Amanda Knox Now A Reporter for Her Local Newspaper

According to several sources, Amanda Knox has found a job as a writer for the Westside Weekly newspaper in her hometown of Seattle. Westside Weekly publisher, Ken Robinson, confirmed to AOL News that Knox has been a freelance arts reporter at the publication since the summer. Robinson said that Knox has written about 10 articles for them, even though she has flown under the radar for several months.

Italian Horror House Gets Old, Yet, Familiar Visitor

The bizarre behavior exhibited by Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito throughout this tragic nightmare has been the source of much talk and controversy. Although it pales in comparison to other peculiar actions exhibited by the two throughout, Raffaele Sollectio added to that when he brought his new love to visit the home where he was convicted of brutally murdering Meredith Kercher.

Curse of Amanda Knox: Realtor says “Italian Horror House Hard to sell”

 

 

The Italian cottage where Amanda Knox, Raffaelle Sollecito, and Rudy Guede  have been convicted of butchering Meredith Kercher was put up for sale in December of 2013. Due to the infamous circumstances, said a Perugian agent for the Tecnocasa real estate agency, which is handling the sale, “…it has not been easy to find potential buyers who are willing to overlook the fact that a brutal murder took place there.”

Amanda Knox’s Conviction is Upheld

After a long wait the Italian Supreme Court’s verdict in the Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito case was finally revealed on Thursday: guilty. The judges in Florence overruled her previous acquittal and sentence her to 28 years and 6 months in prison, while Knox’s ex-boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, was also found guilty and given 25 years in jail. But their lawyers vowed to appeal to Italy’s highest court—a process that will take at least a year and drag out this legal saga even further. 

Repost of Raffaele Sollecito’s Interview with Kate Mansey (two days after Kercher’s murder)

The following is a repost of the interview that British Sunday Times journalist, Kate Mansey, did with Raffaele Sollecito (RS) on November 3, 2007 (Two days after Meredith Kercher was murdered), and was published November 4, 2007. Within, Sollecito claims that he and Amanda Knox were at “a party with one of his friends” on the night that Kercher was murdered. Obviously Sollecito has never used this [fake] alibi in any other tale that he has told, nor has he ever addressed this [false] claim. The following article was available on the internet for a couple of years, but has since been removed. Yet, unfortunately for Sollecito; it has not been forgotten.

 

Knox & Sollecito: A Closer Look at the Footprint Evidence

If you have listen to anything from the American media about the Amanda Knox case you would likely believe that there was no physical evidence at the crime scene linking Knox and Raffaele Sollecito to the murder of Meredith Kercher. However, with just a simple cursory review of some of the official sources it is easy to see that there is actually an abundance of physical evidence against the two convicts. Perhaps the best place to start is Judge Massei’s Report on the conviction of Knox and Kercher. Furthermore, it is imperative to read the Italian Supreme Court’s Reasoning on the case. Aside from the obvious four spots of blood found at the cottage (3 spots in the bathroom and one in Filomena’s room) mixed with Knox and Kercher’s DNA, there are also several pieces of convincing footprint evidence that was used to help convict the three accused, which includes Rudy Guede. Putting the plethora of circumstantial evidence and the other physical evidence aside and simply focusing on the footprint evidence gives us a very clear picture of exactly what occurred that fateful night.

Amanda Knox’s Final Conviction Appeal Just Around Corner

Not really breaking news or much of a shock, but just moments ago Amanda Knox’s lawyer, Luciano Ghirga, told the Florence daily La Nazione that she will not be attending her conviction appeals hearings in Italy. The appeals of Amanda Knox and Raffele Sollecito against their convictions will begin on September 30, 2013, and will take place in Florence.
 

Amanda Knox to face “Retrial”

The Supreme Court of Cassation, Italy’s highest court, met this morning in Rome at 10:00 a.m. and overturned the acquittals of both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. The ruling means that the case against Knox and Sollecito will be sent back to be reheard at an appeals court in Florence. Italy’s highest Court ruled today on questions of procedure, not on the merits of a case. This should make Knox’s upcoming interview on Diane Sawyer a bit more interesting, to say the least. An extradition will only be requested once a definitive conviction is reached. At which point, the conviction would then have to be upheld by the Court of Cassation again. We could be looking at another year or so.

Italian Supreme Court Set to Rule on Amanda Knox Verdict

The Italian Supreme Court of Cassation is scheduled to rule on the prosecution’s appeal of the Amanda Knox appeal verdict tomorrow. In 2011, Knox and her Italian boyfriend at the time Raffaele Sollecito were released from an Italian prison, on appeal, after previously being convicted of participating in the murder of her British roommate Meredith Kercher in 2007. Based on the Galati-Costigliola Report (112-page final appeal document), the prosecution’s appeal attacks the approach of the appeals court and their handling of trial from both a procedural and a reasoning standpoint. 

ABC News’ Diane Sawyer Set to Interview "Amanda Knox"

She has been out of the news for some time now; but don’t think that Amanda Knox is going anywhere anytime soon. Knox’s book, “Waiting to Be Heard: A Memoir” is scheduled to be released on Tuesday, April 30, 2013 by HarperCollins. And on that very day, Amanda Knox has an interview scheduled with ABC’s Diane Sawyer at 10:00 p.m. The interview ahead for Knox is one of great anticipation. It has been almost four years since she last spoke (at her trial, June 2009, on the witness stand) about the night Meredith Kercher was murdered, which did little to clear-up what her involvement in the murder was, if any.

Sollecito’s New Book: “Knox May Have Left My Apartment”

In his new book In Honour Bound: My Journey to Hell and Back with Amanda Knox, Amanda’s ex-boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, finally breaks his silence, and his words mirror the bizarre and contradictory behavior both he and Knox exhibited since the murder. In the book, Sollecito questions whether Knox knew more about the murder than she revealed, casting doubt on her key alibi—that on the night of the killing she was in his apartment, watching a film and making love.

In an excerpt from his book, Sollecito writes:

“My poor memory seemed a ridiculous reason to throw me into an isolation cell and accuse me of involvement in the crime…If the problem was with Amanda and the things she might or might not have done outside the house—assuming she left at all—why not focus the investigation on her?...Maybe she knew something. Maybe there was something she hadn’t told me. But please, I thought, leave me out of it.”

Sollecito goes on to insist that he “didn't believe for an instant she was capable of murder,” but admits he had doubts about the friends that Knox mixed with.

Let’s break these statements down. Let’s say your DNA is found on a murdered female victim’s severed bra next to her body and police ask you where you were during the time of the murder and you say you don’t remember who you were with because you had smoked marijuana less than 24 hours ago. Do you think that it would then be "ridiculous,” as Sollecito says, for police to hold you as a major suspect in the crime?

Moreover, Sollecito told police (less than 24 hours after the murder) that he was with Knox in his apartment the entire night. Less than two days later Sollecito did an interview to Kate Mansey of the UK's Sunday Mirror in which he claimed that he and Knox were at a party of an unnamed friend. Then, less than 4 days after the murder he changed his story again, claiming to police that Knox had left his apartment at 9:00pm and returned at 1:00am on the night of the murder, and that Amanda told him to lie. He claims that he doesn’t think that Amanda is capable of murder, even though he had only known her at that point for approximately one week.


Sollecito certainly leaves the door wide open in regard to Knox not being at his flat at the time of the murder. Then, when police confronted him and told him that a knife confiscated from his apartment was found to have Knox’s DNA on the handle and Kercher’s DNA on the tip; Sollecito said that he accidentally pricked Kercher with the knife while cooking her a fish diner in his apartment, even though it was later determined that Kercher was never in his apartment.

Police knew very well that Sollecito and Knox were inseparable from the time that they met and for a short time after the murder. That is why they focused on him as well as her. Moreover, he became even more of a focus when police intercepted a phone call that he had with his father just days after the murder, where he called police “stupid,” because they didn’t find the knife that he carried frequently on his person when they searched him. If Sollecito wanted to truly “stay out of it” he would have been honest with police right from the start, telling them that Knox had left his apartment. There is only one problem with that scenario: he was with Knox when she left his flat and he was there during Kercher’s murder. His cover-ups go far beyond an innocent bystander simply sticking up for his true love of one-week. After all, his DNA was found on Kercher’s severed bra, and the contamination theory doesn’t hold water. Sollecito’s DNA was found nowhere else in Knox’s apartment and there was no way to transfer it to Kercher’s bra.

The probability, or even plausibility, that two people could smoke a joint and completely forget where they were, who they were with, and any of the events of the night (only hours later) is comical. Moreover, even if we were to believe this truly ridiculous theory, what is to stop us from asking: if they didn’t remember anything, how can they say they didn’t do it and don’t remember?


In another section of his book, Sollecito writes that Knox did not have a key to his apartment. Therefore, he surmises that if she had slipped out to murder Kercher, he writes, she would have had to ring the doorbell for him to let her back in. This didn’t happen, he says (funny how he has such selective memory). Yet, this clearly contradicts his earlier statement that he is unsure if she had left his apartment or not. But, again, he blames his memory loss on the joint that he smoked, so he really can’t be held accountable for any of these statements…hedging his bets, if you will.

“I knew I had nothing to do with Meredith's murder, but I was furious with myself for having such a foggy memory and I knew it was in part because of the joint I'd smoked on the afternoon of November 1,” Sollecito writes. Interestingly enough, Sollecito can remember most of the events that took place during the afternoon and early evening hours, just not of any events that occurred during the time the murder was taking place.

In his new book, Sollecito also makes new allegations against Perugia police. While being held in custody in Perugia, he writes, that police stripped him naked while threatening and slapping him. Sollecito was subject to what he calls a “less than scrupulous” set of “time-honored pressure techniques,” in which, he believes, the police asked him to repeat his story multiple times in order “to catch me out in whatever inconsistencies they could find.” He also claims that police never seriously believed in his guilt, but pursued him aggressively in order to have him testify against Knox. When he wouldn’t, Sollecito claims that they set him up. Sollecito says that, while searching his apartment, officer Finzi reached into his cutlery drawer in the kitchen, “pulled out the first knife that came to hand, a large chopping knife with an eight-inch blade,” and turning to a fellow officer he asked, “Will this knife do?” to which the officer answered, “Yes, yes, It’s great.”

Sollecito paints himself as a hero in the book—much as he did in the interview he gave to UK’s Sunday Mirror (when he falsely claimed that he and Knox were at a party while the murder was taking place). Sollecito claims that his family, and his lawyers, urged him to abandon Knox and change his testimony in order to buy favor with police and save himself, but he writes, “…my determination to stick by Amanda, and by what I knew to be the truth, was one thing I knew I had exactly right. Nothing in the world—not the people I cared about most, and certainly not the threat of further punishment for a crime I did not commit—could induce me to change my mind.”


READ PART ONE

Sollecito Arrives in U.S. to Promote his New Book

Almost one year to the day that Amanda Knox and Raffalele Sollecito had been released from jail after their conviction had been overturned; they are once again back in the news. This time it is Sollecito who is stealing the headlines. Yesterday, Sollecito arrived in the United States to promote his new book, Honor Bound: My Journey to Hell and Back with Amanda Knox, which is scheduled to be released on 18 September 2012. The book is co-authored by Los Angeles-based Andrew Gumbel who spent six years in Italy and was a Reuters foreign correspondent.

In leaked excerpts of his new book, Sollecito speaks about his “indescribable joy,” after being acquitted and released in Perigua, Italy almost one year ago today. He also speaks of his love affair with Amanda Knox, including their first night together:

“I showed Amanda around and invited her to plop down on the bed while I loaded a film on my computer. Of course, by the time I settled in next to her, all thoughts of the movie were quickly forgotten and we pulled each other’s clothes off before the opening credits finished rolling. When I woke up the next morning, Amanda still had her arms wrapped tightly around me. I remember feeling safe and warm in a way I hadn't since I was a little kid.”

The Associated Press received an advanced copy of the book Teusday and say that it describes how the early days of their relationship became a nightmare: the horror of Kercher’s slaying; the misunderstandings that swept them up in the case; their tabloid portrayals as two suspects unrecognizable to themselves. In the book Sollecito also wrote about his first night in prison, saying he wavered between “great waves of indignation and a nagging sense of guilt.” He said that while he knew he was innocent, he was angry at himself for having a “foggy memory” of the night of the killing because he and Knox had smoked marijuana.

It will be interesting to see what he has to say about the night of the murders and his side of the story now, considering that he and Knox have told several conflicting and different stories about what had happened and where they were throughout this whole ordeal. UK’s The Telegraph writes briefly that in his new book, Sollecito questions whether Amanda Knox knew more about the murder than she revealed, casting doubt on her key alibi--that on the night of the murder she was in his apartment, watching a film and making love. Yet, he still appears to maintain that smoking weed caused him not to remember these crucial events.

Knox has also signed a multimillion dollar publishing deal, and her book is due out soon as well. It is unlikely that there will be any true closure or any clarity added by these two, if you are familiar with the case and with the way that they both speak so confusingly about the events; Know even falsely claiming that another man (Patrick Lumumba) was present at the murder scene. Moreover, it is not likely that anything truly enlightening will be added in this book as Sollecito’s correct legal status is that he STILL stands accused of Meredith’s murder unless and until the Italian Supreme Court signs off on the case’s outcome.


However, Gumbel told mediabistro.com, “Not only will the book leave no doubt about Raffaele’s innocence; everything Raffaele and his family have to tell, backed by previously unpublished documents in the case, suggests that his incarceration had almost nothing to do with the actual evidence but had another motivation entirely — to be revealed when the book comes out.” But then again, Gumbel may just be trying to hype it up for the sake of book sales.

Sollecito is scheduled to speak at UW's Kane Hall Room 110, Tuesday, Sept. 25, 7:00 p.m. Tickets are $5 at the door, or free with advanced purchase of his book at the University Book Store. Sollecito is scheduled to appear on the Katie Couric show on Tuesday 9/18/12. Protesters are also scheduled to meet Tuesday morning, 10:30 am to 12:00 pm, near the studio (Lincoln Center). Hopefully Katie will ask the tough questions and not fold to the Knox PR machine. Here’s a PPP from www.truejustice.org on some of the poignant questions that Sollecito is yet to answer and that Couric should be asking him (CLICK HERE). In any event, the two former lovers will become rich because of this tragedy, and Kercher’s parents will keep being reminded of what happened to their daughter.

Amanda Knox Hires Superlawyer: Looking for Book Deal

The Amanda Knox PR machine, headed by the Marriott Group, is still in full swing. This time, David Marriott announced that Knox has hired D.C. superlawyer, Robert Barnett "to represent her in discussions with various book publishers who have expressed an interest in Amanda writing a book.” Although Barnett does not call himself a literary agent, he knows his way around seven-figure deals (he’s also repped President Barack Obama, former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, Rosie O’Donnell and Barbra Streisand) — and the Knox family liked the fact that he’s a lawyer with a powerful firm behind him. Barnett is charging a hefty hourly fee instead of the standard 15 percent commission.


“The thing about Bob is not only does he know how to negotiate on behalf of his clients, but he’s very well-connected in the media world and can help create the perfect launch for the book,” said Carolyn Reidy, president of Simon & Schuster, who’s worked with Barnett for decades. Marriott did not elaborate on those additional opportunities but said few details of a potential book had been yet decided by Knox and her family, including an advance or the possibility of co-authors.

“This is a case I have followed from day one and never, not even for one moment, have I doubted the innocence of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox,” said Seattle-based literary agent, Sharlene Martin, in a recent statement.

Sharlene Martin has certainly been on the Knox bandwagon from the beginning. In a response to my query back in January 2011, Martin snippily replied to me, “It seems to me that it is YOU who is trying to cash in her [Knox’s] misfortune by writing a book for which you have NO inside knowledge or cooperation.” Apparently Martin must not have been aware of the plethora of official information made public about the case, including Judge Massei’s 427-page summation of the original trial, Judge Micheli’s extensive report, and my affiliation with www.truejustice.org. In any event, Martin appears to believe that cashing in on the case is ok as long as you believe what she does.

Moreover, it appears that Martin is inferring that she knows more about the exclusive details of the case because she has spoken to the Knox family, as she also indicated in her response. I am assuming that by this she believes that this exclusive inside knowledge makes her an expert on Knox’s innocence; even though I have yet to find any credentials that she has any qualifications to analyze evidence or the like, and she has never publicly engaged in any discussion of why she believes Knox is innocent. Surely Knox’s parents have never twisted the facts in any way?!?!


Knox certainly has many questions to answer, as she was unable to truly clarify during the trial or otherwise. So it seems as though she may be willing to roll the dice and try to fool us once again with “the real” version of events in return for some much needed funding. Curt Knox and Amanda’s mother, Edda Mellas, who are divorced, have each said they’ve drained their retirement funds, taken out second mortgages and accrued credit card debt to pay for Amanda’s defense. The Knox family also have hundreds of supporters who have dug deep into their own pockets to support her, and some of them are now asking questions like: Why hasn’t she come clean as to exactly what was her role, how did things actually unfold, and what really happened?

In another related story, ANSA News has reported that Knox prosecutor, Giuliano Mignini’s, conviction has been reversed. Those who have been proclaiming Knox’s innocence have always used Mignini’s conviction to paint the prosecutor as crooked, and they used this as another reason for Knox’s innocence. Yet, surely there will be those who believe in Knox’s innocence that Mignini is still guilty, just as there are those who believe that Knox is still guilty even though her ruling was reversed.

Amanda Knox is still facing legal action for criminal slander brought by those she claimed maltreated her at an interrogation (not at the hands of Mignini). The next hearing on this case will take place in mid-May 2012. Meanwhile, we all anxiously await Judge Hellman’s sentencing report (which will detail Knox’s reversal), due out very soon. And of course, we also expect the prosecution to file an appeal (on Knox’s reversal) to Italy’s Supreme Court of Cassation—to take place probably soon after Hellman’s motivation report is released.

Amanda Knox Dressed as Burglar for Halloween

Less than one month after her release from an Italian prison, Amanda Knox was spotted in Seattle heading to a Halloween party dressed as a cat burglar on the eve of Meredith Kercher’s murder. Meredith Kercher’s father, John, slammed the Knox saying, “I think it’s very insensitive of Amanda Knox, especially considering it is the fourth anniversary of Meredith’s death.” The reason for his comments is that Knox was originally convicted for the murder of his daughter, and the prosecution posed the theory that she and then boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito simulated a burglary at the cottage to throw police off and make it look as though someone had broken in rather than had the keys and walked casually through the front door to commit the murder.


Last Sunday Knox was seen walking arm-in-arm with new love, James Terrano, headed to Seattle’s Asian market Uwajimaja to pick up some food. Knox, 24, wore a black coat and light khaki pants, shooting a sullen look to photographers on the scene. Terrano, also 24, is studying classical guitar at the University of Washington; his brother William confirmed to Mirror News last week that they’re dating. The couple is also reportedly living together in an apartment in Seattle’s rundown Chinatown area. Knox’s new boyfriend is from a middle-class New York family. He is studying classical music, specializing in guitar, at Seattle’s University of Washington.


In his interview with Italian television (before Knox was seen with new boyfriend), Raffaele called his love with Amanda “a seed that had been planted in the earth.” He continued saying, “The problem is that someone took that seed and crushed it.” Interestingly enough, he never mentions who that someone is or who he thinks crushed it, per say, and he makes no reference there to Rudy Guede. Raffaele hinted that they could soon be reunited and that he can’t wait to “look into her eyes.” Raffaele also spoke about the chance of he and Knox rekindling their love affair: “It’s all over between us. I still have a great affection towards her but nothing else. I wish her all the happiness in the world.” Knox's slander trial in Italy has been postponed until 5 February 2013, because the judge was busy with another trial.

Spotlight on Raffaele Sollecito’s Different Versions of Events

Much of the talk about the Meredith Kercher case has been on Amanda Knox, with her boyfriend at the time, Raffaele Sollecito, getting a media pass. Aside from Knox’s voluntary spontaneous statement to police claiming that she may have been at the home during the murder and heard Meredith screaming while Patrick Lumumba was killing her; Raffaele’s versions of events on the evening of the murder are undeniably the more conspicuous of the two suspects. Perhaps that is why he decided not to testify!

Story # 1:

Just two days after the murder, Raffaele Sollecito gave an interview to Kate Mansey of the UK’s Sunday Mirror in which he explained his first version of the events.

“It was a normal night. Meredith had gone out with one of her English friends and Amanda and I went to party with one of my friends.”

Raffaele has never identified this imaginary friend or party since this interview, nor has he ever spoken of this version since.

Raffaele also claims in this interview that Knox was afraid when she noticed that spots of blood in her bathroom, and “she ran back” to his flat in fear. This is quite contrary to what Knox said on the witness stand during trial.

Amanda Knox Testimony (June 12, 2009):

“At first I thought they had come from my ears. But then when I scratched the drops a bit, I saw they were all dry, and I thought ‘That’s weird. Oh well, I'll take my shower.’”

After that, she dried her hair, got dressed and calmly returned to Raffaele’s apartment.

Amanda Knox Testimony (June 12, 2009):

“…Then he came out and we made breakfast, and while we were preparing it and drinking coffee, I explained to him what I had seen, and I asked him for advice, because when I went into my house, everything seemed in order, only there were these little weird things, and I couldn't figure out how to understand them.”

This is hardly the panicked girl that Raffaele described.

A few days after the interview, police intercepted a call between Raffaele and his father. During the call, according to police, Raffaele’s father said to him, “Raffaele, don’t walk about with a knife; if police find it on you who knows what they may think.” Raffaele responded by saying, “Well, they have already questioned me and they didn’t find it on me, those stupid policemen.” Raffaele was speaking of a small flick-knife that he was known to carry around. This conversation prompted police to call him in for further questioning, which ultimately led to his and Knox’s arrest. Coincidentally, experts for the defense argued that the Marietti knife that the prosecution offered up as the murder weapon was too big to have caused the wounds on Kercher’s neck, and that a smaller knife, such as a flick-knife probably caused the fatal wound.


Story # 2:

Raffaele told police that he and Knox stayed at his flat the entire night of November 1, 2007 (night of the murder).

Story # 3:

During his November 5, 2007 interrogation and subsequent arrest, Sollecito wanted to come clean, and he told police that his previous version to them was “un sacco di cazzate” (a load of rubbish). “In my former statement I told you a load of rubbish because I believed Amanda’s version of what happened and did not think about the inconsistencies.” (The Times, 7 November, 2007).

In this version, he told investigators that he and Knox returned to his flat at approximately 8:30pm, and that Knox left his apartment, while he stayed there, and she returned at around 1:00am. He claimed that he believed that she went to see if she had to work that evening. This was clearly an attempt to exonerate himself from any culpability, as Knox had received a text message from her then boss, Patrick Lumumba, at 8:19pm that evening informing Knox that it was slow at the bar and she would not be needed to work that evening.


Story # 4:

Some like to point the finger at police and say that they were forceful during their interrogations with Knox and Sollecito and that is why they both changed their stories so much. However, after his arrest, Raffaele wrote several letters to his father while in prison. One letter to his father explained in detail the version above. This was written under no duress. In the letter, Raffaele explains to his father that he and Knox had arrived at his flat at about 8 – 8:30pm on the night of the murder. “Amanda had [then] left for work,” he writes, but he could not remember how long she was gone—but he writes that he is “certain” that Knox had stayed with him the “entire night.”

Explaining Amanda to his father in the letters, Raffaele wrote of her:

“She lived her life like a dream, she was detached from reality, she couldn't distinguish dream from reality. Her life seemed to be pure pleasure; she had a contact with reality that was almost non-existent.”

Then, he shows uncertainty whether or not Knox had committed the murder (or knew something about it) and blatantly calls her a liar...Raffaele writes to his father:

“I try to understand what Amanda's role was in this event. The Amanda that I know is an Amanda who lives a carefree life. Her only thought is the pursuit of pleasure at all times. But even the thought that she could be a killer is impossible for me. I have read her version of events. Some of the things she said are not true, but I don't know why she said them.”

www.truejustice.org has compiled all of the unanswered questions pertaining to the case (SEE HERE) that have been asked over the years and featured them in one article. Please visit the link for a comprehensive look at all of these and many other questions still left unanswered.

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 Defense Counters (14th Hearing)

The Knox camp got a boost today, as things seemed to go entirely their way Wednesday. The fourteenth appeals hearing started with requests by Prosecutor Manuela Comodi for new testing on the knife and bra clasp and to introduce newly discovered records about the DNA-testing machine used in the case. Furthermore, Comodi had requested to recall Luciano Aviello to the stand, a witness who had originally testified that his brother killed Kercher, who has since publically retracted this statement when questioned by Comodi in prison in July (Read more on this HERE).

Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellmann, however, rejected all three requests—all victories for Knox’s defense, who opposed the motions. Judge Hellman said the discussion regarding DNA evidence had been thorough enough for the court to form an opinion, and he said that new testing would be “superfluous.”

Other expert defense witnesses came forward as well today to counter expert prosecution testimony a day earlier. Much as he did in the original trial, Carlo Torre, one of Italy’s best-known forensics experts, presented a detailed technical argument about the DNA on the knife. Torre testified that the “smaller wound [on Kercher’s neck] is absolutely incompatible with the knife in question.” Torre is also a proponent of “one robust killer” as opposed to three attackers.

Dr. Torre’s assistant, Sarah Gino (who is a private coroner) also testified today. Reiterating some of what she said on the stand in the original trial, Gino added that Sollecito’s genetic material could have gotten onto the bloodied bra if it was on Knox’s clothes when they were washed with Kercher’s before the killing, a new theory now posed by Gino.


In her testimony earlier this week, Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni said that she stored biological evidence in the victim’s freezer on November 2 and 3 (2007), before bringing the samples to Rome. “This is a strange way of [collecting] evidence,” defense forensic expert Adriano Tagliabracci testified today, criticizing the methods used by Stefanoni. Taught methods of collection of biological evidence calls for them to be air-dried, because they are damp, thus should be packaged in a non-plastic contained to prevent mold or bacteria from creating a whole different kind of science experiment inside the containers.

It was certainly a good tactic by the defense to raise these concerns, although in retrospect, this procedure by Stefanoni didn’t affect her results, and the defense has a better chance of swaying the jury with the independent experts’ findings—because the plastic bag contamination (argument) would have a better chance ruining the possibility of receiving a DNA match rather than providing a match via contamination.

Kercher family lawyer, Francesco Maresca, told the media that the rulings were not a defeat, and that he understood why the judge rejected the requests.

Reminiscent of his enthusiasm and optimism during this time in the first trial, Amanda’s father, Curt Knox said (as reported by The Telegraph), “Amanda is happy and hopeful that she won't be spending too much more time in prison...”

Meanwhile, Nick Pisa, of The Telegraph and The Daily Mail, is reporting that a clearly frustrated Prosecutor Manuela Comodi said: "There is an ill wind blowing in this case. The judge and his assistant are clearly against us. I can see both Knox and Sollecito being freed which will be a shame as they are both involved."

However, it is ABC who has apparently interviewed Comodi and their take is very different than what Nick Pisa wrote. The Seattle Times is reporting that in ABC’s interview with her, Comodi said:

“We did our job. I am convinced by what I have said. I am fully convinced of their guilt and I would find it very serious if they were set free. Today’s decision could lead one to think that there is more of a possibility that they be set freed.”

Nick Pisa seems to have used his ill-will to twist the quote of Comodi in an effort to "sell papers" per say; and it seems to be working because today Sheppard Smith of FOX News used the quote verbatim and proceeded to slam Italian Justice and the case against Knox. Even I was fooled by it for a few hours.

A voice of reason in the most unlikely places also emerged today. After the session, Knox's lawyer Luciano Ghirga, warned that the court’s rejection of new DNA testing was not equal to a positive outcome of the whole appeals trial.

Judge Hellmann suspended the proceedings until 23 September 2011, at which time he announced that closing arguments will begin, with the prosecution going first, followed by civil plaintiffs, and then the defense.

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: Resumes Today After Summer Recess

With the verdict in the appeals trails of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito expected at the end of this month, tensions are high on both sides. After a summer recess, the trial continued today with the prosecution questioning the court appointed forensics experts regarding their results of two key pieces of DNA evidence that helped convict Knox and her former boyfriend of murdering Meredith Kercher back in 2007. Knox arrived at the courtroom today looking anxious and drawn.

In their 145-page report to the court, the experts—Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti—questioned much of the evidence that was collected in that original investigation, saying procedures to obtain it fell below international standards and may have led to contamination.

Questioned today over the extraction of DNA profiles from the bra clasp, Carla Vecchiotti said the data was so mixed that a very high number of genetic profiles could be extracted, depending how one combined the data “I could find yours, too,” Vecchiotti told the presiding judge. “I’m there, too,” she said, adding that some data was compatible with her own DNA. This was a bizarre comment by Vecchiotti, which if we take what she said at face value could call into question her own methods and possible contamination on her part. However, she was most likely facetiously stating that there were a number of profiles on the clasp. She added that Kercher’s profile was the only certain one.

The prosecution and Kercher family lawyer, Francesco Maresca, are now in a touchy situation as they are forced to attack the reputations of the court appointed experts, which might be viewed as an attack upon Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellmann—who appointed them.


The key witness today was Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, the police forensic scientist who carried out the original investigation, defended the collection procedures used and the results obtained. Dr. Stefanoni told the court that DNA analyses were carried out from behind a glass wall to avoid the risk of contamination. She also said some of the standard protocols cited by the experts were published after she finished her report in May 2008, also pointing out that there are no internationally accepted international protocols for DNA collection. Using some of the 119 PowerPoint slides she said she had prepared, she challenged the experts' finding over DNA quantity, analysis and evidence collection techniques. Dr. Stefanoni’s testimony will continue Tuesday, where she is expected to defend her team's handling of the bra clasp among other things.

After the session, Maresca commented to CNN reporters regarding Dr. Stefanoni’s testimony today. “Stefanoni has thoroughly and calmly clarified the principal elements of the work she carried out—in a clear manner, given the complex subject…during the examination at the time…I think she managed to get the court’s full attention and to have damaged the independent forensic work.”

Just ahead of the hearing, in a letter (Read complete letter HERE) released by Francesco Maresca, Kercher’s sister, Stephanie, wrote: “In these last few weeks we have been left seriously anxious and greatly troubled by the news regarding the original DNA findings. It is extremely difficult to understand how the results, which were obtained with great care and presented in the original trial as valid, could now be regarded as irrelevant.”


Stephanie Kercher concluded by writing, “My sister, a daughter brutally and selfishly taken from us nearing 4 years ago…and yet a not a single day goes by that we can grasp any peace or closure…We ask that the Court of Appeal assess every single (piece) of evidence, both scientific and circumstantial, as well as any witnesses who have taken the stand independently of any other information or media,” she wrote.

Continuing her verbal campaign to free her daughter, Knox’s mother, Edda Mellas commented on the contents of the Kercher letter: “I saw in her letter where she stated that it [the evidence] was collected appropriately,” Mellas, told ABC News. “Well, perhaps they should go and review the crime scene videos, because clearly it was not.”

The appeals hearings are expected to continue through the week. After rebuttals later in September, an appeals verdict is expected by the end of the month.