Meredith Kercher: Another Murderer to go Free?

The mainstream media like to beat Amanda Knox’s drum, but in a sense they have to. Any proper analyses of this case would probably result in public posturing, retractions, expensive lawsuits and PR disasters. And yet the media pretends to be a cogent source of news.

What do we mean by proper analyses? What’s missing from the media narrative? In terms of the Amanda Knox case, actually a huge chunk of vital information.

Today, February 21st, 2018, at 10:00, Rudy Guede, the Ivorian man first convicted of Kercher’s murder during a first-track trial will find out whether his already reduced sixteen year sentence may be commuted to ten years. In other words, by the end of today, Guede will know whether he’ll be out of jail by the end of this year.

No matter what one says about the guilt or innocence of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, Guede’s original co-accused, no matter how one looks at it, whoever murdered Meredith Kercher has gotten off extremely likely.  If Guede’s appeal is granted, the sentence for brutal murder of this splendid student from Southwark, London, will be even less than the minimum sentence of fifteen years handed down to Oscar Pistorius.

rudy-hermann-guede-galleryYet as problematic as this situation is, from Guede’s perspective it appears to make complete sense. Though you won’t read about it just yet in the English press, the Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata [ANSA, the leading wire service in Italy] are covering Guede’s appeal.

Blasting News, the social news platform, provides useful description on the legal issues at hand. What it boils down to is that there needs to be a kind of internal cohesion in the justice system.  If one judge makes a finding, another judge should not deviate from those findings, but remain consistent unless a superior court alters the trial narrative. In this case there were three accused, and two trials – one for Guede, and another for Knox and Sollecito.

In layman’s terms, the findings in Guede’s trial – for consistency sake [for legal efficacy in other words] – needed to be applied as far as possible in the Knox/Sollecito trial. They were and Knox/Sollecito were accordingly convicted and sentenced to a far harsher sentence than Guede’s current sentence, 26 and 25 years respectively.

88575003Ultimately though, Knox/Sollecito using their combined resources, overturned the guilty verdicts. What Guede is arguing now is this: if the court’s didn’t apply his evidence to their trials [it was inconsistent], then he should be exonerated or given a kind of legal credit too.

Blasting News provides the legal-technical explanation as follows:

What the appeal is about

The appeal is on the grounds of “non-compliance” of the rules of procedure and failure to acquire “fundamental elements” of the Court decision Guede is appealing against, on the grounds of ‘internal contradictions’. The alleged contradictions are that in annulling the convictions of the other two defendants in the murder case, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, the Fifth Chamber’s written reasons come into conflict with those in Guede’s.

 In Italy, Judge’s decisions must be legally consistent with each other.
In Seattle, Knox ought to be on tenterhooks, watching and waiting on the outcome of this hearing. The outcome does have a bearing on Knox, and her controversial version of events. Sollecito, ironically working as a TV expert on crimes for Italy’s Tgcom24, may find himself reporting on his own trial. That ought to make for interesting TV.37e0ea2a-cfc2-4301-9865-12adddee13f4
The pertinent facts found by Judge Paolo Micheli are what is known in some court systems as “common cause.” Or are they? Can these “facts” as they were found by Micheli in 2009 be applied as “common cause” to Knox/Sollecito, or not?  If not, why should they apply to the Ivorian.

The facts found by Judge Paolo Micheli, at Guede’s trial include:

  1. Guede did not wield the murder weapon,
  2. He had had no meaningful prior contact with Meredith, as Guede had claimed in his testimony.
  3. Therefore, he was not invited to the cottage or let in by Meredith, nor had any consensual contact with her.
  4. The burglary mise en scène was a second stage of the crime after the murder.8660316
  5. It, therefore, followed that Knox let in Guede to the murder cottage.
  6. The crime was sexually motivated, and not one motivated by theft.
  7. Guede did not steal the rent money or the phones.
  8. There were multiple assailants.
  9. Guede was guilty of aggravated murder because of his complicity in the attack and failure to stop ‘as soon as the knives came out’.
  10. There was complicity with others: “Above all if the certain facts include the consequent outline of that supposed ‘unknown’ (the presence of the three at the scene of the crime) they are abundant, and all abundantly proven”. (– Micheli)

In my view, having researched this case extensively through the course of two trilogies:

  1.  Correct. Guede did not wield the murder weapon, which means Guede, although present at the scene, and although he participated in the torture, he didn’t murder Meredith Kercher, someone else did.
  2. Correct. Guede had no meaningful prior contact with Meredith. Knox on the other hand did, and so did Sollecito. Sollecito’s contact with Meredith as Meredith’s flatmate’s boyfriend, was more than Guede’s. In the sense that both Knox and Sollecito were more personally close to Kercher than Guede, and given the highly personal nature of the crime [seven cuts and sixteen bruises , including injuries to  her nose, nostrils, mouth, and underneath her jaw compatible with a female-sized hand being clamped over her mouth and nose], didn’t it make sense that the attack was committed by someone close to Meredith? Who was closer to her than an American roommate living next door, that didn’t like to be told what to do or how to do it?
  3. Correct. Meredith would not have invited Guede in, however it’s possible Knox did.
  4. Half-true. There was no burglary in terms of the way the crime scene was presented [Filomena’s broken window etc.] imagesHowever a few of Meredith’s belongings were stolen, including her phones and her rent money. If the motive was burglary, why were both Meredith’s phones immediately tossed into someone’s garden? Why wasn’t her laptop stolen?  And who would know about Meredith’s rent money besides someone who lived there, who was also paying rent?
  5. Correct. Knox let Guede in, possibly without Sollecito’s knowledge.
  6. Half-true. The crime was only sexually motivated in the sense that there was a sexual rivalry between Knox and Meredith. The “sexual nature” of the crime, however was “staged” to impute a male attacker, or put otherwise, to negate the possibility of a female housemate with no alibi being involved in her housemate’s murder. This was why Meredith’s body was staged to appear sexual, her body moved from the original killing scene and placed on a sheet, both legs spread wide open, her hips propped on a pillow and her bra removed after the murder.sperma-181816117.main_image Thus, the sexual crime, just like the burglary crime, were both staged to distract from the actual crime – the murder of Meredith Kercher.
  7. Correct. Guede did not steal the phones, but whoever did, had the presence of mind to attempt a transaction on Meredith’s phone at her British bank account moments after the murder. Who would think to siphon money from Meredith’s account but a student of computer engineering, or someone who was actively using international banking services herself?
  8. Correct. There were multiple assailants, hence Meredith had virtually no defensive wounds, and did not scream out during a botched stabbing of her throat. 10380 Meredith’s death was extremely unpleasant. She drowned in her own blood, an event that would have taken minutes to kill her, and would have involved violent expirations of blood, as well as arterial spurts from her throat. She would not have screamed if she was unable to scream, if she was being muzzled.
  9. Correct. Guede was guilty of complicity in Meredith Kercher’s murder. He held her down, perhaps assuming it was a game between friends, perhaps simply because he was asked to help, and perhaps he “helped” because he wanted to impress Knox [and/or sleep with Knox].
  10. Correct but arguably unproven in court. There was complicity with others.

In the Supreme Court ruling in which Knox and Sollecito had their convictions annulled, in March 2015 it was found that Knox ‘had covered up for Guede’ when falsely implicated her former boss; Knox told police Patrick Lumumba was the culprit.

It was only after Lumumba was arrested and jailed for about two weeks, when the police began processing the scene, that they discovered evidence that pointed to someone else, someone that wasn’t Lumumba. 20080115-bedroom-b_2012801i (1)Although Knox, Sollecito and Lumumba appeared in court together, Lumumba was released due toi lack of evidence, and despite Knox’s allegation against him.

Bloody fingerprints found at the scene were run through forensic systems, and matched one Rudy Hermann Guede. Because of Guede’s immigrant status, his prints were on file, which is how and why he was caught. On November 20th, about three weeks after the murder, Guede was arrested in Mainz, Germany.

South Africa’s News24 reported at the time:

Frankfurt – A fourth suspect in the gruesome murder of a British exchange student nearly three weeks ago in Italy was arrested in Germany on Tuesday, German police said. The suspect, 21-year-old Rudy Hermann Guede from the Ivory Coast was seized in the western German city of Mainz while travelling on a bus or a train, a police spokesperson said.

“He was travelling without a valid ticket,” the spokesperson said, without giving further details.

Fingerprints at the scene

Guede, already known to Italian police, faces charges for the murder and sexual assault on November 1 of British exchange student Meredith Kercher, who was found with her throat slit the following day, sparking lurid headlines.

Detectives reportedly discovered Guede’s digital and genetic fingerprints at the scene of Kercher’s murder in the central Italian city of Perugia. Three other suspects were arrested on November 6 – Kercher’s American housemate, Amanda Knox, Knox’s Italian boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito and a Congolese musician and bar owner, Patrick Lumumba Diya.

Italian forensic experts said on Friday that they had found DNA traces of Kercher and Knox on a knife at Sollecito’s home, which Kercher is not believed to have ever visited. Investigators have reportedly found no evidence linking Diya to the scene of the crime.

Known for petty thieving

Italy’s ANSA news agency reported that Guede was picked up as he was travelling on a train between Mainz and the nearby city of Wiesbaden. Under Schengen procedures, he will be extradited to Italy, but it may take two or three days.

Guede has lived in Perugia since he was five and was adopted by an Italian family at age 17. Italian and British press reports have described him as a drug dealer, while Ansa has said he is known to police for petty thieving. The case has been beset by leaks from Italian police and intense media speculation that have been criticised by lawyers representing the accused.

Police said Kercher’s assailants “apparently had a sexual motive” though initial autopsy results showed the Briton from south London had not been raped.

Blow dealt by a man

Investigators have said that the depth of the fatal knife wound in Kercher’s neck indicated that the blow was dealt by a man. It was possible that Knox cut herself with the knife while holding it or washing it.

The probe had initially focused on a flick knife belonging to 24-year-old Sollecito as the possible murder weapon. Kercher was in Italy on a student exchange programme.

From Blasting News:

The legal issues facing the Supreme Court today

The crux of Guede’s appeal for a review of his case is that it is a legal absurdity to find as a fact he did not commit the actual killing, but that the police are not looking for anybody else as ‘the multiple attackers’, despite Knox and Sollecito walking free notwithstanding the evidence of the presence of either or both of them at the scene (the ‘unknown others‘) ‘they are abundant, and all abundantly proven’.

Marasca & Bruno proclaimed that the two main reasons for the annulled convictions of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were because of  ‘a flawed investigation’ and ‘undue press influence’. The pair were released because of ‘insufficient evidence’. It raises the question, if it was ‘flawed’ for Knox and Sollecito, then would not the same state of affairs apply to Guede?

If the Italian courts find in Guede’s favor, the absurdity of the Amanda Knox case will be full exposed.

Coming soon:

1-Fullscreen capture 20170826 125620 AM-001

23 thoughts on “Meredith Kercher: Another Murderer to go Free?

  1. Nick I do believe has he lost his appeal and how long before the motivations for the judges decision be known, simply he should win really because the arguments the SC used to let Knox and Sollecito off the hook ie flawed investigation applies to Guede, I personally do not want him released he can rot for his role in Merediths death, do you think race plays a role, let off the rich white kids and let the black man take the heat


  2. Hi Penny. Yes he lost his appeal. Race plays a role in PR, and a lot of what “won” this case for Knox was PR. PR also costs money, and Guede had none.


  3. Out of curiosity what evidence do you apply to anyone but Guede being guilty? No physical evidence in the room links the murder to Knox or her boyfriend, yet there’s lots of DNA from the Guede. Shouldn’t there be some from the other two if there was “sex games” and other antics? The defendant was known for breaking into homes and had recently been into the downstairs apartment in that very house, meeting Knox briefly. It stands to reason that the most likely course of events is that Guede broke in the home, had some juice (this was in evidence), used the toilet and was startled upon the arrival of Kercher home. As you needed a key to leave the house, he panicked and perhaps she threatened to call the cops, so he attacked her.


    • No physical evidence? Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp. Knox’s DNA and Meredith’s was found on the knife in Sollecito’s apartment. Meredith had never been to his apartment.Then the very simple question, perhaps the simplest of simple questions – did Knox and Sollecito have alibis?

      Liked by 1 person

      • The crime scene techs admitted to not changing gloves between the handling of various items for testing, which makes the risk of cross-contamination is extremely high – especially as we are only talking about the tiniest of samples from Touch DNA. The knife, for example, involved such a small amount of DNA on the blade that the idea it was used as a murder weapon is nearly laughable. A larger amount of Knox’s DNA, someone who was not bleeding or having their skin pierced with a blade, was found on the handle – reasonable considering the knife was found in Sollecito’s home, she was known to have been there and probably sliced something with it. However, Guede’s DNA was literally all over the murder room – in roughly a dozen places. Every one of these samples he left were also significantly larger than what we’re talking about on the bra clasp or the knife. This is obviously indicative of someone actually being in the room. Were the other two involved, there should have been similar amounts of their DNA at the crime scene, particularly if what you’re saying transpired is accurate.

        Sollecito’s computer showed he was active at the time the murders were alleged to have taken place – adding to their story they were home which stayed pretty consistent.

        Guede was known to break into homes while the owners were absent, both to find a place to stay and steal things. He had previously visited the downstairs part of the house once, so he was familiar. It was a holiday and literally no one was around, so he assumed he was safe to make himself at home. What the evidence shows here is that the break-in was real, Guede helped himself to some juice then defecated in the toilet (he was known to not flush, as the downstairs neighbors testified when he visited their apartment). Upon leaving Meredith had arrived home and locked the door. His attempt to flee was foiled by the fact the door had a deadbolt which required a key to unlock. She probably threatened to call the police and thus he attacked her. Once dead he fled the crime scene and was spotted by a witness, who saw a black man leaving alone.

        Given your knowledge of the JonBenet case and the problems Touch DNA evidence can cause, particularly with innocent transference, especially when all of the other evidence points in a different direction, I’d suggest you really take another look at this case from scratch. I’d highly recommend the documentary on Netflix as they were not only actively shooting during both trials (rather than relying on archival footage), but they spent time with the court-appointed evidence testing facility who retested all the evidence. To literally watch videos of the crime scene techs cross-contaminating evidence by their poor training is pretty staggering.

        For someone who is so incredibly accurate on the JonBenet stuff, the lack of insight into the facts of this case is saddening.


      • Even more saliently Knox’ and Sollecito’s alibis were legally found to be knowingly, wilfully and patently demonstrably, FALSE.*

        Who else gives a false alibi other than a guilty party?

        A false alibi is criminal evidence in itself.

        *This remains the final official Supreme Court finding, in perpetuity.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. As you say, very shocking.

    You ask where is the evidence. When evidence is fielded, you say, oh no, but…

    Yes, you can take the evidence and explain it away and then shrug, and say, jeepers, why was Amanda Knox implicated in this crime? You can take any evidence and say it’s contaminated and thus not valid, as occurred in the OJ Simpson and Stephen Avery cases. Worked in one, backfired in the other. If that’s your slamdunk counter theory, contamination, go for it. It still doesn’t explain why she was convicted twice, as well as Sollecito, if the lack of evidence was so slamdunky it can be dealt with in a single brushoff. But please don’t pretend to have a nonsensical claim to “no evidence”. Just say there was a lot of disputed evidence, disputed by the murder suspects, that’s being more forthright about it.


    • There’s a VAST difference between the OJ case and this. Here we are talking about literal the smallest amounts of trace DNA that can easily be transferred when a crime lab tech touches a sample from Sollecito’s house and then touches the clasp, without changing gloves – as the original techs admitted, on the record. There is literal video evidence of the scene techs using the absolute worst methods for collecting evidence. In the OJ case, you had a literal trail of blood – that is not the same.

      Again, the biggest problem here is that Guede’s DNA was present in the levels from someone who’d been in the room. Knox’s DNA was completely absent, and Sollecito’s was barely present.

      Again a court-appointed lab retested all of the evidence – they found numerous errors and problems, all of which was well documented.

      Like the JonBenet case – DNA evidence can be a powerful tool when used with logic and other evidence. Here, there is no motive or evidence beyond questionable lab work.


  5. I think I’m gonna take your advice and relook at that pro Knox Netflix documentary. Somewhere in those 6 books [2 trilogies] I think I missed something.


  6. If you’re interested in these cases you should invest more time than watching a single 1 hour Netflix film.
    The DNA narrative in the JonBenet case is also completely bogus. The Ramsey case isn’t about DNA. It’s one of the most contaminated crime scenes in true crime history. Like in the Knox case the Ramsey case is skewered around make or break DNA evidence. People unfamiliar with these cases base all their reasoning around fake experts.
    Same with Casey Anthony and the decomposition smell that’s not human decomposition it’s pizza decomposition. Why? Because an expert defense witness said so.


    • This makes my point. DNA evidence in the JonBenet case is extremely contaminated, as it was here. Except that Guede’s DNA should never have been in that room and it is present at such high levels that he had to have been in there. The same should have been true for Knox and Sollecito, but it was not. Remove the DNA evidence and you have two people who have no known relationship to Guede, who have no motive, no history of violence, nothing. Guede, on the other hand, can be conclusively linked via DNA and eyewitness accounts to being in the house. Sollecito’s computer shows him active at the time the murders took place.

      And, I’ll trust the opinion of the Italian Supreme Court who saw a devastating injustice and righted a wrong.


      • A few counterpoints:

        – Suggesting that traces of Knox and Sollecito certainly should have been present in the murder room in equal quantities as those recovered from Guede does not hold up to logic/realities. Different people “shed” DNA with different ease of difficulty in different circumstances. And broadly speaking, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

        – Sollecito’s DNA in significant quantity was recovered from the bra clasp. Yes, the bra clasp collection was bungled, delayed as it was by several weeks, and handled by techs who were argued not to have been attentive as they should have been to standards of handling, i.e. changing gloves, etc. Hence the supreme court’s ultimate judge of that evidence’s illegitimacy. However we as armchair observers can still guess at whether the DNA arrived on the clasp via first-hand touching or tertiary transfer by techs. Sollecito’s DNA, iirc, was found in only one other place in the cottage: on a cigarette butt in the kitchen. Also, statistician David Balding said that, given the quantity and clearness of the DNA deposited, in his estimation the chance of tertiary transfer was much lower than the odds that the DNA was deposited there by Sollecito himself.

        – Guede did in fact have a known relationship to Knox. They had once hung out in the downstairs flat with Meredith and the Italian young men who lived there. (By one young man’s account, Guede graphically noted his sexual interest in Knox.) Also, by both of their accounts they had seen each other once or twice at the bar Amanda worked at. She also said she knew him to play basketball at the nearby court — and coincidentally(??), when wrongly accusing Patrick Lumumba, she said she flashed to an image of Patrick (also a black man) at … the basketball court.

        – The phone and computer activity did not alibi Knox/Sollecito. In fact the before-crack-of-dawn playing of music files ran counter to their story of sleeping in till 9 or 10am. And Sollecito has waffle d back and forth about whether they turned off their phones or left them on, with his flat’s spotty cell service being responsible for the appearance of the phones being off.

        – The behavioral backgrounds of Knox/Sollecito are not as squeaky clean as might suggested above. Knox had cavorted with a drug dealer, been part of a disturbance call at her college/university, wrote a morbid story with a sex assault iirc, and even admitted to once having staged a burglary as a prank, just as she’d be accused of staging a burglary at the cottage. Sollecito collected knives, had some bestiality material that worried authorities at his school iirc, jokingly admired a serial killer, had used harder drugs in past, expressed interest in having more stimulating/exciting adventures, and seemed to have a father who felt compelled to check on him very regularly. My sense of Knox and Sollecito together is that they quickly made a toxic pair: a narcissist, imbalanced pleasure seeker and a “follower” who wanted to please this fascinating new woman, a rarity for his life.

        Anyway, I hope you’ll take the above counterpoints into consideration when assessing the case. If your research has been either largely or solely based on the Netflix Knox movie, I urge you to branch out into the court rulings and other sources, such as the books by Follain or Nadeau, for a better look at the case against.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @Fred>Suggesting that traces of Knox and Sollecito certainly should have been present in the murder room in equal quantities as those recovered from Guede does not hold up to logic/realities

        This is a brilliant point, not least because in a scenario of a cover up, one would *expect* selective cleaning up of certain DNA. If they could sequestrate their own DNA and plant Guede’s, well that would get them off the hook, wouldn’t it [and didn’t it?]
        That may sound ridiculous at face value, but we know Knox’s reading lamp was in Meredith’s room at floor level, and that Rudi’s shoeprints were almost completely rubbed out, as if they’d been washed by someone, but not *completely* erased.
        Meredith’s body was undressed and moved, and iof Rudy had cut himself as often happen when knives become slick, and we know it was his blood on the wall, this blood could have been used as a reservoir to leave other traces while getting rid of everything else – removing Meredith’s clothes, washing them, and applying bleach to the floor. It didn’t have to be a meticulous picking up using tweezers, just a broad cleaning. A few errant hairs and clothing fibres would be worth securing, easy to do with a vacuum cleaner. In any event, the two suspects theoretically had hours to do this, and so, it’s not surprising the pair of them looked so blear-eyed and bedraggled and next morning, or that Knox had run out of clean warm clothes on that morning of all mornings.


      • Yes, in reference to DNA deposits and a possible cleaning job by Knox and/or Sollecito, it’s surely worth pointing out, as you have, the strange presence of Knox’s reading lamp on the floor of the room, which had two other working light sources in it (noting too, that the removal of the lamp from Knox’s room had left it with no working light sources).

        Among other things I’d add in the coincidence(??) of Knox admittedly shuttling a mop between the cottage and Sollecito’s flat on a morning she’d be accused of cleaning a crime scene. Not to mention the eventual witness identification of Knox allegedly waiting outside a store in the early morning hours (when she had claimed to be asleep) and heading back where cleaning supplies were kept. These are the kind of details should at least give pause to any objective observer of the case.

        Lastly, on a subjective note, I agree with you that photos of Sollecito and Knox from that early afternoon do not seem to portray two people who had slept in and were refreshed. In fact, iirc, Knox would, later that day at the police station — another scene of notoriously red flag behavior from her — complain of being tired. (Reminds me of Michael Peterson supposedly complaining of the cold air in the early morning hours as police were tending to the crime scene inside his home — when his eventual offered alibi would be that he had been lounging outside by the pool in a t-shirt and shorts in weather estimated to be 51-55F…)


  7. Why should Guede’s DNA not be in thar room? It was in the room. I don’t think you understand contamination, what it means or how it works. In the Ramsey case they looked for DNA in JBRs underwear. Why? Because in a contaminated scene DNA cant float through blankets and clothing. In Knox case body was covered and the bra clasp was found under a mattress. This formed a kind of protective environment insulating it. You suffering a huge logic fail here – how does Sollecitos DNA get under a duvet and mattress and into Meredith’s locked room? Oh it’s contaminated in the lab. Or at the scene? So they happen to have Sollecitos DNA smeared over themselves like mud while they’re testing the most crucial sample? Meredith’s DNA is also on the bra clasp. And strong indications Knox’s DNA is too.
    Btw what’s your opinion on Stephen Avery? Also based on watching TV, being fed someone else’s scenario and swallowing it?


  8. You’ve mentioned Sollecito’s computer as evidence twice now. You don’t know what you’re talking about. When Knox claimed she was asleep – till 10am his computer was on for half an hour at around 05:30 playing a dozen American songs. Knox’s music. The night before his computer was involved in an automatic download and the download completed. It didnt need human interaction.
    There was more destroyed computer evidence than evidence – like Facebook and MySpace accounts being deleted. Why woyld you need to delete your social media? Oscar Pistorius selectively did the same. Sollecito was majoring in computer science at the time so no wonder the evidence in this respect is also covered up.

    You say no motive – you obviously have no idea what’s going on in the Knox case. If Guede alone was involved and it started out as a burglary, and we know he stole things out of Meredith’s handbag, and both her phones were stolen, why not steal her laptop that was in the room? It’s right there? There were 4 in the house. Yet after the burglary all the most valuable items are still there. If Meredith was raped why wasn’t she raped? Why does Meredith have so many stab wounds besides in her neck – cuts, nicks etc? Did Guede a random burglar have a grudge against her? Oh…he knew her from before. But he’d never met Knox or Sollecito. And there’s evidence of that? So when he slept in the villa he never met anyone? And he lived around the corner from Sollecito and played basketball around the corner from the villa but no one knew him.
    Btw what do you do for a living Justin? And what’s your handle on twitter?


  9. Contamination can happen. In the JonBenet case, all it would take is for her to touch an object that had someone’s DNA on it before touching her panties or someone in the factory sneezing on the fabric to create a suspicious profile. The issue in the Knox case is even more bungled law enforcement and lab work. The lab techs admitted, on the record, to not changing gloves and protective wear between handling Sollecito’s sample and the bra clasp. Same with the knife. It was shoddy work. When the evidence was retested using better technology and a more sterile environment, different results were produced. The amount of DNA found on each of those items was so small that transference was very, very possible. If the knife actually dug into Kercher’s flesh and killed her, there would have been much, much more of her DNA on it. However, it is telling that so much of Guede’s DNA was found all over that room over 12 points. If all of their actions involved the three of them in the room acting together, there should have been some DNA of theirs actually from the room, the bed, etc. There wasn’t. Nothing.

    Guede wasn’t there to rob the place of all its valuables, that wasn’t his MO. He was a petty criminal who liked to break into people’s houses and basically housesit without permission. Sometimes he’d steal things, sometimes not. There is no evidence he had any interaction with Sollecito previously and had only met Knox once. To say they must have then concocted some elaborate scheme involving these sexual fantasies is an absolute joke. He came there to basically have a place to crash, maybe leaving with a valuable or two. His plan was foiled by Kercher’s arrival home, which caused him to murder her then flee – he even left the phones nearby. After she was gone he had to run away – there was a witness to him fleeing! If he was caught with her belongings he’d surely be caught.


  10. What’s your view on the West Memphis Three case? Another high profile case with a great trilogy of documentaries. All Apologia of course, all meant to make the case for innocence and all heavily particilated in by the defense cast.
    Btw did you ever answer my question on who you are, who you are on twitter and why you’re so adamant a prime murder suspect – convicted twice – is innocent. I’m interested to know your connection to Knox. Thanks.


  11. No need to divulge my personal identity but the “prime murder suspect” was acquitted by the highest court in Italy, after the original lab admitted crucial mistakes that led to cross-contamination and retesting by a court-appointed lab found none of the same inculpatory evidence. This isn’t rocket science.


  12. For the record, the Knox documentary on Netflix gives equal screen time to both sides of the case, including the prosecutor. It’s worth your time.


  13. You also never answered my questions as to why there is a complete absence of DNA in the room outside of the likely transference on the knife and bra clasp. Why did Guede’s DNA basically permeate the entire room, yet Knox’s DNA was totally absent, while Solecito’s DNA was only found on a bra clasp (which was tested by a tech who did not change their gloves after handling his samples).

    Also, what is the reason Knox and Solecito would kill this girl, especially with a homeless drug dealer? There was no serious animosity. No real history of sexual violence. No history of any activity with Guede. Nothing that would suggest this was coming.

    What we do know is Guede liked to break into houses, use them as his own and then leave. He never did this with third parties and certainly did not participate in “orgies” with visiting college students.


  14. The court appointed lab as you call it was shut down, ironically, due to gross contamination – to such a severe level it presented a public health hazard. You can read about that here:

    “Recently, Conti and Vecchiotti’s laboratory in Rome was closed down due to public health issues. Contamination almost certainly occurred in their laboratory. Rotting cadavers unclaimed by relatives, were said to have piled up in the corridors. Stefanoni’s laboratory, which followed all the conventional standards of the day was never proven to have been contaminated.”

    I’m not going to waste any more of my time discussing a single Netflix film with you. For those interested, read Krissy’s excellent analysis here:


    • Conti and Vecchiotti were not in charge of the cadavers at La Sapienze University which feature at all universities with graduate medical schools. You might as well charge a random tenured professor at Michigan State University for the crimes committed by Larry Nasser on young female gymnasts there. Stefanoni was proven an incompetent mountebank in the Hellman trial and it’s clear from their emphatic statement that no traces of Knox or Sollecito were found in Meredith’s room effectively eliminating them as suspects, that the Marasca/Bruno ISC panel agree with the assessment.


Comments are closed.