My Story – The Friends of Amanda Knox

by Anne Bremner

My initial involvement in the Amanda Knox case came when I received a phone call from King County Superior Court Judge Michael Heavey nearly four years ago while I was at a conference for the American College of Trial Lawyers. Mike and I talked for some time about Amanda's legal plight. I was interested and probably got hooked on this case at that time. Soon thereafter, I met Mike and Tom Wright for lunch and breakfast at AJ's Restaurant on two occasions in Seattle. Following my conversations with these two remarkable men at those meetings, I was hooked for sure.

What happened next is that we met with the Knox family in West Seattle. I then spent weeks with a certain individual watching the crime-scene videos and studying all the evidence of the case. By then I was more than hooked, and completely convinced that Amanda was innocent. I also conducted my extensive research and found my beliefs to be confirmed.

It was decided that I would release all the evidence to the world's press. The individual specifically required me to not reveal that he was the person behind this. I then released the crime-scene videos to the Today Show and a shot was heard around the world. I felt as if I was Daniel Ellsberg releasing the "Pentagon Papers."

Mike Heavey, Tom Wright and I became “The Friends of Amanda Knox”. We were joined by best-selling author Douglas Preston, “The Monster of Florence” who had lived through the same terrifying experience as Amanda with the prosecutor Mignini; Jim Lovering (our brilliant writer and researcher extraordinaire); Paul Ciolino (famed and talented investigator) and sometime later, Mark Waterbury (extraordinary DNA scientist and author of “The Monster of Perugia). This fine group of people were responsible for turning the “supertanker” around of false and malicious press accounts about Amanda Knox. And in that, they turned around the trial.

The Friends of Amanda Knox consisted of a small group of extraordinarily talented and motivated individuals. What I recount here is but a fraction of what they did. I hope that they tell their stories to show how a group with unique and complimentary talents and skills can turn around an international sensation- in what could be a template for other future efforts to save victims of injustice – innocents abroad. The Friends of Amanda did all of the work, I was the mouthpiece or messenger.

This is what we discovered: the now-famous bra clasp with mixed DNA --purportedly Rafael Sollecito's -- turned from white to black from dirt because it hadn't been collected for months and was dropped repeatedly; a policewoman disturbed the crime scene when she crashed through a window in the house by mistake and shattered glass everywhere; investigators did not cover their heads, letting their long hair hang over the scene; unidentified observers were lounging around the scene and talking on cell phones; and the filming of the evidence was conducted like an old high-school audio-visual class project. We called this fiasco "Fellini Forensics," in mock honor of the famous Italian filmmaker's surreal style. My friend Jim Lovering stayed up all night culling through the tapes and then cataloging them.

In addition, the Italian appellate court would discover that the knife that was such an important part of evidence in this case was shoddily transported in a shoe box, further validating the fact that the forensic evidence was unreliable, contaminated and inadmissible.

I then wrote my piece, "Amanda Knox, My Truth and My Challenge," for the Perugia Shock. I also posted it on my Seattle Post-Intelligencer newspaper blog for "City Brights." Jim was the genius behind these as well. This was a stepping stone for more articles and discussions, including ones with CNN Anderson Cooper (I blogged for AC 360 on the Amanda Knox subject), Bill O'Reilly, Gerald Rivera, Jane Velez Mitchell, CNN.com, AOL.com, MSNBC, CNN, HLN, Fox News Channel, NBC, CBS, ABC, the BBC, most of the United Kingdom press, the Italian press and local Seattle media. I made weekly appearances for years in the national and local media. All told, I have made hundreds of appearances on behalf of Amanda Knox.

A number of on-air personalities -- and even Donald Trump -- offered to fly to Italy -- and have Amanda's family flown there -- and advocate and fund-raise for Amanda and do anything they could on her behalf and bring her home. I appeared on Dateline NBC with Dennis Murphy and the Today Show over time. I developed relationships with most everyone in the national and local media. And I appeared with Sollecito's and Meredith Kercher's attorneys on the Italian version of "Oprah," "Porte a Porte."

I spent a huge amount of time trying to turn people around on the issue: All of the previously mentioned media outlets required this. I met with the UK Observer and did scores of BBC interviews. I talked to Nick Pisa and debated Barbie Nadeau on the air. For three-and-a-half years I went on TV and radio weekly to get the word out about Amanda Knox. I met with Time Magazine's Tiffany Sharples and a fantastic Time story resulted from this exchange. And New York Times writer Timothy Egan interviewed me and others on the case. Tim's two pieces were real turning points for Amanda. I partnered with KING-TV Seattle's Linda Bryon as well as Kathy Goertzen of KOMO-TV in public appearances and speeches.

My assistant, Joan Stapleton, and Tom Wright set up the websites "friendsofamanda.com" and "amandadefensefund.org." They hired a lawyer to create a trust fund at our own expense. They worked very closely with the Knox family on both sites and ultimately turned it over to them. Tom Wright, the true heart and soul of the Friends of Amanda, took on the torch of these projects and developed a world class website that was translated into many languages. It was and is the most definitive site for information about Amanda Knox. The site has received nearly a million hits from all over the world.

Tom Wright kept an ongoing blog on the website to inform the public the press about any new developments. The Internet hits exploded off the charts. The research receptacle that Tom Wright and Jim Lovering, our researcher extraordinaire, nurtured was vast. We advocated for the securing of a State Department lawyer. We spent considerable time on this issue. We actually contacted an attorney, who later became President Obama's White House Lawyer. We then spent a lot of time with John Q. Kelly, who was excellent. The family chose Ted Simon, who ultimately found little apparent success with the State Department. We, of course, wrote to Congress and to Obama. The Friends of Amanda Knox was a force to be reckoned with.

I became the target of much ire and vitriol against Amanda because I chose to be the face for the Friends of Amanda Knox. Amanda's attorneys and family were not able to step forward to address the evidence and their public-relations representative was tight-lipped, recommending silence, on the advice of Italian counsel, because of fear of retribution and defamation charges in Italy. Websites adverse to Amanda posted terrible comments about me online, including vicious attacks voiced on the Perugia Shock. Amanda-haters posted tasteless, doctored pictures of me online as well as false and defamatory remarks about me, too. I received more death threats than I can count. Every article or story where my name appeared had hideous, menacing comments. In my 25 years of legal practice, prior to my involvement with the Amanda Knox case, I had never had a negative news article or comment published about me in the media or on the Internet. That all changed with Amanda Knox. I received a virtual avalanche of negative publicity, comments and posts. My involvement in this case nearly ruined my reputation and career.

I staked my reputation and career for Amanda Knox. I would still do it all over again if asked. Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere.

Tweet

My Truth and My Challenge – Amanda Knox

by Anne Bremner

The following piece was originally written in March, 2010, and still holds true today, as the Italian appeals court hears DNA evidence that may set Amanda Knox free.

One year after the murder of Meredith Kercher, a man has been convicted and two other suspects await trial. Public interest in the case remains strong, and the truth about what happened is emerging, gradually and inexorably. But the truth is not without staunch foes who are doing their best to keep it submerged beneath a sea of resentment. Recently, for example, La Nazione published an article quoting Rudy Guede’s lawyers Walter Biscotti and Nicodemo Gentile, who allegedly made the following comment:

“A request was made to move the trial to the United States. Maybe to an outdoor affair in Alabama, where there’s a tree with a noose ready to hang the negro whose turn it is.”

This statement is spectacular in malicious intent. It goes beyond slander and reaches the level of hate speech. And since I am the one who supposedly made this request, I should clarify the record.

I did not request, and would never request, that Italy yield jurisdiction over a criminal case arising within its borders. This erroneous allegation was made by the London Telegraph, and they formally retracted it the next day, but not before it was widely repeated. Italy is one of the world’s great democracies, with public institutions that befit that status. I have no doubt that the Italian court system will deliver justice in the end.

At the same time, this particular case has been managed by Perugia’s chief prosecutor, Giuliano Mignini, in a way the public should know about. Somebody needs to challenge the bizarre conjecture through which Mignini and his associates have turned a straightforward murder into a fable with no precedent in the annals of crime.

And somebody needs to make the point, again and again until the world understands, that Amanda and Raffaele Sollecito are innocent. The case against them is based on evidence so ambiguous and compromised it should have no place in a fair trial. But the prosecution has done a good job of using lies, distortions and innuendo to incite resentment and public prejudice against these innocent suspects, and that is why I am speaking out. No one is paying me to do so. I have practiced law for 25 years, both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney, and I recognize an outrage when I see one. This case is an outrage.

Someday the smoke will settle, the mirrors will be pulled away, and the public will see that. I’m going to stay involved until that day comes. And if people slander me along the way, I’ll take whatever steps are necessary to deal with it.

Tweet

Amanda Knox: Traveler’s Advisory

Mark Waterbury, guest blogger
and Anne Bremner 

NOTE: As this post goes to press, two important developments in the appeal of Amanda Knox’s wrongful conviction in Perugia, Italy, have taken place. A group of Italian legislators led by Rocco Girlanda has filed a petition with the president of Italy and the Italian justice ministry requesting an investigation into the conduct of Perugian prosecutor Giuliano Mignini and others in Amanda’s trial. This important request for an investigation was read aloud before the Italian parliament.  

The second development involves a letter to the President of the United States and copied to all members of Congress that also requests an investigation, this time for failure by U.S. consular officials to fulfill their obligations to safeguard the rights of Amanda Knox under Italian law. We are co-signers of that letter, along with Michael Heavey and Thomas Wright. Details regarding these letters are being released through other outlets. The following article is intended to provide additional information in a less formal format.

Americans traveling abroad are subject to the laws of the nations they visit. Rights, that, in theory, U.S. citizens enjoy here at home do not apply. This poses problems of understanding due to language barriers and legal differences, even when the visited country has a sophisticated criminal justice system. Matters can be far more difficult in places like Iran or North Korea, where politics, religious zealotry, and corruption far outweigh any balance beam of justice. Yet, at least in those extreme cases you know where you stand--on quicksand, but with the hope that the State Department will apply pressure on the local dictator to secure your eventual release if you are wrongly imprisoned. 

As we’ve watched the unbelievable investigation, bizarre prosecution, and wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox in Perugia, Italy, we have seen a situation that is more complex and nuanced, resulting in a kind of legal limbo. The problem is that while Italy is an advanced western nation, a critical ally on many global issues, it is saddled with a justice system that looks good on paper but that is, at least in Perugia, a work in progress.

The presumption of innocence, for example, is enshrined in the Italian constitution. Knowledgeable observers say, however, “They don’t get it,” relegating this fundamental principle to an abstract irrelevance. The idea that guilt is something that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, rather than conjectured as a possibility, is another newfangled thing that does not seem to have taken hold.   

Then there is the corruption and the lurid media environment.

From The Economist, June 10, 2010:

“…Italy is not like other countries. It is notoriously corrupt, so politics and justice overlap.”

“Something else to which Italians are largely oblivious is the routine trampling on the rights of suspects and others caught up in investigations. Information is selectively leaked to reporters before the accused come to trial, often creating a presumption of guilt that is difficult to reverse, whether in court or in the public mind. An example is the case of Amanda Knox, an American student, and her Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, who were convicted last year of the murder of Ms. Knox’s British flatmate.”

One of us (Mark) wrote this about the trial in his recent book, The Monster of Perugia: The Framing of Amanda Knox. The following is an excerpt from Chapter 12, “Gulliver’s Travel Warning”:

“Legendary traveler Lemuel Gulliver had the misfortune to be caught in a violent storm at sea. Driven far off his course, his ship sunk, his shipmates dead and his lifeboat gone, Gulliver swam and waded till he happened upon an unknown island. Safely removed from the terrible weather, Jonathan Swift’s famous character awoke to find that he was captive and at the mercy of a perfect storm of political intrigue among a very little people, the 6-inch-tall Lilliputians.

Amanda Knox had the misfortune of having her roommate murdered while she was living abroad. The tragedy that befell Meredith could just as easily have happened to Amanda--a thought that weighed heavily upon her in the days after the murder. Having escaped that terrible fate, Amanda found herself held captive and at the mercy of a perfect storm of third world justice, corruption, and personal interests, all deeply entrenched in what is theoretically a first-world nation.

The language and culture barriers between Gulliver and the Lilliputians were immense. There had been no known contacts between their worlds, after all. He tried speaking half a dozen languages to them and got nowhere. There was an unfathomable gulf to cross, and yet... Gulliver found ways to express his respect for his captors, who recognized and appreciated his mild disposition. Soon they were won over. They fed him, freed him, they got along with him, right up until he refused to slaughter their enemies from the neighboring island of Blefescu.

Amanda expressed her respect for her captors and her confidence in the Italian justice system. She has been a model prisoner. She was paraded through the streets when arrested, she had her picture displayed beside convicted mafia dons before she was charged, she was held in prison for a year before those charges were brought, she has been demonized in much of the Italian press, and she was wrongly convicted and sentenced to 26 years in prison. Score one for the Lilliputians.”

Amanda doesn’t seem to be blessed with Gulliver’s luck, so we thought we would check on the job the diplomats have done ensuring her right to fair treatment under Italian law by reviewing the cables that reported on the case by the United States Consul in Florence. The cables were conveniently revealed by the Wikileaks organization. We wondered how the information reported in those crucial cables compared with what had actually happened to Amanda.  

In theory, Amanda has the full support of the United States’ Department of State, which has the responsibility to ensure that American citizens’ rights under local law are respected. At least, that is what they say. In response to questions about what they were doing about Amanda’s ordeal in Perugia, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said, “…it is the responsibility of our consular officials to make sure that American citizens are treated fairly under local law.” That seems clear enough.

With all of that in mind, the following is the first cable sent, in December of 2008, more than a year after Amanda was arrested after an all night interrogation by a dozen polizia detectives operating in rotation, speaking in Italian, and without being allowed an attorney. That interrogation, it was claimed, was not recorded, in another violation of Italian law.

DEC 08

FM AMEMBASSY ROME

TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1244

INFO AMCONSUL FLORENCE

AMCONSUL MILAN

AMCONSUL NAPLES

SUBJECT:  ARREST UPDATE:  AMANDA KNOX

1. NAME: Knox, Amanda Marie

9. CHARGES: Participation in voluntary manslaughter with aggravating circumstances of cruelty (potential maximum sentence: life imprisonment; however, in Italy “life imprisonment” equates to 30 years) ; Participation in sexual assault (possible sentence: 5 – 10 years) ; Simulated robbery (possible sentence: 1 – 3 years) ; Slander (stemming from Ms. Knox’s accusation against Patrick Lumumba ; possible sentence: 6 – 20 years) ; Possession of weapons (possible sentence: up to 1 year) ; Aggravated theft (possible sentence: 3 – 10 years)

10. PLACE OF DETENTION : Capanne Penitentiary, Perugia, Italy

12. TRIAL/HEARING DATE:  January 16, 2009

That was the first cable sent after Amanda was paraded through the streets of Perugia in polizia vehicles with sirens blasting in a macabre kind of victory dance immediately after her arrest. It was after it was ruled that she could be held for a year in prison before being charged. It was after Amanda was relentlessly demonized by a rabid press, fed a continuous stream of news leaks, lies, and innuendos from the prosecution and polizia, much of them illegal, all of them consumed by a jury that was not sequestered or enjoined against discussions in any way.

This cable, like all the rest, is a simple list of the starkest, and ultimately least informative facts about the arrest and prosecution of Amanda Knox. It is as if a lynch mob dragged someone away in full view of everyone, and all that was reported back was “Suspect was apprehended.” No mention of the white hoods, torches, or the terrified, innocent victim. Amanda Knox was in the process of the most conspicuous public lynching in decades, and yet the report gives no hint whatsoever that it was anything but justice taking its course.     

But let’s look at more cables to be sure. Perhaps they were waiting for the actual trial to report back anything of substance. A month or so after the trial began the next cable was sent:

FEB 09

1….

9….

10….

12. TRIAL/HEARING DATE:  Trial is ongoing. Hearings take place every Friday and Saturday. The court plans to follow the same weekly hearing schedule in the foreseeable future.

Friday and Saturday… two days a week. That’s it. Bus schedules go into more detail.  The next cable, three months of blatant kangaroo court proceedings later:

MAY 09

SUBJECT: Arrest Update: Amcit Amanda Knox

12. TRIAL/HEARING DATE: Trial is ongoing.    Hearings take place every Friday and Saturday.   According to Ms. Knox’s attorney, the trial is being moved to an accelerated time-table and beginning June 4, hearings will be held three times a week, on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.

18. ACCESS: ConOff and ConAsst visit Ms. Knox on May 14, 2009 at Le Capanne prison in Perugia, Italy.  

Note the numbers, mostly 12 or 18, denoting categories of information. There is no 1, 2, 3… in most of these particular cables, but only 10, 12, or 18. Apparently, 10 means “Where At,” 12 means, “Cursory description of the trial schedule,” and “18” means something like, “We had to skip a nice luncheon to go to some damned prison.”

It is a shame that only these few numbers were used. Diplomatic cables that briefly summarize the relentless destruction of an innocent life might benefit from using more categories. May we make a humble suggestion? How about assigning, say, 23 to “Defendant’s rights are being trampled beyond recognition,” and how about 42 for, “Prosecutor has been convicted of prosecutorial misconduct, but is still the prosecutor.” That would leave 36 to represent “Defendant has been relentlessly smeared by the world’s press,” and 78 for “The forensics were a travesty of pseudoscience.”

Three more cables follow, at roughly three-month intervals, in August, November, and December of 2009. They say nothing about the constant spread of misinformation by the prosecution, nothing about the fact that the prosecutor was under indictment for misconduct (convicted of same in January, 2010), nothing about the fact that the DNA evidence would never be admitted as evidence in any normal courtroom, and that the two star prosecution witnesses were drug addicts.   

One might argue, “So what?” Perhaps these reports are simple schedule documents, but here’s the thing. When asked about the trial after Amanda’s conviction in a December 7, 2009 briefing, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said “we haven’t received any indications necessarily that Italian law was not followed.”

I guess they weren’t paying attention. Adding insult to that injury, in response to a question that pointed out the tainted evidence, the non-sequestered jury, the problem prosecutor, Mr. Kelly asserted that “…Italy is a democratic country that has an established and transparent legal system.”

Which brings us back, full circle, to our opening point. If Amanda had been captured by a crazy prosecutor in North Korea, she might have had some support from State. In Italy, she has been on her own.

Here’s the takeaway lesson from all this: The next time you’re in a foreign country and a crazy, corrupt local prosecutor decides to make a career move by throwing you in prison for the rest of your life, you can count on your United States’ consul to dependably tick off the milestones as you rot in jail. 

Anne Bremner is a member of Friends of Amanda.

Tweet

The Prosecutor's New Clothes and Amanda Knox

by Mark Waterbury, PhD., with Anne Bremner

We all remember the tale of The Emperor’s New Clothes, by Hans Christian Andersen. Charlatans convinced the vain Emperor that they could weave fabric so fine, so beautiful, that only an idiot or incompetent would fail to see it. Not wanting to admit that he couldn’t see the fabric himself, the Emperor bought a pricey outfit and paraded about before his people.

The people, not wanting to be thought of as idiots or incompetents, all praised his fine clothes. They outdid one another in describing the beauty of the fabric and how perfectly it all fit together.

It was left to a child to point out the obvious: The Emperor had no clothes. Once the child spoke, the floodgates opened and everyone could admit the truth that lay before their eyes all along.

Now, at the appeal of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in their trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy, we see prosecutor Giuliano Mignini’s absurd charade of guilt coming apart at the seams. The prosecutor, it seems, has no clothes either. Much of the unraveling took place in just the last week. First, a report from court-appointed independent experts who are reviewing the DNA profiling evidence on two items claimed to be critical by the prosecution, was leaked to Italian media.

The experts report that they have found nothing. No blood on a kitchen knife that the prosecution claimed was the murder weapon, not even between the blade and the handle where it would have surely been wicked up and trapped. Neither did they find enough DNA to profile. The finding that there is no DNA or blood anywhere on the knife marks the beginning of the end for that critical item of evidence.

That result was not a surprise. It was an ordinary kitchen knife that did not match the wounds, did not match an imprint left at the scene, no blood was found on it in the first round of tests with TMB, and the profiler system reported “too low” for DNA. But it had woven, like the Emperor’s invisible fabric, into apparently damning evidence with a breathtakingly simplistic line, “Amanda’s DNA on the handle, Meredith’s on the blade.” Only an idiot or incompetent could fail to see that that meant guilt.

When presented in court it was carried in its own glass case, under armed guard in a melodramatic show. It was scientific nonsense, and now everyone can see it. That knife had nothing to do with the crime. It was also the beginning of the end for the bra clasp that was literally kicked around on the floor by investigators for 47 days, dug out from under a throw rug, dropped back on the floor, then finally retrieved.

The prosecution had no physical evidence whatsoever that associated Raffaele with the crime. So, they sent a team back in after the 47 days to fetch some in the form of that clasp. We learned from that same leaked report that there is no DNA to be found on the clasp. It was claimed by the prosecution to have contamination-level DNA on it from an unknown number of sources, one of them possibly being Raffaele. But now, nothing can be found. Why? Because it seems, the clasp has been stored, for years, in a jar of liquid. Not only has any DNA long since rotted away, the clasp itself has actually rusted. Any competent forensic investigator knows that DNA samples must be kept dry or they will decompose.

This leaves us with a question similar to ones that seem to come up again and again in this case while analyzing the prosecution, their forensics experts, and the judges in the court of first instance. Were they really so incompetent as to not know this? Or could it be that the destruction of the clasp evidence was not a mistake? We may never know. All that is certain is that the clasp will go down as a kind of monument to bad evidence handling.

The prosecutor’s new clothes looked even shabbier when Monica Napoleoni, the head of the polizia unit in charge of the hotly disputed interrogations of both Raffaele and Amanda, failed to show up to testify in court. The astonished judge fined her 300 Euros. There was a recess while they tried to contact her, but she could not be found. Oops! Got the wrong day of the week? The prosecution said that they didn’t really need her after all, but she will be summoned nevertheless. It is not the first time.

Why is it that key witnesses for the prosecution seem to no longer want to appear in court? But it was the testimony of Antonio Curatollo, also known as Toto, a perpetually homeless heroin addict that most clearly laid bare the prosecutor’s new clothes. Toto had been hailed as a “Superwitness,” a role he had practice at playing since this was no less than his third appearance as a critical witness in a murder trial. The man doesn’t get around much, but a lot must go down within sight of his perch on the park bench where he lived.

Toto testified in the trial that he saw Amanda and Raffaele engaging in a heated discussion in the plaza near her home, hanging out for hours on the evening of the murder. This contradicted their alibis that they were at Raffaele’s apartment that night. There were deep problems with Toto’s testimony from the outset, but these had been papered over, and he had emerged as the single, solitary, prosecution eyewitness who the defendants were near the crime scene. He had testified that he was sure of the night and the time because people had costumes on, and there were buses taking people off to the discos.

Trouble is, the buses and costumes are recollections of Halloween night, the night before the murder took place. There were neither costumes nor buses on the night of the murder, November 1, All Saint’s Day, a more sober holiday.

In answer to a question from the presiding judge, Toto explained that although he was addicted to heroin at the time of the events, heroin was not a hallucinogen. He replied that he lived “at home” when asked about his residence, but home turned out to be Capanne prison, where he is serving a sentence for sale of Heroin. He was uncertain about what day Halloween falls on and professed not to know why he is in prison. He was clear about where he relieved himself, in the bushes near the plaza. An assistant prosecutor, Manuela Commodi, dismissed Toto’s multiple contradictions, saying that it doesn’t matter that he confused the night of the murder with Halloween, since we know where Amanda and Raffaele were on Halloween.

But the leaked report, the no-show, and the almost-childlike statements of a bewildered man have now spoken for all to hear, and revealed for all to see - the prosecutor has no case.

Tweet

Heated Debate: Lifetime vs. 'Foxy Knoxy'

by Stacy Dittrich

Let’s face it. An international murder mystery that has been followed by millions will ultimately catch the eyes of filmmakers wanting to cash in. Lifetime television is airing a movie later this month based on the Amanda Knox case. “Amanda Knox: Murder on Trial in Italy,” (promo photo left) debuts February 21, much to the dismay of the murder victim’s father, John Kercher.

In a recap, Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and Rudy Guede all received between 16- and 26-year sentences in the brutal and violent murder of Meredith Kercher. However, the voracious debate regarding Knox’s guilt rages on. “Foxy Knoxy,” as she has been deemed by the media, is currently appealing her conviction in Italy. Knox’s attorneys have formally requested Lifetime pull the movie or face legal consequences. They fear the movie may potentially taint the trial. After viewing the trailer (below) for the movie, which includes an incredibly graphic scene of Knox holding down Kercher as she screams, John Kercher was appalled.

“To actually see it is distressing. The scenes are absolutely horrific,” John Kercher told Britain’s The Sun. “It’s awful what these film people have done. I’m surprised they have gone so far.”

According to ABC News, Knox was able to view the movie trailer in her prison cell and became physically ill upon doing so. You can view the trailer here and at the end of this post.

So, did Lifetime cross the line? It boils down to a matter of ethics, and Lifetime television is certainly not the pioneer here in bringing a true horrific case to television. Helter Skelter, anyone? I’m sure Sharon Tate’s sister wasn’t exactly cheering at the notion of her sister’s murder being played out in front of millions. Let’s not forget Farrah Fawcett being nominated for an Emmy Award for her portrayal of Diane Downs in Small Sacrifices, and Francine Hughes in The Burning Bed. Both stories were horrific real-life tragedies. At the time, The Burning Bed was one of the most-watched shows on television ever. Both of those movies were based on the true crime books, and a quick glimpse on Amazon revealed a total of eight books already on the shelves pertaining to Amanda Knox. Where was the outrage there?

I’m pretty torn on this debate. As a true crime author who has faced backlash from family members of a murder victim, the question always posed itself: “Authors and journalists have been writing about murders for decades, what makes your family so special that we shouldn’t? People have a right to know.” On the flip side, I’m a mother and if something happened to one of my children—that was later played out on television or film—I’m confident I would get violently ill. There’s also the standard that surfaces when a debate like this happens: “If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.”

The Lifetime movie about Amanda Knox appears to portray her as a vicious, knife-wielding psychopath, from the looks of the trailer. Regardless, actress Hayden Panettiere—who plays Knox in the movie—gives us her idiotic expertise. In a contradictory statement, Panettiere seems to think that butchering an innocent girl isn’t malicious and no intent was involved.

She said: “This is such a vulnerable story, and, specifically, Amanda was so needy. My job was to play a girl who, regardless of what happened, was innocent in who she was. She's not a malicious girl. She didn't have any intention to do this. This wasn't an angry or dark girl. Whatever it was that happened that night, people's lives were ruined. But it was my job to stay pretty true to form in who she seemed to be as a person in court and otherwise.”

“Regardless of what happened, was innocent in who she was…” Eh, I’m pretty sure Ted Bundy, Diane Downs, and Jeffrey Dahmer all felt they were “innocent in who they were” too. Panettiere should probably just shut her trap and do what she does best: act. (Although, that statement seems questionable as well after I viewed the trailer.)

I have absolutely no opinion on the guilt or innocence of Amanda Knox. The amount of evidence makes my head spin, and I have chosen not to follow the case in detail. But, my opinion on whether or not to air the movie is general. People will typically watch a movie than read a true crime book. If there is the potential that a movie could jeopardize a trial, I say wait. Lifetime has the right to air the movie, but they should hold off until Knox’s trial is over.

Thoughts?

Tweet

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Perugia

by Anne Bremner

Given the continuing scrutiny of the forensic evidence in Amanda Knox's trial, I've asked my friend, Mark Waterbury, Ph.D, a member of The Friends of Amanda Knox, to give us his thoughts on the evidence. Most recently, Mark has authored and released a book, The Monster of Perugia – The Framing of Amanda Knox, which is now available in Kindle (eBook) format on Amazon.com.

by Mark Waterbury
A funny thing happened on the way to Perugia.

In December, the court in Perugia, Italy, that is hearing the appeals of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito ruled that independent experts should review the DNA forensics work of the Polizia Scientifica. In particular, it asked the experts to take a fresh look at the only two items of evidence that the prosecution claims connect Amanda and Raffaele to the crime. Those items are highly contested by the defense because of the unique and irreproducible handling of the evidence, as well as the interpretation of testing results.

A review of the methods and interpretations has been a longstanding demand of the defenses.

The first item of evidence was a kitchen knife retrieved from Raffaele’s kitchen implements drawer. Although it does not match the knife wounds, does not match an imprint left on a pillow at the crime scene; and although it tested negative for blood with TMB and the DNA profiling systems reported “too low” as the test result, the prosecution’s forensics expert twisted the controls to blow up the noise at the bottom of the graph. Voila! In a DNA profiling lab with many samples of Meredith Kercher’s DNA, both before and after PCR amplification, a noise level trace appeared. This kind of contamination is not unusual at all.

The other item was Meredith Kercher’s bra clasp, which was cut or torn from her bra during the assault. The strap was spotted and photographed soon after but not retrieved until 47 days and unknown exposure later. At this point in the investigation, not one single shred of DNA evidence, or fingerprints, or footprints, or anything else connected these two defendants to the scene of the crime. That implies very strongly that these two defendants were innocent, and that the murder was committed by a third defendant, Rudy Guede, who has already been convicted. Guede left extensive traces at the crime scene, and even admits being present.

Instead of releasing Amanda and Raffaele in what I call a "hail Mary" clasp play in my book, The Monster of Perugia – The Framing of Amanda Knox, the investigators went back in 47 days later specifically to retrieve that bra clasp. By remarkable coincidence and unbelievable luck, it showed a contamination level DNA of at least three people, and was compatible with the DNA of Raffaele Sollecito. It was also compatible with many, many, other people because it is a mixed DNA profile at trace levels.

The funny thing happened when these new experts appeared in the Perugia court and one of them asked if they could dismantle the knife handle to inspect the tang, the part of the blade that secures the knife to the handle. The defense had no problem with that, but the prosecution and the civil attorneys that side with the prosecution fought it tooth and nail.

The prosecution has claimed that this item is powerful evidence against Amanda and Raffaele. Why should they be afraid to take a closer look at it? In fact, why didn’t they examine the insides of the knife handle long ago? If it was, in fact, used to commit a stabbing, blood certainly would have made it to the handle and some of it would wick up into the joint between the blade and the handle. Critical evidence would be preserved at that point. Yet, the prosecution never looked for it, and now doesn’t want it examined.

The appeals judge granted the independent experts the right to dismantle the knife, and we 'll now wait 90 days for their report.

Click to find more information about Mark Waterbury's book or Amanda Knox evidence.

Mark is a Ph.D. in materials science with 20 years of experience, including as a scientist for the Air Force, an engineer for a major engineering firm, and CTO for two companies. He's also developed a number of measurement techniques, holds several patents, and has worked on a wide range of scientific projects. Most recently, Mark started his own firm, Perception Development Co., which provides consulting services and development of a variety of new products and technologies.

Tweet

Amanda Knox: 'I'll be home for Christmas, if only in my dreams'

by Anne Bremner

In the three years since Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were arrested in the murder of Knox's British roommate, Meredith Kercher, public opinion appears to have swung in their favor in Italy and abroad. Crime novelist Doug Preston says this may have an effect on the appeals trial, which opened with a preliminary hearing this month. While Amanda didn't make it home for the holidays this year, she may be home for Christmas next year.

The shift in opinion began when the original prosecutor in the Knox/Sollecito case, Giuliano Mignini (photo right), was convicted of abuse of office and sentenced to 16 months in prison. Then, the original trial judge, Giancarlo Massei, issued his massive 427-page conclusion. At least here in America, many judicial experts were disturbed, if not shocked, by the sheer amount of unsupported surmise, conjecture, and speculation that formed the backbone of the opinion. The loquacious Massei speculated freely, without offering evidence, about such basic issues as motive, the murder weapon(s) used, how the murder was committed, and why.

Also during the past year, a range of American experts re-examined and/or commented on the forensic and DNA evidence, which was exactly the kind of independent examination that the original trial court had denied the defense. These experts include the notable FBI special agent Steve Moore, a DNA expert and former Air Force scientist Mark Waterbury, criminologists Paul Ciolino and Larry Kobilinsky, and forensic specialist Ron Hendry. All concluded that the evidence collection had been grossly incompetent and that the scientific analysis of that evidence was deeply flawed. The DNA experts said the DNA conclusions, crucial to the conviction, had been deliberately manipulated and did not meet even the most minimal international standards. None of these scientists had been hired by the Knox family or accepted fees for their work, making it hard to question their independence.

This past weekend, the Italian Courts ordered a complete independent review of the forensic evidence. This was a major victory for Amanda. It is a good sign that the names have been made known in advance of the January 22, 2011 trial date, which suggests a more open process this time around. It is important to maintain the spotlight, demanding professionalism and expecting that an unjust verdict will be overturned so all parties concerned may finally move on and an innocent young woman can put this nightmare behind her for good.

Criminalist Mark Waterbury explains that if the forensic review burrows down into identification details, alleles and profile correspondences, they are deliberately missing the point. Larger issues render that evidence meaningless. You can't just twist a knob and make a new machine, technique or protocol. The standards that were not met are not meaningless red tape, but, rather, necessary steps to produce valid results.

One can directly witness Italian criminologist Stefanoni using very poor sample acquisition techniques, yet she is the same person who claimed that she had never seen contamination in her lab. She also testified that she "only changed gloves after handling a specimen that was particularly contaminated with blood." Material transfer is a surface energy phenomenon. It does not require dripping liquids to happen. Pet a cat. I rest my case. Stefanoni betrays ignorance of the basic physics of materials that cause the most contamination and is not competent to claim that those physics do not apply to her.

This speaks directly to her further claims about the knife, that DNA could not possibly have come from contamination in a lab full of Meredith's DNA. No responsible researcher would make such a claim. Many of the details of her unique test have not yet been revealed, which further compromises the integrity of the results. Full disclosure of the DNA data files and procedures to both the reviewers and the defense is critical.

Will Knox and Sollecito be acquitted? Per Preston, nearly 50 percent of all Italian criminal convictions are overturned on appeal. Indeed, in Italy, so common are reversals, that you are not actually considered convicted until you’ve been convicted on appeal. This is the main reason Mignini has not lost his job as he continues to appeal his own sentence for abuse of office. He is still acting as a prosecutorial consultant in the Knox appeal, and he has been busy filing criminal slander charges against many of his critics in Italy and America.

Everything hinges on whether the appeals court will decide to retry the case or just re-examine certain parts. Sources in Italy say that the judiciary would like to find a way to convict Amanda on lesser charges, proclaim time served, and get her out of the country. That would save face for the powerful interests who convicted her in the first place, while getting rid of a thorn in the side of U.S.-Italian relations. Italians are deeply embarrassed at the bright light this case has shone on their criminal justice system. They are acutely aware of its shortcomings and have been trying to reform it for years, and they are not happy that its flaws are on display in this case, exposed to outside criticism.

Among the many "Friends of Amanda Knox" are prominent authors, judges, attorneys, scientists and law enforcement experts such as Doug Preston, Paul Ciolino, Michael Heavey, Tom Wright, Mark Waterbury, Bruce Fisher, Charlie Wilkes and myself. Our Christmas wish this year was granted as the court in Perugia embarked upon an ongoing examination and criticism of the forensic evidence in the Knox case. Even world-renowned forensic expert Dr. Cyril Wecht has offered his assistance to Amanda Knox as she continues her quest for vindication. John Douglas, the inventor of modern FBI criminal profiling methods, declares in the current issue of Maxim magazine that "Amanda Knox is innocent." Let's hope Amanda is granted her dream of justice and freedom--if not during this holiday season, then certainly sometime soon in the coming months.

Tweet

An American Girl on Trial for Murder Trial in Italy - The Amanda Knox Case

by Jenna Jackson

Last spring, we brought you the story (or at least the beginning) of the Amanda Knox case. She’s in Italy–accused of killing her roommate.

On November 1, 2007, Meredith Kercher, 21, was found semi-naked with her throat cut in her bedroom of the student house she shared with Knox (pictured center) in the Italian hilltop town of Perugia.

Her Italian ex-boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito (above, to Amanda's right), and another man, Rudy Guede (left), are accused of sexually assaulting, brutally murdering and stealing money from Kercher, Knox's British roommate in Perugia, the ancient learning hub near Rome where Knox was spending a year abroad from the University of Washington.

Pre-trial hearings are ongoing in this case–and a murder trial is finally on the horizon.

Peter Van Sant is a correspondent with me at 48 Hours–he has been working on this case for months. For those who missed the Mystery Man column he wrote for us in April, here it is. For our regular readers, here's a primer on an upcoming trial worth following.

by Peter Van Sant

This is a murder case that, from the beginning, just didn't seem to add up. The background here is very important to gain perspective on this investigation.

Amanda Knox is the classic all-American girl. She was a straight-A student at Seattle Prep, one of the top Jesuit high schools in the country. She plays guitar and has a wonderful singing voice, starring in a production of "Annie."

A tall brunette, Amanda's beauty turns heads wherever she goes. Her smile radiates. The twenty-one-year-old's biological parents divorced when Amanda (pictured right) was very young, but the family remained close. Mom is a math teacher. Dad is in management at a major department store. Her step father is in finance. All are good people.

Amanda went on to attend the University of Washington in Seattle, where she discovered her true passion in life, languages. She speaks fluent German (her grandparents on her mother's side are from Germany), Italian and some Japanese and Russian. Her friends describe her as friendly, helpful, someone who is concerned about others.

Doesn't sound like the profile of a killer, does it? I admit I'm teasing you here, but please read on.

While studying in Seattle, Amanda learned about a school in Perugia, Italy, called the University for Foreigners. Perugia is a beautiful medieval town about a two-hour drive north of Rome. The university offers students from around the world an opportunity to study in Italy. For Amanda, who was always interested in learning about different languages and cultures, it seemed the perfect place to go.

So while attending the University of Washington, Amanda worked three part-time jobs on the side. Eventually, she saved up more than $7,000. She was accepted into the University for Foreigners, and late last summer, she arrived in Perugia to begin a year of study abroad.

Six weeks later, Amanda was in prison—a suspect in the murder of her roommate, Meredith Kercher of greater London, England. Meredith (pictured left) was a lot like Amanda. She attended Leeds University in the U.K. and dreamed of studying abroad.

She got her chance last year and moved to Italy, where she attended a different school from Amanda's, the University of Perugia. Meredith needed a place to stay, and she eventually found a house she could rent with two Italian students and a young woman from Seattle, Amanda Knox.

On the night of November 1, 2007, Meredith was last seen walking home after having dinner with friends. Amanda wasn't home. She was spending the night at her boyfriend's house.The next morning, Amanda claims she went home to shower and change her clothes. She was upset that someone had left the front door open. After her shower, when she came out of the bathroom, Amanda says she noticed some blood on the floor. She tried calling her roommates, but no one answered their cell phones. Meredith's bedroom door was locked.

Amanda called her Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, who walked over to the house. Just then, police arrived. Meredith's two cell phones had been found in someone's yard. Police had come over to the house to return them.Amanda told the police of her concerns. They broke open Meredith's door and discovered her body lying on the floor, covered with her bedspread. There was blood everywhere, including bloody finger stains on a wall.

Meredith's throat had been slashed. Authorities believe she may have taken nearly two hours to die. In the room were some tantalizing clues, a bloody fingerprint and a shoe imprint left in Meredith's blood on the floor.

Amanda Knox was questioned by police. She was later taken back to the crime scene with her boyfriend. Police wanted to see how they would react. They held each other and kissed several times, quick pecking-style kisses. Since Amanda's house was now a crime scene, she didn't have access to her clothes. Later, the two went to buy underwear for Amanda. The clerk claimed they were talking about having steamy sex that night. Authorities thought the behavior was cold and insensitive.

Four days after the murder, Amanda and her boyfriend were brought back to the police station for questioning.

After an all-night, 14-hour session in which Amanda was denied sleep, food, or an attorney, she agreed to sign a statement saying she HAD been at the house that night and that she thought she remembered her boss, Patrick Lumumba, killing Meredith Kercher. You should read her statement. It's written in bizarre English, clearly not dictated by Amanda.Amanda, Patrick Lumumba, and Raffaele Sollecito were all arrested.

Police developed a theory of the crime. They claimed that Amanda, Patrick, and Raffaele wanted Meredith to participate in kinky four-way sex. When Meredith refused, she was assaulted and murdered. The theory was fed to the news media in Italy and Great Britain. For weeks, tabloid newspapers gave the case sensational front-page coverage. Italian television also did extensive coverage. Much of the country saw Amanda as "The Dark Angel of Seattle." That coverage made its way to the U.S. as well.

Through her parents, Amanda has proclaimed her innocence. 48 Hours Mystery hired a renowned private detective, Paul Ciolino of Chicago. The investigator went to Italy to examine the case against Amanda. Ciolino has spoken with witnesses, key investigators, and people who knew all the suspects involved. He has come up with a startling conclusion.

This is a railroad job from hell," says Ciolino, a cigar chomping, pug-faced detective, who specializes in wrongful arrest cases. "There's not a shred of evidence putting this girl at that murder scene. But they've gotta convict her now, or they look like fools."

48 Hours Mystery has learned disturbing new details of what happened during Amanda's 14-hour interrogation that led to her "confession," which was not recorded or witnessed by a third party.

Paul Ciolino also questioned one of the most important witnesses in the case, a woman whose story helped form the police theory. What the woman tells Ciolino, while a 48 Hours Mystery camera is rolling, turns the case upside down.

In Italy, a person can be held without charges for up to one year. Amanda has still not been charged with any crime. She sits today in a maximum-security prison, allowed to see her parents twice a week for a brief time. Her parents say she is frightened. This is as disturbing a case as I've ever covered. (Click here for the full story.)

Tweet