanting.”

Inmate Cosimo Zaccari—who is in jail for fraud, libel, criminal conspiracy and receiving stolen goods—said Aviello had confided that he was “contacted to create confusion in the trial.” Zaccari testified that Aviello told him he had been offered €70,000 ($62,400) by Giulia Bongiorno.

When asked about these accusations by reporters after the session, Bongiorno adamantly denied them, vowing to take legal action against her accusers. Kercher family lawyer, Francesco Maresca, called the statements of the two inmates, “extremely credible.” Bongiorno responded by saying, “We are beyond the realms of the reasonable,” adding, “Not even the prosecutors appear to believe this story and I will be reporting this libel.”

On June 30, the forensic experts will submit a report to the court detailing their examination, and they will testify to these findings at the next hearing, which is scheduled for July 25. Closing arguments should begin in early September, with a verdict expected in October.

Knox Appeal: Tears & Twists

As expected, The two court-appointed experts—Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti—from La Sapienza University officially stated that they could not retest the contested DNA evidence and are now assessing the reliability of the tests that were originally conducted (as has been previously predicted—nothing new). Today, during the seventh hearing (which laster about two hours), the two experts asked the court for a six week extension to examine DNA evidence on the knife and bra clasp and their request was granted. Vecchiotti and Conti will finish their report 30 June 2011 and describe their findings to the court at a 25 July 2011 hearing.

Dressed in a beige satin top and black trousers, a teary-eyed and emotional Amanda Knox briefly addressed the appeals court in Perugia today. “I don’t want to spend my whole life in prison as an innocent,” she asserted during her 90-second statement.

Another important decision made today was the decision to allow five new defense witnesses, all of whom are inmates in Italian prisons who claim to have information clearing Knox and Sollecito. Which, if any, are we to believe? The new witnesses, as have been well documented for months now, include convicted child murderer, Mario Alessi—along with newly documented, three witnesses called to back up Alessi's claim—as well as jailed mobster, Luciano Aviello .

And, as if there wasn't enough drama in this case already; a new surprising and bizarre twist has now emerged! Today, the court discussed a three-page handwritten document dated 6 May 2011, that was sent to the court and to Knox's defense team by (oh yes, it’s true!) another inmate, Tommaso Pace.

In this latest version, Pace sent a written statement to the court claiming that a drug dealer had paid €100,000 to have Meredith Kercher murdered over an unpaid debt. In his letter Pace named the man he said had ordered the murder, paying two brothers to carry it out, and said that the Marietti knife (alleged murder weapon) was not the weapon used to kill Miss Kercher. Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellman ruled that he would delay any decision on whether or not to admit Pace as a witness but said that the first prisoners would be heard on 18 June 2011 (the next hearing) with special arrangements being made for them to testify.

After the witnesses and experts testify, the court will adjourn for a summer break and pick up again in September, at which time the prosecution and defense lawyers will give their closing arguments. A verdict by the appeals court is expected after the summer, but don’t hold your breath.