The True Crime Weblog Message Board

.


Studio Aperto are the people who released the CCTV video from the car park camera claiming it showed images of Rudy and Meredith arriving at the cottage.


These images were shown in the wrong order.

The impression given by the video was of Meredith arriving first followed by Rudy the suggestion being that things hadn't happened as Rudy said.

It was only when other media outlets looked at the timestamps that it became obvious that Rudy arrived first as he had said.

The same trickery of using clips out of time order happened in the Telenorba video used to discredit the forensic investigation of the crime scene.

Hi and thanks, Soozie !


About that e-mail of AK's (assuming it is genuine) :

I think this bit is very strange (and perhaps telling) :
“I got home when she was still asleep, but after having a shower, while I was in the kitchen, she came out of her room with the blood of her costume (a vampire’s) dripping from her chin,”

[ BTW who is said to have had a shower ? Either Meredith or AK. I understand from the context that AK meant "but while I was in the kitchen after having a shower" -- atrocious syntax ! ]

My point is that, whatever "blood" (some kind of paint or special lipstick ?) Meredith would have smeared her mouth with as part of her Hallowe'en costume, it would not have survived a night's (even a very short night's) sleep in bed : there might remain some slight smudges, but "dripping" ? No way. Indeed, even the previous night the red whatever-it-was would not have "dripped" (although perhaps at some point Meredith might have painted some fake "drops" on her chin).

Of course the above is a translation from the Italian translation of the original English, and perhaps "dripping from her chin" is an overworked translator's imaginative rendering of "still visible on her chin" (or words to that effect). But it does not seem very likely ... How could we get hold of the original English ?

It seems to me that the phrase "the blood ... dripping from her chin" cannot be a realistic description of what AK supposedly saw that morning (1 Nov.). So whence does it come ? The simplest answer is, from the gory sight of poor Meredith's bloody neck (and surrounding areas) after the stabbing. And AK is not supposed to have had a (close) look at Meredith's dead body the next morning (2 Nov.) ! During the night, however ...

Bluetit wrote:

About that e-mail of AK's (assuming it is genuine) :
I think this bit is very strange (and perhaps telling)

I know there was an email that was quoted at least once (someone who had received it was quoted, at least) and then disappeared. John Follain seems to be quoting from a "VO." That's my impression anyhow. If he is quoting, then not only is the content strange, so is the narrative style. It reads like a rehearsal, a clumsy novice attempt at writing fiction or a highly self-conscious memoir. And it is very different in style and tone from the statements written for the police.
I don't know what to make of it. It's creepy, self-absorbed and callous. Or is the press quoting out of context? John Follain knows this case and has been receptive to the family. But as The Machine noted, it sounds as if he is finding it increasingly difficult to defend the total innocence of this woman.

I agree with your take on the blood dripping from Meredith's chin: this is either very bad fiction or a lie. Smudges, yes, drippings, no. It is preposterous. And very bizarre.

'It seems to me that the phrase "the blood ... dripping from her chin" cannot be a realistic description of what AK supposedly saw that morning (1 Nov.). So whence does it come ? The simplest answer is, from the gory sight of poor Meredith's bloody neck (and surrounding areas) after the stabbing. And AK is not supposed to have had a (close) look at Meredith's dead body the next morning (2 Nov.) ! During the night, however …’Bluetit

I think the ‘blood dripping from the chin’ phrase might be Amanda’s flair for being over dramatic. I agree with your analysis. But by the way she described it in her email, I’m just wondering if Amanda when seeing Meredith dressed up in that costume, some little light bulb went off in her head. Maybe not to try to recreate a rape scene that she had wrote about earlier, but to have some fun.

Yes SB, a rehearsal of sorts, if what was written is true.

Yes,
I often wonder during this case where this "creative writing" student pulls these horrible things from her mind when writing nonchalantly about drugging and raping someone.
I have to say I have never written anything like that, not in a million years.
Then, even in the context of this awful tragedy, she is using dramatic prose in her emails to her friends and family when describing Meredith walking into the kitchen from her room, still with the halloween make up on.
A very sick and twisted individual indeed.

Some comments from a journalist who says he had access to both the diary and the email:

Perhaps so, though in her rambling e-mail to family and friends, sent at 3.24am on November 4, when she had no idea she was about to become a suspect, her recollections are strangely more detailed.

One might imagine she was crafting the opening chapter to a macabre thriller, with herself in the central role, naturally, rather than describing the tragic events surrounding the murder of her friend.

'The last time I saw Meredith, English, beautiful, funny, was when I came home after spending the night at a friend's house,' she begins.

'It was the day after Halloween, Thursday. I got home and she was still asleep, but after I had taken a shower and was fumbling around the kitchen she emerged from her room with the blood of her costume (vampire) dripping down her chin.'
Amanda Knox's parents, who have been visiting her since being jailed
In a story which the prosecution claim is riddled with holes, she goes on to explain how her suspicions were aroused the following day when she returned home after, she claims, spending the night with Sollecito to find Meredith's room locked, the toilet unflushed, and specks of blood in the bathroom.

She adds that she thought, at first, that the blood might have been Meredith's because she was having 'menstrual issues'.
But when banging on her door failed to arouse her, she called the police in a panic.

As Meredith's friends and family grieved, and the murder investigation swirled around her, Knox remained as self-absorbed as ever. That much is clear from her e-mail. She moans about suffering from a stomach ache after eating vending machine food while waiting all night to be interviewed by police.

And she complains at the injustice of having to pay rent for the following month, even though she won't be able to return to the house because it's been sealed off as a crime scene.
'It kind of sucks,' she remarks, as Meredith lay on a mortuary slab.

The sheer enormity of what has happened - and the grief of Meredith's parents who have lost a treasured daughter - doesn't seem to have occurred to her. The picture that Knox inadvertently paints of herself is one of a narcissistic young woman with a remarkably callous disregard for what has happened to Meredith.
But unattractive as that portrait is, it does not mean she's guilty of murder.

Indeed, she may well turn out to be innocent, as she insists. Nonetheless, Professor Wilson believes the diary and e-mail offer the first real insight into the mind of this enigmatic young woman.

The Italian prosecutors agree, and intend to use the documents as vital planks of evidence.

http://tinyurl.com/3jc4kf


I'm grateful that the board is back on track. I'd like to say thank you to Michael for stepping in so quickly during this "emergency". I'm sure he has put many long hours into making sure nothing serious happened, and we had a place to go. It was also nice to see Fast Pete take the time over at TJMK.com to devote a blog post to direct people to Michael's new site.

"She moans about suffering from a stomach ache after eating vending machine food while waiting all night to be interviewed by police"

I remember this from when it was first published.

It gives the lie to the 14 hour torture session - and also indicates the callous disregard of what has just occurred - this being the slaughter of her housemate in the room next door to her.

Welcome back Soozie
Glad this board is back on track guy's, you all work so hard for it not to be so!

Pandora London UK wrote:Welcome back Soozie
Glad this board is back on track guy's, you all work so hard for it not to be so!

What Pandora said.

Soozie, I hope you stay and post. I hope Damian sticks around and everyone stays.

Tensions are bound to run high at crucial times like this. Let's not do to ourselves what goofy et al couldn't do to us. Onwards!

The Momi/Studio Aperto cash for story affair makes the front page headline at Corriere Dell'Umbria

More on page 2 and 3.

Hopefully they'll be available later today on the net.

Corriere Dell'Umbria front page as a pdf

Last paragraph.

I think it says Kokomani has shown the GUP an SMS which he has stored on his mobile phone.

His lawyer says it comes from someone(NOT A JOURNALIST) with a request to appear on Porta a Porta.

I think it says this request was made BEFORE Kokomani became a witness.

Didn't Kokomani say that Papa Sollecito had offered him money not to be a witness?

Google translation of Umbria Journal

Click on the headline for the full story.

Anyone up for a real traanslation of that last bit about Kokomani?

The rest of the Italian Press is strangely silent today.

Have they got some kind of conscience. Remember what Frank said about trusting the stories in the Italian press.

How much of it is bought and payed for???

Google search of Italian news on Meredith Kercher

Momi said to Video Aperto that the Nazione had paid him for his story back in December. I've no idea whether that is true or not.

BUT

There is a story in La Nazione today in which they attempt to justify their news collection. They say they would never pay for such a story and they used as an example their exclusive publishing of Raffaele's diary back in December.

The thought occurrs to me that they may not have paid for the story but maybe someone paid them to print it.

I'm sorry but I can't just now find the link.

Tara wrote:Some comments from a journalist who says he had access to both the diary and the email:
...
http://tinyurl.com/3jc4kf

Thanks a lot, Tara. I have just been re-reading that Mail article, and I am stricken anew by some spine-chilling details from both the e-mail and the diary. Especially the last sentence in this passage :

'I'm writing this because I want to remember. I want to remember because this is an experience not many people will ever have. I am not saying I am glad everything that has happened has happened. If it were up to me, my friend would never have been killed.'

I know we have already discussed this ad nauseam (literally !) months ago, but a fresh look at it makes me even more certain that NO INNOCENT PERSON, however self-centered and insensitive, would ever have written such a thing (she would have said something like ' I am very sorry my friend has been murdered'.)

' I am not saying I am glad everything that has happened has happened ' is bad enough.

But ' If it were up to me, my friend would never have been killed ' simply could not occur to anyone EXCEPT a guilty person who (at the very least) witnessed the murder -- and who may be trying to suggest (reading between the lines) that SOMEBODY ELSE killed Meredith despite her (AK's) objections ... Perhaps prudently paving the way for an alternative defense in case she was proved to have been present ?

Sometimes i wonder if anyone will be convicted of Meredith's murder.

My summation of the case was set in concrete once the information about the clean up came out. The bleach receipts, the washing machine, the lack of fingerprints, footprints, slammed the door on the case for me.

But, I see RS smiling. I see AK...

I just wish one of the three would say, 'Okay, this is what happened.'

betty

Brian S. wrote:Last paragraph.

I think it says Kokomani has shown the GUP an SMS which he has stored on his mobile phone.

His lawyer says it comes from someone(NOT A JOURNALIST) with a request to appear on Porta a Porta.

I think it says this request was made BEFORE Kokomani became a witness.

Didn't Kokomani say that Papa Sollecito had offered him money not to be a witness?

Google translation of Umbria Journal

Click on the headline for the full story.

Anyone up for a real traanslation of that last bit about Kokomani?

From elsewhere:

Apparently he was offered 10,000 euros to appear on Porta a Porta. The programme denies the offer came from them. Kokomani's SMS record and other information has been sent to the investigating authorities by the judge along with Biscuits video of Momi. Kokomani isn't accused of anything, he didn't take up the offer. (to say what on Porta a Porta? He hadn't yet gone to the police with his story, when this offer was made)

To Soozie, your apology says a lot about your stellar character. As my mom always used to say to me, time heals all wounds. In other words when you feel ready, chime in, especially if you see us spinning our wheels in the mud and you have a piece of the puzzle to move us along. Thanks!

As we read and reread some of Amanda's writings it brings to mind something I once learned about personality disorders. Though, I have NO idea if Amanda has been diagnosed in the past or currently suffers from a personality disorder I see evidence of manipulation, exploitation, lacking a developed super ego. People with personality disorders have the capability of raising intense anxiety in others. Look how just her writings are eliciting our emotional responses. No doubt in my mind Amanda had some real problems long before she stepped foot in Italy.

Brian S. wrote:Last paragraph.

I think it says Kokomani has shown the GUP an SMS which he has stored on his mobile phone.

His lawyer says it comes from someone(NOT A JOURNALIST) with a request to appear on Porta a Porta.

I think it says this request was made BEFORE Kokomani became a witness.

Didn't Kokomani say that Papa Sollecito had offered him money not to be a witness?

Google translation of Umbria Journal

Click on the headline for the full story.

Anyone up for a real traanslation of that last bit about Kokomani?

Hey Brian!

I clicked on your link and came up with this story! It's still very interesting though. Seems they are cracking down on drug use and possession in Perugia:

28/09/2008 (UJ.com) PERUGIA - - Nearly 200 grams of hashish seized, many of which are found in the ravines used by drug dealers to avoid holding the drugs on the person, a young Pugliese sued for selling drugs, while other 36 persons, almost all Italian (including 2 children), were reported to the prefectoral for possession of drugs for personal use; 15 also withdrawn licenses for many consumers who, right now, had the availability of a car...

http://tinyurl.com/Google-Translation

Tara wrote:

I clicked on your link and came up with this story! It's still very interesting though. Seems they are cracking down on drug use and possession in Perugia:

Quote:

28/09/2008 (UJ.com) PERUGIA - - Nearly 200 grams of hashish seized, many of which are found in the ravines used by drug dealers to avoid holding the drugs on the person, a young Pugliese sued for selling drugs, while other 36 persons, almost all Italian (including 2 children), were reported to the prefectoral for possession of drugs for personal use; 15 also withdrawn licenses for many consumers who, right now, had the availability of a car...

So with Raffaele, that makes at least two young "Pugliese" under arrest in Perugia.

Perugia also led Italy in 2006 àr 2007 (can't remember) for the number of deaths from cocaine overdose. It seems to be something of a plaque tournante (central exchange) for drugs.

Bluetit wrote:

But ' If it were up to me, my friend would never have been killed ' simply could not occur to anyone EXCEPT a guilty person who (at the very least) witnessed the murder -- and who may be trying to suggest (reading between the lines) that SOMEBODY ELSE killed Meredith despite her (AK's) objections ... Perhaps prudently paving the way for an alternative defense in case she was proved to have been present ?

I have always found this to be one of the most bizarre formulations in a bizarre 'collection' of writings, including the online journal entries and short story.

Long ago, back in the days of haloscans, I remember several exchanges about legal versus moral responsibility. I put myself in the camp which feels that -- among the many puzzling things said and written by the various protagonists -- elements of the truth puzzle have emerged and will continue to emerge. I know many people here disagree with me, but I have felt for a long time that AK's responsibility may be moral rather than the direct consequence of a physical blow she inflicted. This could be anything from flirting with disaster (by flirting with Rudy) to inciting violence by both encouraging jealousy (on the part of RS) and feeling it (with respect to MK).

Let's not forget that Meredith was dating the guy AK wanted to play guitar with, right?

And also, nothing written that we have seen offers incontrovertible proof of her guilt, but it is hard to read this stuff and not get the impression that she is one very self-absorbed individual with an empathy deficit -- at least with respect to her dead roommate. At 4 am on November 4, she wrote a sort of recital for friends back home, in spite of being asked by police not to (fuck 'em!) because she needed to let off steam. In this recital, her dead roommate is treated like just one object among many in the decor serving as a backdrop for a first-person narrative told by a young but hardened narcissist. This is in such stark contrast to the picture painted by the family for public consumption, of a girl so filled with compassion and love for all God's creatures that she cries at the sight of a wounded bird and is unable to kill a spider.

Taken as a whole, it makes for a truly puzzling picture. One thing that is clear to me, though, is that the family's image of AK is deeply engrained and to be defended at all costs, against all evidence to the contrary.
Anything that contradicts this image is explained away -- from photos taken in a holocaust museum to the post-murder video images that raced around the world. Not once has anyone in the support camp come close to admitting that there is any truth in or basis for anything written about AK. It is as if admitting to one chink in the armor puts the whole image ar risk.

Anything that contradicts the sacred image has been minimized, swept aside, ignored or explained away for a long time, in my opinion. Some parents will let their kids get away with murder (figuratively speaking) as long as they bring home the trophies and the good grades.

Everything else -- from getting fined for hosting a party that got out of hand to walking out on an internship after three days to not getting along with a roommate -- is denied, defended or rationalized.

I would have more faith in the Knox/Mellas version if they showed us that they do are capable of more than just condoning everything their daughter has ever done or said and that is now part of the public record.

...Hi guys, I'm back - had a medical emergency with my heart - was on page 62 when I left and was so afraid I had lost you - so glad I found you tho - I know I don't contribute much of anything - but - I will be here til we have justice for Meredith and her family -

...oh ... and her family lawyer saying Meredith could have been saved is lawyer speak to make the defendants look worse - if you think of it medically - there is no way they could have saved poor Meredith once the knife was thrust into her -

.. thanx again for all your great posts !!! - I would just like to say I will miss soozie, sparrow and damian - they will be back for Meredith -

PDX

WELCOME BACK AND TAKE CARE OF THAT BIG HEART

Bluetit wrote:But ' If it were up to me, my friend would never have been killed ' simply could not occur to anyone EXCEPT a guilty person who (at the very least) witnessed the murder -- and who may be trying to suggest (reading between the lines) that SOMEBODY ELSE killed Meredith despite her (AK's) objections ... Perhaps prudently paving the way for an alternative defense in case she was proved to have been present ?

This line leapt out of the page when I read it at the time. If Amanda had only witnessed the murder she would have told the truth about what happened that night which is something she clearly hasn't done. She has chosen to remain in prison for 10 months over telling the truth. Whatever the truth is she doesn't want to it to be revealed and neither do Raffaele or Rudy. Their behaviour tells me that all three suspects played very active roles in the torture, sexual assault and murder of Meredith.

Amanda also paved the way for an alternative defence when she admitted being at the cottage and blaming Diya Lumumba for Meredith's murder. The cannabis-induced amnesia gave her the convenient excuse of being unable to remember very much about that evening. Amanda and Raffaele didn't have enough time to get their stories straight, so they must have agreed to come up with the story about remembering almost nothing because they had smoked cannabis. The details they wrote down about that what they had done during the day in the notebook is significant. Raffaele's lawyers excuse about it being a sign of two people in love is laughable. Someone they both knew had been brutally murdered. Why would they be writing down what they had done?

Amanda, in particular, must be an absolute nightmare for her lawyers. One of them even told her to stop lying. I think one of the reasons for the high profile PR campaign is to change the public's perception of Amanda after the details of her MySpace page and the footage of her and Raffaele kissing outside the cottage and in the lingerie shop were made public. They gagged her for a very good reason; she's a liablilty and there's a very real risk she would say something else that is highly incriminating. I bet her lawyers are dreading her taking the witness stand.

Soozie! Welcome back and thank you!

pdx, I hope your recovery is smooth!

Betty,
My stomach turned in knots to see the smirking R & A. It only makes sense that the three of them and their legal teams will stop at nothing to get away with the crime. They would have to be that sick anyways to have committed it. I have faith but I think it will be a long, emotional road.

The emails from Ice Queen revisited are so shocking. I had forgotten that dialogue.

Hello Soozie,

I too would like to say thank you and welcome back.

I hope you carry on posting. Your posts are good and sometimes cracking funny. (I would like to see Ollie again)
Just think of the satisfaction that the hideous Smellas/Nodding knoxes would get if you don't post no more.


My Malti-Poo Sushi says Hi to your Ollie.

[font=Arial Black]These entries are on Monica Guzman's Twitter account. Something to ponder on this Sunday - who might the local Seattle author be...that's a SHE?[/font]

@jojoschwa You were in Perugia when the Knox thing started? Wow. How did you hear? 01:41 PM September 16, 2008 from twhirl in reply to JojoSchwa

Local author contacted me about helping the Amanda Knox family defray their legal expenses by writing a book. She did it for the Goldmans. 01:30 PM September 16, 2008 from twhirl

http://twitter.com/moniguzman?page=4


Jools: THAT IS ONE CUTE DOG!!

Tara wrote:[font=Arial Black]These entries are on Monica Guzman's Twitter account. Something to ponder on this Sunday - who might the local Seattle author be...that's a SHE?[/font]

@jojoschwa You were in Perugia when the Knox thing started? Wow. How did you hear? 01:41 PM September 16, 2008 from twhirl in reply to JojoSchwa

Local author contacted me about helping the Amanda Knox family defray their legal expenses by writing a book. She did it for the Goldmans. 01:30 PM September 16, 2008 from twhirl

If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say it was that faux journalist the IW. I didn't realise she was also an "author". I'm aware that she wrote Lusty Ladies: The Strippers Next Door, but you can't find a copy of her literary materpiece anywhere, so I'm assuming it went straight to video. I think most people on here knew that the IW was part of Team Knox from the very beginning despite her pretending she was an "Italian journalist" who was just an objective onlooker commenting on the case. Madison Paxton inadvertently let the cat out of the bag by providing links to the IW's articles on her Free Amanda and Raffaele facebook page. Monica has just confirmed what we already knew.

Tara wrote:[font=Arial Black]These entries are on Monica Guzman's Twitter account. Something to ponder on this Sunday - who might the local Seattle author be...that's a SHE?[/font]

@jojoschwa You were in Perugia when the Knox thing started? Wow. How did you hear? 01:41 PM September 16, 2008 from twhirl in reply to JojoSchwa

Local author contacted me about helping the Amanda Knox family defray their legal expenses by writing a book. She did it for the Goldmans. 01:30 PM September 16, 2008 from twhirl

http://twitter.com/moniguzman?page=4


Jools: THAT IS ONE CUTE DOG!!

Tara,

you're getting good at digging some juicy bits up.

How about this, although I've no idea if Marilyn Hoffer is local to Seattle:



"His Name Is Ron: Our Search for Justice" by the family of Ron Goldman, with William and Marilyn Hoffer

Nobody who has suddenly lost a loved one - whether to crime, illness or accident - could ever dismiss the Goldmans' story as just another O.J. Simpson book.

After all, their son and brother, Ronald Lyle Goldman, was not just the "other" victim of the "crime of the century." He was not just the young man who frequently was identified only as "Nicole Brown Simpson's friend," and who often was described, inaccurately, as being "a sometime model and aspiring actor."

The Ron Goldman we meet here, through his family's often heartbreaking words.....

The Seattle Times

Brian wrote:

I've no idea if Marilyn Hoffer is local to Seattle

I am trying to find confirmation, but I believe William and Marilyn Hoffer are freelance journalists (writers), possibly based in Vancouver, B.C. While that city is in Canada, it is within 3 hours of Seattle and many would consider that "local." Also, where was the person from who was contacted by a local author?

Hi Skep,

It was Monica Guzman that was contacted. She wrote that on her Twitter page. If you click on the actual entry, you'll see. Then, the person who said they were in Perugia, if you click on their message, they said they be happy to help out since they were there! Yes, Vancouver BC would be considered "local" in my book! (no pun intended)

Good call Brian - it's a possibility?

William Hoffer and Marilyn Hoffer have ghost written quite a few Skep.

Two for the Goldmans and several others.

# His Name Is Ron
by Marilyn Hoffer, William Hoffer
Softcover, HarperCollins Publishers, ISBN 038073124X (0-380-73124-X)
#

via
His Name Is Ron : Our Search for Justice
by William Hoffer, Marilyn Hoffer
Hardcover, HarperCollins Publishers, ISBN 0688151175 (0-688-15117-5)
#

via
Miracle on the Mountain: A True Tale of Faith and Survival
by Mike Couillard, Mary Couillard, William Hoffer, Marilyn Hoffer
Softcover, HarperCollins Publishers, ISBN 0380789795 (0-380-78979-5)
#

via
My Feudal Lord
by Tehmina Durrani, William Hoffer, Marilyn Hoffer........

Bookfinder

Mistakes and / or misunderstandings happen. Hopefully we're all Divine enough to do the forgive and forget part. To not post nor participate is cheating oneself and the community. Soozie, Damian and anyone else, we're all part of Team M. Come on back. Clothing is optional...

Lube and kisses,

ddude

P.S. Doesn't RS with his long locks think he's some kind of Fabio-hot? He's got that model's smirk down pat...

Brian wrote:

William Hoffer and Marilyn Hoffer have ghost written quite a few Skep.

Their most famous seems to be Freefall, about some Boeing flight that fell out of the sky and how the pilot got it to safety. It was made into a movie, apparently. If it's the same guy, William Hoffer is also a bookseller in Vancouver, B.C.


ddude: it's always nice to hear from you.

Far be it from me to rely on UK tabloid news but Nick Pisa started it. The People is part of the Mirror Group so putting two and two together = one story from Nick Pisa in Rome

By Nick Pisa

Two of the people accused of murdering British student Meredith Kercher have been exchanging love letters behind bars, it emerged yesterday.

Raffaele Sollecito, 24, wrote to Amanda Knox, 21 - who calls herself 'Foxy Knoxy' - saying: "When this is all over and I know it will finish well, we can get back together again. I miss you." ....

The People


(Source: Sunday Mirror; London)MEREDITH Kercher murder accused Raffaele Sollecito has sent pleading love notes to keep his relationship with fellow suspect Amanda Knox alive.

Sollecito, 24, told the American dubbed "Foxy Knox": "When this is all over, and I know it will finish well, we can get back together again. I miss you." He also sent flowers for Valentine's Day and her 21st birthday in July.

But Knox wrote back: "I'm not sure - let's see.

Maybe we can just be friends."....

Istockanalyst - Ha I can't find the actual Sunday Mirror story


And for verification of Nick's story I present this from The Daily Star:

AMANDA KNOX IT ON HEAD

MEREDITH Kercher murder suspect Amanda Knox has dumped her Italian boyfriend in a secret note sent from her prison cell.

She told Raffaele Sollecito they were finished after he bombarded her with flowers and love letters from jail, it has been claimed.....

The Daily Star

Soozie wrote:

Breaching the rules by posting a private PM instead of paraphrasing it.

Sorry to interrupt your discussion, but I need to make an IMPORTANT clarification here. It is not okay to post or paraphrase a PM without the author's permission. It is not okay to say "so and so told me in a PM that... " unless you have his or her permission.

Do not post another person's PM or even allude to what was said by any particular person in a particular PM without the prior consent of the author. In other words, don't identify specific content with a specific person without prior permission.

EDIT:
I was delighted to see that Soozie had posted and did not notice this until it was pointed out to me by a member requesting clarification. It needed to be clarified and is not in any way an extension of the debate, a reflection of the need to have the last word or a criticism of Soozie or her post. Just a clarification of the rule.

A link to a video from Umbria Journal.

It shows the suspects arriving at court but about halfway through there are shots of the actual courtroom when its empty.

Everyone sits on one level and it doesn't really look like a courtroom

The judge obviously sits at a table at one end, some tables with papers and things in the middle and three rows of tables and chairs at the other end.

Shots of what are obviously some of the prosecution presentation documents and some film of the crime scene.

Umbria Journal

Hi Brian,

Thanks for the link to the video of the courtroom. It's nothing like I pictured it to be! I guess when Google translates and calls it a "classroom", that's what it really looks like. It's much smaller than I imagined.

Also, about the love notes and Nick Pisa. For what it's worth, on KOMO 4 News, Seattle's ABC affiliate, the report of the love notes was included in this evening's broadcast as well. KOMO was also the station where reporter Kathi Goertzen recently interviewed Curt Knox, Edda and Deanna Mellas. It's also the station where the IW called in from Perugia for her special report. Maybe they ALL read Nick Pisa!

Skep

What is the matter with you?

You can't leave it, it seems, without having the last word and sticking the boot in.
Happy?

Why do you have to go and put that, to show who is boss?

Soozie apologised because she does not want to have that put on her that anything is her fault, like the story of closing this board down.

But you can't leave it, she told you she will not be posting again and it looks like you just want to make sure she will not.

Paraphrase means to (possibly) put something in another way.

How ridiculously strict do you want to be or do you want to talk about the laws of behaviour and being personable?

Because what you did is not personable, to give her wrong info, then after all this, after you called her out for all to see, accused her falsely, based on her having said something based on 'your wrong information', how can you ever come back now with this, why the hell don't you just leave it alone?

In the PM, it was nothing, big deal.

But, it did say you was going to ban Wilkes.
Later Soozie repeating that gets called out for it by you like she is a blithering idiot for saying it.
And now you do this.
Well done.

Why wouldn't someone paraphrase something said in a PM that was later used to trip them up and make a bloody fool of them.

Is this the KGB?

Or maybe the CIA?

Old Shindler was good, he helped a few people out who they wanted to take off and shoot.

Hi di ho everyone.

Why didn't you just say that in a PM like and demonstrate in deed not just word your example of decency, this isn't decent to go on and have to have the last word.

You are doing more harm than good.

You are being petty.

[font=Comic Sans MS]TLC -[/font]

TLC wrote:Why the hell don't you just leave it alone?

[font=Comic Sans MS]I find myself asking the same question. I understand these are your 'opinions', with which as it happens I do not agree as they are 'wrong', as is your recollection of events, they have though been noted, but the main thread is NOT the place for them, it is OFF-TOPIC. The place for them is in PM, since they do not concern the case. Although, you have already been told this...many times. Moreover, your post is specifically aimed at undermining a Moderator, which is easy for you to do since you do not have to Moderate whilst being undermined, so also for that reason it is in the wrong. Moreover, 'again' you are seeking to justify something that is unjustifiable. Lastly, you appear to insist upon continuing to argue the toss over who is right and who is wrong. 'This' has already been settled by Steve Huff the group's 'OWNER' and his Mods/Admins acting on HIS behalf. The discussion is therefore OVER. If, Skep feels as Admin, she has a requirement to correct something posted in public, so that the rules on a certain matter are clarified for the benefit of the membership, it is both 'her' perrogative and duty to do so. There is a 'protocol'. There has to be, otherwise doing our jobs would be impossible. Please allow Skep to do her job. So, for the final time, this discussion is OVER. Therefore, any more posts on the matter will be deleted. We have provided you with appropriate channels to discuss it, if you insist on doing so. Thank you.

In regard to Soozie, I am glad that she has posted, for which I thank her and I hope that the whole thing can be put behind us and she will continue to contribute here. She is welcome anytime.

Michael (Moderator)[/font]

Tara wrote:...Also, about the love notes and Nick Pisa. For what it's worth, on KOMO 4 News, Seattle's ABC affiliate, the report of the love notes was included in this evening's broadcast as well. KOMO was also the station where reporter Kathi Goertzen recently interviewed Curt Knox, Edda and Deanna Mellas. It's also the station where the IW called in from Perugia for her special report. Maybe they ALL read Nick Pisa!

Ah! Terrific insight, Tara.

Another peeling of another onion gets under way here. Page 37 is turning into a really gripping read on the various camps in the media, thanks to you and to Brian, Machine, Skep and many of the good company here.

I have also been trying to figure out more precisely who in the media and the blog world is reliable and objective, who is biased (and what are the trends), who may have been bought, and who may simply be lost or behind the curve.

In effect three our four lists still in progress, and maybe very effective if they are posted. A kind of readers' guide to the universe.

The kind that quite possibly could be grabbed by one of the main media and published to show just how unreliable all those other hacks are!!

I do know that one of the main commenters here (at least) likes Nick Pisa and thinks that he is well worth any positive shows of attention.

The Machine wrote:Amanda and Raffaele didn't have enough time to get their stories straight, so they must have agreed to come up with the story about remembering almost nothing because they had smoked cannabis.

Machine, good comment, I see just this part slightly differently.

I think their Plan A was to covertly clean up, and appear lucid and caring, and above all point to Patrick or Rudy, and they seem to have had 12 hours together to get that story straight. And they seem to me to have come pretty close to giving that story line legs.

Plan B was the last-moment seat-of-the-pants story line concocted right there in the yard of the house, right in front of half a dozen cameras, and maybe in the back of the police car, when Plan A started to go off the rails because the cops came. (is there any lip-reading to be done here?)

We probably all think they would have been nabbed in any case, on the basis of the luminol evidence, but they did have a Plan A that might have confused matters for months, and maybe terminally.

Remember when Rudy was on the run he was the Number One Perp in a lot of people's minds. If he had paid for his ticket in Germany he might still have been on the loose right now and Number One on the Most Wanted of Interpol.

And they might have just walked.

Pesky over-diligent cops!! (Their thought, not mine.) And pesky bleach-detergent cleaner stuff; next time use the pure bleach.

It's more effective - and it's cheaper.

Since the offending post has been removed I have removed my post.

Here are some comments by the IW when she visited Italy for the April 1 hearing. She seems to focus on how the reporters dress, and whether or not they stay at 5 star hotels. Interesting to note, she did NOT have a press pass:

I got into the hearing room by tagging along with Doug Longhini of 48 Hours Mystery, a veteran of the Natalie Holloway and Jon Benet-Ramsay cases. We were the only Americans who showed up. I didn't actually have a press pass, but handed the guard my driver's license and told him I was an Italian-American journalist from Seattle. He found my cover story and accent so entertaining that he let me in.

The hearing room was on the fourth floor of the magnificent building--white marble, carved wood and giant statues everywhere. The room itself was about the size of a wedding chapel, wood-paneled, with crystal chandeliers. There I met the most famous journalists on the case, Nick Pisa and Richard Owen, both from the UK.

Pisa works for the tabloids. He's a snappy dresser, short and tanned, with spiky hair. I couldn't manage to ask him a question. He was an Energizer bunny, jumping around, tossing rapid Italian into the phone. He never did take off his black trenchcoat.

Owen, from the Times of London, is tall and gray-bearded. He said all of the journalists had to "decamp" from Rome to Perugia for a month when the murder occurred and they were not thrilled. The tabloid people got to stay at the Brufani; the others at the nearby Locanda.

"So the quality press is three star; the tabloids are five. That's the way it works nowadays."

http://tinyurl.com/3lf5bz

On this you tube video that Soozie kindly posted from the ITN interview, Nick Pisa comes on at about 5:48 into the show. He doesn't look tan, and he doesn't have spiked hair. He does seem to have spent quite a bit of time on this case. IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9uwpH9YG1I

Tara wrote:

On this you tube video that Soozie kindly posted from the ITN interview, Nick Pisa comes on at about 5:48 into the show. He doesn't look tan, and he doesn't have spiked hair. He does seem to have spent quite a bit of time on this case.

It is true that the description of Nick Pisa and the guy in the video are miles apart. Of course, maybe he took his batteries out for the onscreen interview to prevent himself from jumping about.

A couple of thoughts:

If the tabloid guys are staying at the fancy hotels, does this mean they have bigger expense accounts for investigating, fact-checking and just generally following developments in this case and doing background work?

The general tendency to cherry-pick is apparent on all sides of this case, and also to rate the journalists on the basis of whether they are saying what we want them to or not.

Where is the straightest scoop coming from? Who has been the most accurate and fair so far? These are interesting questions. John Follain has covered this case from the beginning, as has Nick Pisa, both from Italy. Both probably have extensive contacts at all levels. Follain has interviewed the Knox family. I don't see either of these journalists as biased from the get-go. I would be wary of journalists or others who have fraternized for any length of time with members of the families involved, as opposed to interviewing them in the course of covering the case.

From todays's Corriere dell'Umbria

http://umbria.corr.it/news.asp?id=21

TITLE : Il delitto di Perugia - “Nessuna prova contro Amanda”.

Prof. Carlo Torre (the "expert" for AK's defence team) seems to be repeating the well-known mantra.

skeptical bystander wrote:If the tabloid guys are staying at the fancy hotels, does this mean they have bigger expense accounts for investigating, fact-checking and just generally following developments in this case and doing background work?

If they flew their own guys there from the UK there is clearly something of an editorial budget for the story. It's an intriguing story - and it's helping to sell papers and therefore advertising. I think for counter-balance, the more the better.

Did anyone fly from the US, real media people that is? Newsweek and the NY Times have a bureau in Rome.

By the way, I did not see a lot of hotels in the old city and they were all slightly pricey. Everything is in walking district from them.

The classiest hotel that I saw was just north of the Piazza Italia, a four-star I think, and that must have just about been taken over by the horde.

If the dollar and the Euro were back at parity (I wish!) you'd get a very good hotel in Italy for around $100. Prices being paid by the press in Perugia would be decidedly low by say London or Berlin standards.

Fast Pete,

I suspect Amanda and Raffaele were preoccupied with cleaning up all the blood from the cottage and removing all traces of themselves in Meredith's room. They must have been physically and mentally exhausted. They still hadn't finished their clean up job when the postal police turned up: Amanda's lamp was still in Meredith's room, the bloody footprint was still on the bathmat and the washing machine hadn't finished its load. They must have been freaked out by the unexpected arrival of the postal police and they made a silly mistake when they told them they had already phoned the police and were waiting for them. This was followed by another critical mistake when Raffaele then phoned the police in front of them. Extreme tiredness and blind panic caused them to become very careless. The idea to come up with a story about being at a party on the night of the murder which could be checked out very easily was an absolute clanger. They would have been prime suspects from the moment they opened their mouths.

The fact they were passing secret messages to each other just before they were due to be interviewed by the police tells me that hadn't got their stories straight. The police said their witness statements were chaos. Amanda's and Raffaele's pact didn't last very long with Raffaele dropping Amanda in it when he was shown the phone records that proved they were lying. They both proved just how stupid they were with Raffaele giving the police another alibi which was very easy to demolish and Amanda telling her utterly ridiculous story about having a vision and not being sure what true and what wasn't. I'm surpised they haven't been sent straight to trial and more surprised that their lawyers have been able to keep straight faces when they try to explain away the evidence.

‘Prof. Carlo Torre (the "expert" for AK's defence team) seems to be repeating the well-known mantra.’….Bluetit

An exert from the link provided:

‘Critically, the professor, also on genetic investigations that nail Amanda, and the fact that the knife found a house call, in addition to the DNA Meredith there is the DNA of "Foxy Noxy": "In a laboratory in which hundreds have been made examinations on the blood of Meredith, finding his profile on a sample does not mean much. " Nearly a claim that the knife may have been inadvertently contaminated. "The DNA - says Professor Torre stated a 'Panorama' - may have been transported: they are things that happen.‘

That is not the same mantra that Joe T. said in in early phases of the investigation when he said there was only a 20% match with Meredith’s DNA on the knife blade. This was picked up by Amanda supporters and transformed into that the DNA would match half of Italy. What Carlo Torre seems to be saying, and appears to be concerned, is that if it’s a 100% match, then he has to argue that the knife got contaminated somehow. We’ll see if the DNA evidence holds up, but if it does the Amanda defense team will be in a much weaker position.

That's all well and good Michael but you too set no example if you have to put it in a long post.

My one was original, in response to Skep not leaving it, but yours is a copy of mine making two wrongs a right.

Put it in another topic yes, and you too SKep

If you are saying to me to leave it, it means leave Skep to not leave it, there is no logic in that.

So I say again, set then an example and put it in a PM then instead of repeating the offensive behaviour by having to make a show of something that could have been handled in a diplomatic fashion.

Kind regards your humble servant

Terry

DLW wrote:‘Critically, the professor, also on genetic investigations that nail Amanda, and the fact that the knife found a house call, in addition to the DNA Meredith there is the DNA of "Foxy Noxy": "In a laboratory in which hundreds have been made examinations on the blood of Meredith, finding his profile on a sample does not mean much. " Nearly a claim that the knife may have been inadvertently contaminated. "The DNA - says Professor Torre stated a 'Panorama' - may have been transported: they are things that happen.‘ .

The forensic experts can't dispute the fact that Amanda's and Meredith's and Raffaele's DNA are on the knife and Meredith's bra respectively, so the only line of defence they are left with is that it's a result of contamination. It's feeble in the extreme and it won't convince any judge or jury. The most feeble excuse so far must be the claim that the police timer must have been faulty because it showed that Raffale phoned the police after the postal police turned up.

The Machine wrote:

The forensic experts can't dispute the fact that Amanda's and Meredith's and Raffaele's DNA are on the knife and Meredith's bra respectively, so the only line of defence they are left with is that it's a result of contamination. It's feeble in the extreme and it won't convince any judge or jury. The most feeble excuse so far must be the claim that the police timer must have been faulty because it showed that Raffale phoned the police after the postal police turned up.

I think belief in a series of weak claims is necessary at this point for anyone to believe that AK and RS had nothing to do with the crime. That is why I can't jump on a defense bandwagon and run with it. It is as simple as that, or so it seems to me.

The Machine wrote:I suspect Amanda and Raffaele were preoccupied with cleaning up all the blood from the cottage and removing all traces of themselves in Meredith's room. They must have been physically and mentally exhausted.

TM I agree with everything you so meticulously map out in terms of how dumb their alibi-making proved to be.

I think you were maybe not yet over here from your tackling the dark side (IW) when we discussed what they were doing back in the wee hours? Maybe a month ago now.

Some of us felt they probably were holed up in Raffaele's place from about 11 at night to around daybreak, and only then went down to the house to do the cleanup and the laundry. In the apartment, we felt they may have concocted the alibi I called Plan A and just possibly tried to sleep.

Remember the little supermarket on lower Garibaldi was not open until 8 or 9, which is when they seem to have bought the spray bleach. Also of course the PC and cellphone activity.

Starting from say then, they had around three hours to do the cleaning-up that they did. The cleanup looked to us like a three-hour job rather than a 12-hour job.

If the supermarket had been a 24 hour operation, they might have headed down earlier than they did. Rudy must be thanking his lucky stars tor that.

AK friends describing her:http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Story?id=3999320&page=1
'Loving and Compassionate'
ABC News correspondent David Muir asked Knox's friends how they would describe her.

"She is bouncy, energetic, funny, rock climber, yoga," said Madison. "Best hugger in the world. I think we can all agree on that."
"Her world revolves around making people feel good," Andrew said, "and making people feel happy."
"Everybody who knows Amanda has no doubt that she did not do this."

'RS described by his Papa as a marvelous boy. He collect knifes, so what? I collect guns....'

'RG described by his teacher and her son as a good, normal average kind of boy.'

(Interesting article from The Herald:http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/features/display.var.2454513.0.Ignore_the_myth_because_we_are_mysteries.php)

"Ignore the myth, because we are mysteries"

"Yet friends and relatives of people accused of crimes are still routinely invited to court as character witnesses, as though familiarity with how someone might have acted in one situation - be that good or bad - is a reliable guide as to how they might have acted in another. The defence of the three people who have been accused of the killing of the British student Meredith Kercher in Perugia, for example, will in part involve people testifying to their character.

Some try to make too much of these facts and suggest that the whole idea of character is a myth. We needn't go this far: we do know that there are patterns to people's behaviour, and some display certain traits more than others. But we would do well to drop the idea that behaviour in one sphere is necessarily indicative of behaviour in another."

Her friends in the US did not know her in Perugia.

Is there ANYONE who knew Knox in Perugia who have described her in such gushingly nice terms?

Is there ANYONE who knew Knox in Perugia who have anything good to say about her at all?

Jools quoted:

"But we would do well to drop the idea that behaviour in one sphere is necessarily indicative of behaviour in another."

Try telling that to Charlie Wilkes.

Thanks for the link to this interesting article. Human behavior is a fascinating and incredibly complex thing. Much too complex to be predictable, even though it sometimes is just that -- and not in a good way!

Here is a tiny URL to the article: http://tinyurl.com/4yprjt

[font=Comic Sans MS]Hello everyone,

Please all read the following announcement as soon as possible:

http://truecrimeweblog.freeforums.org/p ... .html#8360

Michael (Moderator)[/font]

.

In the absence of any news from the front line in Italy today, two thoughtful pieces, one from the US and one from the UK which is not directly related to this case but does pass comment.


From the rear windows of the medieval courthouse here you can see clear across the Umbrian countryside to Assisi. But inside, a true-crime drama is playing out whose brutality seems at odds with the postcard-perfect surroundings.

In the coming weeks, a judge will decide whether to indict Amanda Knox, of Seattle, and her onetime Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, in the killing of Ms. Knox’s 21-year-old housemate, Meredith Kercher, last November. A third suspect, Rudy Hermann Guede, who was born in Ivory Coast and grew up in Italy, is undergoing a separate fast-track, closed-door trial for murder and sexual assault; a verdict in his case is expected by the end of October.

With its good-looking young suspects, tales of junior-year-abroad debauchery and hints of racial tensions in a sleepy college town, the case has drawn relentless news media attention, particularly in Italian and British tabloids. Whenever the suspects arrive in court, they face a veritable Fleet Street gantlet. There are blogs and books about the case. But much of the coverage is speculative because nearly a year has gone by without any decisive developments.....

The New York Times





Ignore the myth, because we are mysteries

.....There has been a lot of work in the field of psychology over the past few decades that has cast doubt on claims made for the consistency of character. For example, whether someone is helpful or not may depend much more on apparently trivial variations in situation than on deep-rooted character traits. Experimenters tested this by getting an actor to drop a pile of papers outside a phone booth as unwitting guinea pigs stepped out. When they had just "found" a coin in the return slot, which had in fact been put there by the testers, 14 out of 15 people stopped to help pick up the papers. When there was no lucky find, only two out of 24 did. It seemed that whether people were helpful or not depended more on whether they were put in a good mood by a small stroke of luck than it did on any stable character traits.

Another experiment looked at whether people would stop to help someone in clear distress. Whether they did so depended a lot on how much of a hurry they were in - and it's worth noting that the people being tested were students at a theological seminary.....


.....friends and relatives of people accused of crimes are still routinely invited to court as character witnesses, as though familiarity with how someone might have acted in one situation - be that good or bad - is a reliable guide as to how they might have acted in another. The defence of the three people who have been accused of the killing of the British student Meredith Kercher in Perugia, for example, will in part involve people testifying to their character.

Some try to make too much of these facts and suggest that the whole idea of character is a myth. We needn't go this far: we do know that there are patterns to people's behaviour, and some display certain traits more than others. But we would do well to drop the idea that behaviour in one sphere is necessarily indicative of behaviour in another....

The Herald

The second link is not intended to be used as an excuse for people to rant on about the Amanda Knox and her family but it does offer a view which I consider to be relevant to the case in Perugia.


EDIT:

Ha Jools,

That'll teach me to read earlier posts before I compose mine.

No duplication intended. Perhaps an example that great minds do think alike.

Thanks for the links, Brian.
Jools posted a link to the Herald piece yesterday, but it may have been overlooked.
The NY Times article is up to the high standard of that paper: factual, comprehensive, unbiased, etc. It reminds us that no public records have yet emerged from the pre-trial hearings, and quotes one of Guede's lawyers (Gentile) as well as Maresca. The latter sounds certain of the involvement of all three. His words are deftly juxtaposed with a brief quotation from Curt Know ("she's 100% innocent,"). An example of good coverage.

No more handcuffs.

ISTM that the Italian press are reappraising they way they have reported on Rudy. They are attempting to tell something of his real life and not that which has until now has portrayed him as a drifting, homeless drug dealer and thief.

He has no convictions for either drugs or theft and seems to me to have been very much part of the Perugian scene, not short of friends.

Damian has translated a couple of stories on Rudy which have appeared in the Italian press at his new blog.

http://damiano33.wordpress.com/

Brian wrote:

He has no convictions for either drugs or theft and seems to me to have been very much part of the Perugian scene, not short of friends.

He did seem to get around. He hung out with O8's son and his friends, with the boys at the cottage, and so on. I would imagine that, because his family situation was so precarious, his group of friends was an important emotional anchor for him.

When I was in graduate school, there were lots of guys like Rudy around. They were fringe fixtures, by which I mean not students but part of the broader student culture. I think every university town in the world has them. When I was an undergraduate, at a fancy college located in a small town in Massachusetts, we called them "townies."

Brian S wrote:

"The second link is not intended to be used as an excuse for people to rant on about the Amanda Knox and her family but it does offer a view which I consider to be relevant to the case in Perugia"

Anymore rules you seem to be taking it on yourself to lay down Brian?
Thank you for the permission to just discuss anything you yourself find relevant though.
I and many other people find Knox and her family very relevant to this case irrespective of what you personally think.

I don't think anyone on this board has ranted about Amanda Knox and her family.

With all due respect, I have seen lots of ranting about Amanda Knox and her family, not just here but there and everywhere. While I believe that they bring some of it on by their invasive media presence, I don't think they are solely to blame. And I don't think Brian is telling anyone what to do or not do; perhaps he is just pointing out that this intense focus on Knox's family and insults about them backfire for the most part. It is one thing to be critical of their intervention and their daughter's behavior; I think most of us implicitly know where the line needs to be drawn in the sand and stay on the right side of it.

As one of the three people on this board who is actually exposed to threats of libel for what is written here, I am strenuously opposed to libelous rants and other low blows, and will simply delete them if I feel they put the owners of this board and consequently the board at risk. In doing so, I am acting on instructions from Steve Huff, who owns this place. I would imagine that Michael will have some instructions on this very point for his own board and hope that people who fail to respect the rules will be dealt with swiftly and appropriately.

Disagreement over this very issue was one of the negative forces driving this board down. It won't happen on the new board.

Michael,

I went to your new board to register, I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong...but after doing so, and signing in, I am directed to the initial guest page and asked to sign in repeatedly. I'm not a regular poster so nothing lost, but I have been a lurker from the beginning and would hate to see the great commenters here stymied from their contributions.

I've just been on the TJMK website and I'm impressed. I hope more members from this board post their comments there. We finally have a more visible platform from which to make some very important and pertinent points about the case. My understanding of the case was deepened by reading the many excellent posts on this message board. Unfortunately, the posts on this board are not read by many people. The IW and Frank have been distorting the truth for too long. TJMK website gives us the opportunity to redress the balance. Even if you don't want to post your comments on the TJMK message board, the website is worth visiting just to read Skep's intelligent posts.

Does anyone want to post a link to the website on Perugia Shock? The readers on there need to hear both sides of the story. Here's the link:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

From Rainews 24,
Thei take on the NY Times article.
(Google Trans.)

http://www.rainews24.it/notizia.asp?newsID=86536


The New York Times criticized the trial for the murder Meredith, "shocking event"

After the preliminary hearing three days ago before the GUP of Perugia for the New York Times on the case of Amanda Knox, the American student accused of having killed a year ago in Perugia his companion roommate Meredith Kercher (in addition to Raffaele Sollecito and the Ivorian Rudy Guédé), has become "even more" a complicated case, a "puzzle case", because the surveys were conducted in a little tight.

In this way the newspaper in New York back on the case, stressing that the new details emerged and the new wave of attention devoted to the press, rather than help to clarify the contrary have added additional blocks to a "conundrum" that with the passing of time rather than clarify it is complicated further.
The New York Daily compares the case of Amanda Knox to that of Madeleine McCann, the English girl of 3 years disappeared in Portugal during a vacation with their parents, and criticizes the way their investiagtions were conducted.

"In the eyes of Americans, the case may seem disconcerting," wrote the authoritative magazine, in a match from Perugia, signed by Rachel Donadio, "with the judiciary, law enforcement and lawyers who disseminate information covered by secrecy," and preventive detention of suspects who have not yet been formally sentenced.
"Polluted the scene of the crime"
In it cites the opinion of Joseph Tacopina, a U.S. lawyer, dall'Abc enrolled to study the case. "I'm not impressed," said Tacopina. For Tacopina - writes the NYT - the Italian authorities "have altered the scene of the crime", "have walked far and wide in that place and this has given unreliable evidence from a case."
On the case - the newspaper writes today in New York - have written books, blogs have been opened, have the scatenati tabloid half of the world, "but one year after the crime is not there has been (in) any development decisive ".

Rhonda wrote:Michael,

I went to your new board to register, I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong...but after doing so, and signing in, I am directed to the initial guest page and asked to sign in repeatedly. I'm not a regular poster so nothing lost, but I have been a lurker from the beginning and would hate to see the great commenters here stymied from their contributions.

Rhonda,

Nice to hear from you again.

That also happened to me when I first registered, but when I went back some time later I logged straight in. It seems to take time for the registration to "become effective".

EDIT:

Rhonda,

I have just been to the new message board and checked. You are listed as a member.

Rhonda wrote:Michael,

I went to your new board to register, I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong...but after doing so, and signing in, I am directed to the initial guest page and asked to sign in repeatedly. I'm not a regular poster so nothing lost, but I have been a lurker from the beginning and would hate to see the great commenters here stymied from their contributions.

[font=Comic Sans MS]Hi Rhonda,

I believe every member to be of value, even if they don't contribute very often

Now, with the board, I'm not sure why it is...but some people are joining and they are showing as 'activated'....whilst others are showing as 'not activated'. I am presuming this is due to an automated confirmation e-mail being sent out for the user to use to verify the account and on having done so it takes some minutes to go through the system. That mail may instead be going into ones spam box (so check those). In any case, I've been going through the member list and periodically activating those who are not activated (including yourself). Therefore, if you try it now you should be able to access it okay Likewise, anyone else who finds the same thing, don't worry, in one of my periodical checks I'll activate you if I see you're not already, so just try and sign in at a later time and all should be fine, but any serious problems just let me know.[/font]

The Machine wrote:I've just been on the TJMK website and I'm impressed. I hope more members from this board post their comments there. We finally have a more visible platform from which to make some very important and pertinent points about the case. My understanding of the case was deepened by reading the many excellent posts on this message board. Unfortunately, the posts on this board are not read by many people. The IW and Frank have been distorting the truth for too long. TJMK website gives us the opportunity to redress the balance. Even if you don't want to post your comments on the TJMK message board, the website is worth visiting just to read Skep's intelligent posts.

Does anyone want to post a link to the website on Perugia Shock? The readers on there need to hear both sides of the story. Here's the link:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

[font=Comic Sans MS]Yes, indeed, I encourage anyone who 'wishes' to, to do the same. Pete has been doing a great job with the TJMK site.

I also wish Damian lots of luck with his new blog. That should be a great resource for anyone who wishes to study the case, or those who simply want to learn more.

But, just to clarify something...it is true 'this' board at True Crime is virtually invisible to Google searches. However, the group we are moving to is 'not'...I have it set so that Perugia Murder File lights up on Google like a Christmas tree. This is also one of the reasons for the stricter rule set...we'll be more in the public view, so we have more of a responsibility over how we discuss the case.

Therefore, discussing AK's family and being critical is one thing and perfectly fine. However, what Skep and I are trying to avoid are the kind of posts made for no other reason then to sling abuse at them. Everyone here is intelligent enough to know the difference between the two, so the rules shouldn't be an issue. So, criticism okay, abuse not. The same thing goes for owners of other sites.

We also have to have a care over the high-end profanity. It is actually against the FreeForums terms of service in fact. They could suspend our group for it. So, that will not be permitted in general discussion in public forums. However, where it exists in witness statements and the like it will be permitted if quoted. I hope nobody finds this unreasonable.

Michael (Moderator)[/font]

Michael, Brian & Skep,

Thanks for the assistance!

.

More on the DNA showdown happening in Perugia this coming Saturday.

Raffaele's defense say they'll use crime scene video to demonstrate evidence contamination.
Raffaele stressed out but wants to be there.

Amanda's team to dispute Meredith's DNA on the knife.

Rudy's team have their own DNA expert who will wade into this.

In response to questions from the lawyers and judge us will be the biologist Police Scientific Patrizia Stefanoni who presented to prosecutors Manuela Comfortable and Giuliano Mignini a report of 270 pages that encompasses all the analysis on findings taken in the house of horrors. There is no doubt therefore that the hearing on Saturday will announce as tense and important. With defenses having declared battle and the prosecutor who has all the intention to respond blow on blow.

Google translation of La Nazione





What were the movements of that bra clasp between it's discovery and it's retrieval from the crime scene? Was it bagged before it was taken from Meredith's room?

Will Meredith's DNA on the knife match half of Italy?

What would happen between Amanda and Raffaele if the evidence on the bra clasp was ruled out but that on the knife was ruled in? Amanda would appear to have a decision to make.

Or visa versa? Would Raffaele totally desert Amanda?


I assume Patrizia Stefanoni will have a friend in Rudy's DNA expert, Anna Barbaro. I know that she asked for a retest, I think on the DNA from the knife. That would be logical. Raffaele's DNA isn't contested as not being his, just that it got there from contamination. Meredith's DNA on the knife is actually disputed.

From La Nazione:

Meanwhile Monday evening GUP Micheli has accepted the request made by the defense to call asking to see the clips filmed by the cameras of the parking lot of letters that run into the cottage in via della Pergola. Allowed at first had been denied because they were not shooting seemed to acts. The flying squad, however, confirmed the judge that the disk with the recording was acquired and, therefore, the GUP Micheli has made available to legal assistant to the Giovinazzo.

What a cover up!

I assume this information came from Raffaele's team since they are the ones who gave the interview. They wouldn't want to be accused of leaking the earlier doctored video apparently showing Rudy arriving at the cottage after Meredith.

Of course, they'll claim it wasn't them who edited the film of the forensic gathering shown on Telenorba and put it back together in the wrong order to make things look bad

I hope the judge keeps his eye on the timestamps. Assuming of course that Raffael's team hasn't edited any film again to remove those very stamps.

Raffaelle gets 40 letters and has a fan in Chile according to Il Messagero

Corriere della Sera quotes lawyer, Giuseppe Caforio, who is currently working in America. “In America it’s as if we’re at a baseball match and Amanda’s team is the one to support.

Damian's blog

Brian S. wrote:. What were the movements of that bra clasp between it's discovery and it's retrieval from the crime scene? Was it bagged before it was taken from Meredith's room?

The forensic scientists are professionals, so I'm sure would have bagged the evidence before it was taken from Meredith's room. They are not the Keystone Cops as certain people try to portray them. Besides, if the bra clasp hadn't been bagged in Meredith's room, Raffaele's lawyers would be screaming about it from the rooftops.

Brian S. wrote:Will Meredith's DNA on the knife match half of Italy?

That well-known forensic expert Curt Knox made this claim on a recent documentary on ITV. I'd love to see the forensic report that categorically states the DNA matches the DNA profiles of approximately 30 million people. It sounds like more Joe Tacopina hyperbole to me. Meredith was half-English and half-Indian which would make her DNA profile quite distinctive. I'm assuming the DNA recovered from the knife would have showed strong Indian ethnicity.

Brian S. wrote:What would happen between Amanda and Raffaele if the evidence on the bra clasp was ruled out but that on the knife was ruled in? Amanda would appear to have a decision to make.

Or visa versa? Would Raffaele totally desert Amanda?

I don't think they are able to desert one another because I believe they both played very active roles in the sexual assault and murder of Meredith.

Brian S. wrote:Meredith's DNA on the knife is actually disputed.

The knife evidence is extremely damning evidence. Amanda's lawyers have to dispute this evidence no matter what. If there there was a large trace of Meredith's DNA on the knife, they would have resorted to the "crime scene has been violated" argument and blamed contamination.

QUOTE: "What were the movements of that bra clasp between it's discovery and it's retrieval from the crime scene? Was it bagged before it was taken from Meredith's room?

Will Meredith's DNA on the knife match half of Italy?

What would happen between Amanda and Raffaele if the evidence on the bra clasp was ruled out but that on the knife was ruled in? Amanda would appear to have a decision to make.

Or visa versa? Would Raffaele totally desert Amanda? "

Sounds like a Soap Opera - tune in tomorrow to find the answers to these questions and more...

Michael - what is the web address for the new site? I have it bookmarked at home but not at work.

thanks
betty

The Machine,
Regarding Merediths DNA on the murder weapon, Sollecito would not have come up with the cock and bull story of having pricked her with the knife while cooking over at his place if he had not been scared (guilty conscience perhaps?) when confronted with the forensic scientists findings.
Forgive me if I'm wrong but I can't recall the PR people or the pro Knox people fabricating any type of story to counter the fact as to why he stated this to the police when it is known that Meredith had not actually been to his apartment.This is a facet of this case that people like the cook have tried to cover over/delete like a bad smell.
I would imagine he has some explaining to do regarding this issue.

Brian quoted from Damian's translation of Corriere della Sera article:

Lawyer Giuseppe Caforio, who is currently working in America, says “In America it’s as if we’re at a baseball match and Amanda’s team is the one to support."

It may just be because the World Series is upon us that comparison with the way Americans view sports competition (such as a baseball game) seems so apt, but there is also some truth to the equation. However, I'm not sure the cheerleading for or against a particular team is along nationalistic lines.

mylady007 wrote:
Michael - what is the web address for the new site? I have it bookmarked at home but not at work.

thanks
betty

Hi Betty,

Here's the web address:

http://perugiamurderfile.freeforums.org/index.php

DeathFish 2000 wrote:The Machine,
Regarding Merediths DNA on the murder weapon, Sollecito would not have come up with the cock and bull story of having pricked her with the knife while cooking over at his place if he had not been scared (guilty conscience perhaps?) when confronted with the forensic scientists findings.
Forgive me if I'm wrong but I can't recall the PR people or the pro Knox people fabricating any type of story to counter the fact as to why he stated this to the police when it is known that Meredith had not actually been to his apartment.This is a facet of this case that people like the cook have tried to cover over/delete like a bad smell.
I would imagine he has some explaining to do regarding this issue.

Raffaele Sollecito knew that the knife had been used to kill Meredith and that's why he came up with the ridiculous story about accidentally pricking Meredith while cooking at his apartment. It's highly significant that he lied when confronted with incriminating new evidence. He lied about what he was doing on 1 and 2 November when he was shown the telephone records that proved he was lying. When he was informed about Meredith's DNA on the knife in his apartment he lied again. He has lied repeatedly because he was involved in the murder of Meredith. There is no other plausible explanation.

The bloody trace of the knife left on Meredith's bed matches the knife with Meredith's DNA on it found at his apartment, providing further confirmation that it was used to kill Meredith.

[font=Comic Sans MS]Hello everyone,

It would appear that there is a subtle but important new development regarding the Knox 'Defence Blogs'. Monica Guzman has posted a new blog entry in her typically lightweight style to argue that the prosecution witnesses are weak:

Perugia: Weak witnesses against Amanda Knox

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/theb ... blog_last3

She quotes directly from and links to Dempsey's latest blog:

Unmasked: Kercher murder witnesses flop in court

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/demp ... 149984.asp

What is the subtle but important difference? Guzman's blogs, always having been pro-Knox from the very beginning and having had a series of her own on the subject, were always overtly seperate from Dempsey's and neither was Dempsey or her blogs ever quoted as a 'source'. This now has clearly changed with a linking up between Guzman and Dempsey. Moreover, whilst Dempsey is a freelancer and not actually on the staff of Seattle-PI, Guzman, although a junior reporter, 'is' on the Seattle-PI staff, although this is Guzman on 'The Big Blog' rather then her officially being tasked to the case with a 'story'. Therefore, this may also signify the the first step towards the Seattle-PI making the firat tentative steps to officially accepting and identifying itself with Dempsey and her methods (aside from her merely having a personal blog on their site). I think the confidence to do so has come from the 'apparently' weak prosecution witnesses. So, it would appear that the New Era on S-PI Meredith case coverage, at least from its blogs, is to be with Guzman and Dempsey publicly joining forces.

It is also worthy of note that the general public at large and the Seattle-PI readership are shut out of having a say in this almost almost completely...Dempsey's blog comments section is heavily censored whilst Guzman's comments section hasn't even been opened in the first place.

Dempsey has been acting, by design or not, as Seattle-PI's 'pointwoman' on this case in regard to providing Knox public support whilst staffer Guzman, in an 'unofficial' capacity, has been Knox's cheerleader. None of this could have been without Seattle-PI's implicit blessing and tacit support. Is it with even more then that? When Paul C was interviewed it was by Guzman for 'The Big Blog', rather then for the paper proper and it seems strange that the interview was performed by the paper's junior reporter, especially of someone who had been pipped to ahead of other Seattle newspaper rivals...unless it was a means for Seattle-PI to officially be able to retain some claim to being non-biased on the case...in reality....can we hear 'silent' in fact?

How soon now before Seattle-PI officially weigh in with a senior reporter to take the part of Knox and her 'plight'?[/font]

Brian S. wrote:.

More on the DNA showdown happening in Perugia this coming Saturday.

Raffaele's defense say they'll use crime scene video to demonstrate evidence contamination.
Raffaele stressed out but wants to be there.

Amanda's team to dispute Meredith's DNA on the knife.

Rudy's team have their own DNA expert who will wade into this.

In response to questions from the lawyers and judge us will be the biologist Police Scientific Patrizia Stefanoni who presented to prosecutors Manuela Comfortable and Giuliano Mignini a report of 270 pages that encompasses all the analysis on findings taken in the house of horrors. There is no doubt therefore that the hearing on Saturday will announce as tense and important. With defenses having declared battle and the prosecutor who has all the intention to respond blow on blow.

Google translation of La Nazione





What were the movements of that bra clasp between it's discovery and it's retrieval from the crime scene? Was it bagged before it was taken from Meredith's room?

Will Meredith's DNA on the knife match half of Italy?

What would happen between Amanda and Raffaele if the evidence on the bra clasp was ruled out but that on the knife was ruled in? Amanda would appear to have a decision to make.

Or visa versa? Would Raffaele totally desert Amanda?


I assume Patrizia Stefanoni will have a friend in Rudy's DNA expert, Anna Barbaro. I know that she asked for a retest, I think on the DNA from the knife. That would be logical. Raffaele's DNA isn't contested as not being his, just that it got there from contamination. Meredith's DNA on the knife is actually disputed.

Here is a bit of info on Anna Barbaro now part of RG defense team:

http://tinyurl.com/5xblso

http://www.simef.com/genetics.htm

Michael wrote:[font=Comic Sans MS][i][size=14]It is also worthy of note that the general public at large and the Seattle-PI readership are shut out of having a say in this almost almost completely...Dempsey's blog comments section is heavily censored whilst Guzman's comments section hasn't even been opened in the first place.

There used to be numerous posters on the IW's blog. Now there are only about four people who post on there. I think most people got fed up with having their posts deleted for nothing more than arguing that Amanda and Raffaele must have been involved in the murder of Meredith. However, there is a new poster on there who doesn't toe the official party line. I wonder how long he or she will last?

Michael wrote:[font=Comic Sans MS][i][size=14]How soon now before Seattle-PI officially weigh in with a senior reporter to take the part of Knox and her 'plight'.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the Seattle Post-Intelligencer will get involved once the full trial of Amanda and Raffaele starts.

Last night I got an email from Tara, who had seen some disturbing comments on the IW Reader Blog hosted by the Seattle PI. I must admit that I rarely visit the blog, for reasons I don't need to go into. But I went to see and came away totally depressed. I hoped the offending comments would be deleted by this morning (given the house proclivity), but alas they were still up for all to see. I have submitted this to Fast Pete for publication on his site, but I wanted you all to be aware of what was said and left to stand in response to Maresca's comments for the NY Times:


What’s Meredith Got to Do with It?

When an article about a controversial subject manages to piss everyone off, this sometimes means the author has achieved a certain level of neutrality. Rachel Donadio’s brief article in the NY Times, recapping the main developments in the Meredith Kercher murder case, is neutral using this yardstick. For people who have already decided Amanda Knox is guilty, Donato left out important details needed to expose the case against Knox.

For people who have already decided on Knox’s innocence, Donato committed the unpardonable sin of allowing Francesco Maresca, the Kercher family’s increasingly vocal legal counsel, to voice this opinion: "The important thing is they were all there," he said. "All three are responsible."

In at least one critical respect, the Italian criminal justice system may be better than its US counterpart. In Italy, the family of the murder victim has the right to legal representation. This perplexes many in the Knox defense camp. But anyone who has survived the murder of a loved one will understand why it is so important.

They will also understand why comments of the kind posted on Seattle’s Knox defense blog are reprehensible and must be called out as such.

Kelly13, the first poster to weigh in, notes that Maresca has been increasingly vocal about Knox’s involvement and that he recently expressed dismay at the Supreme Court’s decision to throw out Knox’s oral confession. So far, at least, he is factual and limits his remarks to Maresca. But then he goes to work on the Kerchers: “Despite their carefully crafted direct statements expressing a desire for justice, clearly the Kerchers have made up their minds and they don't strike me as nice or objective people. I wonder if they have created legal liability for themselves, certainly Mr. Maresca can be sued for this unproven claim made against Amanda.”

It is hard to pass judgment on “people” who have only spoken to the press twice (that I know of) and who have read brief prepared statements each time. But what struck me as really strange about this comment was how inaccurate and mean it sounded. Then I remembered where I had read similar sentiments… on the same blog, about six months ago, by the same poster. He is a self-proclaimed faith-based activist who says he lobbies for US citizens jailed abroad. Earlier, he noted blithely that the Kerchers needed to “set aside” their grief and jump on the free AK bandwagon.

A few of the few posters on the site tried to explain why his most recent comments were unacceptable, but they were wasting their time. In reply to those who disagreed, Kelly13 said he knew “folks who have been through even worse and they had the backbone to stand up against obvious injustice. The least the Kerchers could do is just stay silent and keep their lawyer under control. To fail to do so undermines Amanda's right to fairness, contributes to her unjust confinement, and shifts focus away from the tragedy that is Meredith. It's very hard, but in the interest of justice and fairness their lawyer needs to shut up, and only they can affect that.”
End of subject for him. He begins his next paragraph: “Moving on…”

These comments were still standing today. I note this only because in the small corner of the blogosphere covering this case, the blog owner in question has gained notoriety mainly for her heavy thumb on the delete button.

Maresca’s current view of the case will ultimately be proven right or wrong. The family has filed a civil suit for damages against whomever is found guilty, which means that it and its counsel now have access to the 10,000 pages of material submitted by the prosecutor. Maresca’s opinion just might reflect his deep conviction, based on an examination of the evidence.

Furthermore, the Kerchers silence with might also be due to their belief that justice is taking its course. They owe nothing, not one thing, to Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito or Rudy Guede. Conversely, those with a vested interest in the outcome of this case for any of the three suspects owe it to the Kerchers to keep these thoughts to themselves. It is appalling to read that Kelly13 hopes that the Kerchers will ultimately find themselves at the other end of a lawsuit. It is so appalling under the circumstances that it is physically revolting. Especially considering how utterly restrained the Kerchers have been with respect to the media and how relatively restrained their lawyer has been. In fact, it is incredible to even have to say this. Kelly13, where were you when brains and hearts were being passed out?

In any case, Maresca’s words in the NY Times will have no impact on Judge Micheli, who is presiding over the pre-trial hearing. Micheli, who already knows what Maresca thinks, is also doing his job—which is to examine the evidence, hear the challenges, and decide whether or not to press charges.

Maresca may be a thorn in the side of those who have already decided that at least two of the suspects are innocent, but he plays a vital role for the Kercher family. For just about any surviving victim of a murdered person who has been through the criminal justice process, this is a no-brainer.
The comments about the Kercher family on that Seattle blog make me incredibly sad. There is no consolation for this family, which has shown remarkable restraint and dignity for almost one year. Maresca may be, as the blog owner claimed, “a bull in a china closet,” but I see no reason to question his motives or his duty under Italian law to defend the interests of the Kercher family. His dedication to the task is obvious. Back in January, speaking to Meredith’s hometown paper the Croydon Guardian, Maresca noted: “Meredith's parents continue to suffer enormously and they faithfully await news of every hearing as they are doing so today. Their objective is to reach the truth of their daughter's murder out of respect for her memory."

The surviving Kerchers also deserve a little respect, even in the blogosphere, where anyone can say anything. It doesn't matter what you think about who did what and why. Some things should not be said, sung or even hummed.

Great post Skep.
I think it goes without saying how disgusting to normal human beings the IW's blog and stance is.

Hi Skep,

Kelly13 also wrote this offensive post:

"Posted by Kelly13 at 9/30/08 12:47 p.m.

Of course I have sympathy for the family, what could be worse? But surely they control their lawyer; they are after all paying him.

Amanda is a victim here too and the Kercher lawyer, and therefore the Kerchers, are contributing to this victimization. How much more explicit could he be: "all three were there and responsible". This totally unproven statement slants the system against Amanda. I hope she sues the lot of them when this is done."

He seems to have some psychological issues. He also doesn't seem to understand that Amanda's and Raffaele's arrest and detention has nothing to do with the Kerchers or their lawyer.

The Machine wrote:There used to be numerous posters on the IW's blog. Now there are only about four people who post on there. I think most people got fed up with having their posts deleted.

The Machine,
LOL!!!
Precisely,
But not quite, as I think she talks to herself alot of the time in her empty world.
She is a classic sock puppeteer, in her sad world of sock puppets.

"Amanda is a victim here too"

Oh really?

Maybe your right.
I think Amanda is a victim in the sense that her family never addressed/recognised her mental illness but chose to mask it with her supposedly high intelligence.
I have said this before but the constant blubbering of her mother is an indicator of this.
This is how she is dealing with her guilt of knowing her daughter is barking mad and unleashing her on the general public.

Something else to get Kelly 13 going, from the Guardian dated 20 September:

Francesco Maresca, a lawyer representing Meredith Kercher's family, had no doubts. "She came in looking like an angel, but it didn't work."

Followed by this comparative portrait of the families:

Compared with the flow of letters and prison diaries from the accused and the TV appearances made by Knox's parents, Meredith's parents and sister Stephanie have restricted themselves to short tributes to her. "Meredith was such a genuine person that when you think of her now and see her friends, you don't need to say anything, you only need to smile," said Stephanie, before the family got their first glimpse of Knox and Guede in court on Tuesday.

And ending with this reminder that the Kerchers support the investigation and that they have had to deal not only with their daughter's brutal death but also with constant reminders of it. It is nothing short of miraculous that they have managed to maintain their dignity as well as they have:

The Kerchers have kept faith in the investigation, despite the leak of gruesome crime scene photos, part of a steady flow of titbits which has turned Kercher's murder into what Sollecito called "a nightmare reality show".

The Machine wrote:Hi Skep,

Kelly13 also wrote this offensive post:

"Posted by Kelly13 at 9/30/08 12:47 p.m.

Of course I have sympathy for the family, what could be worse? But surely they control their lawyer; they are after all paying him.

Amanda is a victim here too and the Kercher lawyer, and therefore the Kerchers, are contributing to this victimization. How much more explicit could he be: "all three were there and responsible". This totally unproven statement slants the system against Amanda.[i][font=Arial Black] I hope she sues the lot of them when this is done[/font]."[/i]

He seems to have some psychological issues. He also doesn't seem to understand that Amanda's and Raffaele's arrest and detention has nothing to do with the Kerchers or their lawyer.

Hi TM,

I agree - this comment is horrific. I hope that someone can find a way to forward that string of comments to Maresca, so he can be aware of what is being said by the Knox/Mellas Defense Blog in Seattle about his clients.

In addition, I hope that when the IW was near the Kercher's on her most recent visit to Perugia, she didn't get close enough to slip her business card into their pockets with her blog address on it. May the Kerchers never have to see that deplorable blog, its comments, the blog owner or the Seattle PI EVER. IW should be ashamed to let comments like the above by Kelly13 stand.

Skep, thank you so much for writing about that. I hope Pete posts it soon for the whole world to see. I also hope he sends a personal copy to Rachel Donadio, the reporter for the New York Times article. Hey, here's a thought - maybe SHE knows how to get a hold of Maresca!

Skep, I think that's a really good post you've made about Candace Dempsey's blog - I've had a look at it and made comment there myself. The bizarrely offensive comments were made by Kelly - who opened several months ago by hoping that the Kercher family would join the campaign for Amanda Knox's release - and it's good to see that both Charlie Wilkes and Funnycat distance themselves from Kelly on those remarks.

I've also read with interest Michael's analysis of the positions of Candace Dempsey and Monica Guzman. I have a slightly different take on those two blogs. I don't see Guzman's comments as moving towards an official Seattle PI endoresement of Dempsey's viewpoint.

Monica Guzman's main interests are in blogging and in new media - and her initial posts about this case were in relation to that. Candace Dempsey is a food writer who has taken on a crusading role in defence of Amanda Knox. I think that what interests Guzman about Dempsey's blog (and about Amanda Knox's case) is just that it attracts so many comments.

The internet has played, and continues to play, a very interesting role in this case. From the suspects' and victim's own home pages, through the page after page after page of comments, to the generation of spin-off messageboards like this one, the internet has kept this case very much alive in a way that would have been inconceivable ten years ago.

I don't think Seattle PI is likely to take sides on the case before judgement is passed. But I would expect Monica Guzman to take interest in anything that has sent the exciting new world of blog-journalism into such a frenzy.

Finn wrote:

The bizarrely offensive comments were made by Kelly - who opened several months ago by hoping that the Kercher family would join the campaign for Amanda Knox's release - and it's good to see that both Charlie Wilkes and Funnycat distance themselves from Kelly on those remarks.

I was glad to see that Charlie objected fairly strongly to the remarks (and one other person immediately noted that maybe the Kerchers and their lawyer feel the way they do because they believe Knox was involved in the death of Meredith), and it is true that Funnycat and Candace made weak statements to distance themselves (Candace noted that the Kerchers have no one to apologize to and FC said let's not go there, Kelly). I haven't been back for a look, but I'm grateful that you took a stand as well. In addition to being incredibly insensitive and even offensive to the Kerchers, Kelly13's remarks also indicate a stunning level of ignorance with regard to the cause he defends. I believe this is typical of professional crusaders who pick individual causes based on a set of unvarying criteria that form part of a broader agenda (wrongful convictions, Americans jailed abroad, etc.). It isn't that the agenda is necessarily wrong, but it doesn't always fit the circumstances and offers a view from a cruising altitude of 35,000 feet at fast speed. It is fly-by concern in one direction, and other protagonists, like the Kerchers in this case, are considered as just so much collateral damage. Hence the insensitivity toward them. They don't matter, and are fair game insofar as they are perceived as an obstacle.

[font=Comic Sans MS]Finn! Great to see you

I'm just quickly rushing by at the moment...

Have you signed up for the new forum? We're closing this board down over the next couple of days. Everyone's signed up at the new group and the new main discussion thread has just been started there there. It's the same sort of forum as this one...so, easy to sign up and to use. It's here:

'Perugia Murder File'

http://perugiamurderfile.freeforums.org/index.php

and the new discussion thread is in its 'The Murder of Meredith Kercher' forum here:

V. MAIN DISCUSSION, 2nd Oct -

http://perugiamurderfile.freeforums.org/post39.html#39

Everyone, I am now locking this thread. Please all members from this point, continue the discussion on the group in the above linked to thread.

Michael (Moderator)[/font]