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.

Knox in News: Seattle Judge Calls on Obama

Judge Mike Heavey Sr, is back in the news today. You know, the Seattle judge seen here at the home of the Knox family; the one who made the ridiculously erroneous statement, that Amanda Knox “was interrogated for almost two days without food or water,” at which time “she told officials what they wanted to hear." Apparently the Knox family was not eager to correct the good Judge and his ill-attempt at accurately presenting the facts. Apparently Judge Heavey is a neighbor of the Knox’s and his oldest daughter was a high school classmate of Amanda’s.

In any event, the King County Superior Court Judge, in his “capacity as a private citizen,” has written a letter to President Barack Obama, calling for him to launch an executive inquiry into the State Department’s entire handling of the Knox case. Judge Heavey’s letter to Obama cites seven violations of Knox’s rights under Italian law that he says “should have set off alarms at the Embassy in Rome” since the earliest days of her arrest and incarceration; yet Heavey says consular officials did nothing.

Heavey wrote to Obama that the “profoundly unjust process” has had a detrimental effect on U.S.-Italian relations. What the judge fails to point out is that it is fallacious statements, like the one he made in the first paragraph above; or CNN’s special Murder Abroad: The Amanda Knox Story; ABC’s piece on Knox (on 20/20)—that have caused a spike in anti-Italianism in America.


However, the Amanda Knox saga has not affected our relations with Italy, politically speaking. Obama and Italy’s Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, ham it up in the pic above. Italy and the U.S. are still NATO supporters, and just a couple of months ago (in a continuing effort) representatives from both countries met in Washington to discuss the possibility of arming rebels in the fight against Muammar Qaddafi.

The United States and Italy cooperate closely on major economic issues. Moreover, according to a July 2009 statement from David H. Thorne, the United States Ambassador to Italy (appointed by President Obama), “The relationship between Italy and the United States has a long and rich history that dates back to the arrival of the first Italian immigrants on these shores in the 1800s—I am living proof of the close ties between Italians and Americans…Italy has been an important and steadfast friend and supporter of many of our foreign policy goals, both bilaterally and globally.” I think you get the picture.

Again, in the letter, Judge Heavey points out what he believes are seven violations of Knox’s rights under Italian law.

In #1 he asserts that the night Amanda was arrested, she was denied food and water and police “cuffed on the back of her head.” This is a claim that Knox made and is the reason why she is currently on trial for slander—as well as are her parents. Judge Heavey has no way of proving that Amanda was hit by police, and this “allegedly cuffing” should in no way be used as a fact, as the judge is using it.

In #3 he cites Italian law as stating that every interrogation must be recorded and Amanda’s was not. This is a valid point; although, the interrogation was not admissible in court. So, are we to throw out the trial based on this, even though it was not used in court? Judge Heavey knows better.

In #4 he proclaims that during her questioning/arrest, Amanda “was not allowed to have an interpreter to assist her in understanding the questions put to her, the charges against her, or anything else.” There was an interpreter at that interrogation, Anna Donnino, and she testified during the trial. Moreover, Amanda herself testified to the presence of Anna as the interpreter during that interrogation.


So, what does the judge expect to accomplish from this letter? Does he expect to have Obama and his men call Italy and say, “Stop the trial, this farce has gone far enough, we are the United States, after all?” I don’t think so. In my opinion, this letter was written just for effect—as a way to gain more supporters for Amanda’s cause and to add another voice (albeit being a judge at least looks like a legitimate one) to the already overhyped Knox PR campaign. Surely he knows that this letter does nothing to warrant any U.S. intrusion into the case, particularly at this point in time.

Nonetheless, Judge Heavey was charged on 8 June 2010 by the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, (CJC) for speaking out in support of Amanda Knox, according to the West Seattle Herald. Judge Heavey is charged for having used court time, materials, and employees to draw up those letters. He wrote three letters to the prosecutors and a judge in that case in Perugia on County letterhead in 2008 while Knox was in prison awaiting trial.

CNN Special on Knox Case: Embarrassing!

This special was all I though it would be, and worse! This CNN report goes down as top 5 most grossly reported stories on this case, and I may be being kind—it could be numbers 1 or 2 (click here to see documentary). As I predicted, Knox’s family members were heavily relied on in the documentary. Moreover, I predicted that Mignini’s interview was going to be a set-up to make him look like the “Monster” he has been portrayed throughout—this is just what happened people. In fact, it was Mignini that appeared to be on trial in this documentary, not Amanda Knox.

At 7:20 of the video, Drew Griffin explains the evidence against Amanda as the Marietti knife, the bra clasp, and the homeless man, Antonio Curatolo. Coincidentally, he does not mention all of the other evidence against Knox and Sollecito. Moreover, these three evidentiary items are the only things being contested in the appeals of both Knox and Sollecito (Hence, you are witnessing the Knox PR spin in full force). So, as we begin to see, Griffin has excluded all other evidence—as he knows much of his audience will take his word as truth—in a sinister attempt to later dispute and ultimately reveal these evidentiary items as faulty; thus, “proving” Knox’s innocence. It is as if Griffin is unaware of all of the other evidence against Knox and Sollecito’ as if he had begun his research from the appeals and had skipped researching the original trial.

Griffin provides a telling statement at 8:04, “For the next hour forget everything you know,” he says. This makes sense, because if we forget everything that we know about the case then Griffin’s reporting seems plausible. However, if we remember the mixed blood evidence, the footprints, the numerous lies of Knox and Sollecito, the phone records, the computer records, and more...then we have a hard, if not impossible, time believing this putrid reporting!

Let’s go over some clear inaccuracies reported by Griffin:

At 13:36, he says that Knox testified that she was denied a translator when referring to her interrogation/arrest.

Fact: Knox testified that she did have a translator at that time, by the name of Anna Donnino, who testified at the original trial.

Griffin intentionally omits all other evidence against Knox and Sollecito, physical or otherwise (other than his brief reference to Knox’s strange behavior, which he seems to have brought up only to scoff).


At 21:13, Dr. Greg Hampikian, a forensic biologist at Boise State University and Director of Idaho’s Innocence Project (also working with Knox’s defense team), says, “I don’t think this [the knife] would have made it onto a U.S. lab report.” He says this because LCN DNA is not really held as a legit form of DNA testing in America.

Fact: However, the fact is that once Sollecito is told by investigators that they had found Meredith’s DNA on the tip of the blade he confirmed this, telling them that he had accidentally pricked Meredith with the knife while he was cooking at his flat—even though Meredith had never been at his flat. Bringing this admission into consideration, which Griffin or Dr. Hampikian both fail to mention, this evidence would have most likely been admitted into a U.S. court room.

At 14:57, after explaining Knox’s confession and fingering Lumumba as the murderer, Griffin says, “Police didn’t bother to check the facts about Lumumba.”

So, Griffin is actually putting this responsibility on police and not on Knox. I don’t care what country you are in, if a woman was murdered and her female roommate says that she was there and “so and so” was the murderer, police are going to arrest that person and sort things out later.

At 15:52, griffin says, “But almost immediately after the arrests, Mignini had a problem, Lumumba had an air tight alibi…he was in his crowded bar.”

Fact: The bar was not even close to crowded; with only 2 patrons and the alibi was not air-tight at all. In fact, it took police nearly two weeks to track these patrons down to confirm Lumumba’s alibi. All the while, Knox never mentioned to police that she lied and incriminated an innocent man.

Then there was the 10min rant about the Monster of Florence case, which was a clear attempt to persuade the audience into believing that Mignini is just a terrible prosecutor who pressures innocents to admit that they are guilty.


Mignini explained it well when he said (27:45), “The two things are completely different, because I interrogated Preston; Amanda was interrogated by the police. Preston wasn’t arrested, Amanda was arrested. The two things are completely different. They have nothing in common apart from the fact that I was the public prosecutor.”

In fact, Mignini is spot on here. Mignini was not called into Knox’s interrogation until after she confessed that she was at the crime scene and Lumumba killed Meredith. Knox’s status was at that time officially changed from witness to suspect and Mignini was then called in.

At 34:16, Griffin says, “The case against Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito seems to be hanging on two very small pieces of DNA evidence.”

Fact: Actually, it is Knox and Sollecito’s defense teams and their appeals that seem to be hanging on these evidentiary items. As for the remainder of the evidence, those which I have listed numerous times throughout this blog; the defense teams have not made any attempts to challenge; and, apparently the media has made no effort to research or mention. The only thing that is clear to me by the end of this documentary is that Griffin is not even qualified to investigate who drank the last glass of the milk from his fridge.


And, as for the bra clasp: there is absolutely no question whether Sollecito’s DNA was or was not on it—it was! There is less than one chance in a trillion that this was not Sollecito’s DNA. This is a mathematical fact, as plenty of his cells were present to provide a reliable test (1.4 nanogram or 1400 picograms—which contains approximately 160 cells). The only thing that can be contested was contamination from the machine [not the machine on this message board], which is virtually impossible to prove—and would almost have to be performed by monkeys to occur, because of the large amount of cells present. Or, due to some type of physical transfer, prior to removal or testing, that would involve an incalculable improbability, considering that Sollecito’s DNA was not found in the cottage anywhere else (other than a cigarette but).

As "The Machine" from TJMK points out, "Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti weren’t able to carry out new tests on the knife and the bra clasp. They will have to look at the same data as Dr. Renato Biondo, Professor Francesca Torricelli, Luciano Garofano and Professor Giuseppe Novelli. The fact that these experts looked at the data and came to the same conclusions as Dr. Stefanoni..." is telling and foreshadowing to say the least.

PART 1

Purchase Savive's Latest Book: THE STUDY ABROAD MURDER (Amazon.com)

‘Murder Abroad: The Amanda Knox Story’ – CNN’s Drew Griffin Reports

Do we finally have a fair and accurate account from the American media regarding the Amanda Knox case? Don’t bet on it! This Sunday, CNN will debut a one-hour documentary on the case (May 8, 8:00p.m., ET & PT).

It has been reported that, in the special, the host, Drew Griffin, will conduct a rare television interview with the chief prosecutor in the case, Giuliano Mignini. However, don’t expect a very fair analysis from Griffin, as he reports that Mignini “reveals a pattern of prosecutorial behavior that raises questions about the original conviction” (CNN).

Griffin traveled to Perugia to report for this story. He also traveled to Seattle to speak to Knox’s family, which I am assuming will be the bulk of the special (YAWN)—like we have not heard that side many times. Moreover, Griffin reports much more of the same: rehashed inaccuracies of the case. For example, regarding the special Griffin writes that he [Griffin] will “debrief viewers on Knox’s now-disputed confession – obtained after days of unrelenting questioning, and according to Knox, even physical abuse by police interrogators” (CNN).

So, all in all, this documentary is shaping up to be more of the same: more inaccuracies, more biased reporting, more “proclaimed case experts” who show little real knowledge of the events, and more one-sided reporting. I will give credit to Griffin for actually traveling to Perugia to interview Mignini, if that is in fact what has occurred. However, I expect this interview to be somewhat of a set-up, insofar as Griffin only did the interview to put a spin on Mignini’s position and paint him as the “Monster” he has been portrayed throughout. Just my opinion, time will tell…

Todd Schwarzchild is the senior producer for Murder Abroad; Marcus Hooper is associate producer. Bud Bultman is managing editor and Scott Matthews is the executive producer for the CNN Special Investigations and Documentaries productions unit.

In case you miss it or your TiVo is broken, CNN will also replay the special on Saturday, May 14 at 8:00p.m., ET & PT.

PART 2

Purchase Savive's Latest Book: THE STUDY ABROAD MURDER (Amazon.com)

Sollecito Family Trial Begins

Today, the family members of Raffaele Sollecito faced their first day of trial. Raffaele’s family: Francesco Sollecito (his father), Vanessa Sollecito (his sister), Mara Papagni (his stepmother) Giuseppe Sollecito (his uncle) and Sara Achille (his aunt) all from Bari have been charged with leaking a crime scene video out of the 10,000-plus pages plus of evidence and exhibits to Telenorba, a Bari television station. The charges are as follows: defamation, invasion of privacy, and publication of arbitrary acts of a criminal case.

The prosecutors are Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi; the judge is Alberto Avena; the Sollecito defense team consists of Marco Brusco, Francesco Crisis, Luca Maori and Donatella Donati; and the Kercher family (along with their lawyer, Francesco Maresca) is civil party to the trial and damages could be awarded to them if the defendants are found guilty.


The video included deeply upsetting close-ups of Meredith’s uncovered body and the wounds to her neck. It was later re-broadcast by the state network RAI throughout Italy. Vanessa Sollecito was fired from the Carabinieri late in 2009 for her involvement in this attempt to manipulate politicians.

During today’s proceedings, the Sollecito defense team raised an objection regarding issues of jurisdiction. Judge Avena postponed the hearing until 27 June 2011, at which time this matter will be decided.


In related news, the Lifetime movie Amanda Knox: Murder on Trial in Italy makes its debut in Canada this Sunday May 1 at 6 p.m. ET on Slice. The TV movie depicts the real-life murder case of British university exchange student Meredith Kercher (Amanda Fernando Stevens). The film focuses on Amanda Knox (Hayden Panettiere, Heroes), and Raffaele Sollecito (Paolo Romio) and Ivory Coast-born Rudy Guede (Djibril Kébé).

Some journalists praise the movie, claiming that it was well-crafted and executed. However, the movie is flooded with inaccuracies—so much so that it will confuse those who know little about the case. Amanda Knox and her lawyers have protested against the movie. However, it is not as incriminating as if a movie was made on the story accurately portraying the full details. I am not trying to dissuade anyone from watching the movie—it was an interesting portrayal and provides a decent visual of the events—but don’t think that you can “solve the case” simply by watching the movie.

Knox Appeal: Witness Gives Conflicting Testimony

Homeless man, Antonio Curatolo, 54, took the stand today and may have mixed up the date that he saw Knox and Sollecito with Halloween. “The two youngsters were talking intensely to each other,” he told the court. “I can remember that in the piazza that night young people in masks were coming and going and buses were leaving for the nightclubs.”

Knox and Sollecito’s defense team pounced on the fact that Kercher was killed on November 1st, one day after Perugia was filled with Halloween partygoers wearing masks and taking buses out to clubs on the fringes of the hill town. Previous witnesses have said that on 1 November all the clubs were closed.

“This was a witness the prosecution really counted on, while for us Curatolo’s statement that he saw them the night of the murder is not reliable,” said Giulia Bongiorno, a lawyer representing Sollecito. “If he saw them another night, well, they did live in the area,” she said. “We have been saying Curatolo is unreliable for three and a half years,” said Luciano Ghirga, a lawyer representing Knox.
Curatolo’s testimony, however, also gave hope to prosecutors. He claimed that the morning after he had seen Knox and Sollecito he was still in Piazza Grimana and witnessed investigators in white forensic outfits entering the house where Kercher’s body was found in a pool of blood. “Police and carabinieri were coming and going, and I also saw the 'extraterrestrials’, that would be the men in white overalls,” Curatolo said.

“I am really certain, just as certain as I am sitting here, that I saw those two youngsters the night before the men in white outfits.”

Curatolo also told the prosecutor, Giuliano Mignini, that it was not raining the night he saw the pair. “He has simply repeated what he told the trial,” said Francesco Maresca, a lawyer representing the Kercher family. “What is key is that he is sure he saw them the night before the police came and that it was not raining. It rained on the 31st but not on the 1st,” he said.

Prosecutor Manuela Comodi said the confusion between Oct. 31 and Nov. 1 is a moot point as it has already been ascertained that Knox was somewhere else—in a pub where she worked—on Oct. 31 and so could not have been seen in the square.

In more bad news for the prosecution, CBS News correspondent, Allen Pizzey, says leaked documents indicate that two independent forensic experts will say traces of Knox’s DNA on a 12-inch kitchen knife, and Sollecito’s on a bra clasp found at the murder scene, were too small and too contaminated to be admissible as evidence. Traces of Sollecito’s DNA on the bra clasp totaled 150 cells, clearly enough to warrant a reliable test and hard to prove contamination from the machine used to test it or from the scene itself. It will be interesting to hear the experts explain their findings on this piece of evidence. As of now the experts are still scheduled to report their findings to the court on 21 May 2011.

Thanksgiving in Perugia: Knox’s Appeal Begins

Amanda Knox and Raffale Sollecito came face-to-face today (technically Wednesday) for the first time since they had been convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher back in December 2009.


Wearing a pale blue sweater against the damp autumn chill, Knox entered the court for her first appeal session looking more serious, as opposed to her carefree demeanor during her original trial.


Presiding judge Claudio Pratillo Hellman (with assistant judge Massimo Zanetti) swore in the jury of five women and one man, then promptly made his first decision: hearings just once a week—on Saturdays—to accommodate Sollecito’s high profile attorney Giulia Bongiorno (a key Italian parliamentarian and head of the justice commission who recently revealed she is several months pregnant).

Under Italian law, anything can happen in the appeals process, from complete acquittal, to conviction on lesser charge such as manslaughter, to an even harsher sentence if convicted again.

Knox’s appeal is built largely around a request for an independent review of forensic evidence (in particular the DNA evidence from the knife that prosecutors say was the murder weapon).

Prosecutors are also appealing the extenuating circumstances granted to Knox and Sollecito, in hopes that they’ll be handed down a life sentence.


This time, the trial stars “three” prosecutors: Giancarlo Costagliola, and the two from the trial, Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi. Mr. Costagliola, the newest prosecutor, will lead the team.


The long awaited appeal is finally here, and the first session was over quite quickly: lasting only about 15 minutes. The defense asked for a postponement until Dec. 11, so “the trial could begin in an atmosphere of tranquility and serenity,” and the prosecution agreed. Judge Hellman granted the request, and fixed hearing dates for Dec. 11, 18 and Jan. 15, for now.