What Really Happened in the Amanda Knox Case?

I have followed the Amanda Knox case over its course, and was recently able to attend a talk given by Prof. Greg Hampikian of Boise State University on the subject.  Prof. Hampikian is also Director of the Idaho Innocence Project and an internationally recognized authority on DNA forensics.  Prof. Hampikian advised the Amanda Knox legal team on DNA issues.

After the dust had settled, I felt compelled to write a brief summary of the case based upon my own knowledge of the case combined with information from Prof. Hampikian’s presentation – just to try to put it all into perspective.  That summary follows.

What Really Happened in the Amanda Knox Case?

People involved:

Meredith Kercher                        Murder victim, British student

Amanda Knox                               Accused murderer, American student, one of                                                                .                             Meredith’s roommates

Raffaele Sollecito                        Accused murderer, Italian student, Amanda’s                                                          .                             recent boyfriend

Rudy Guede                                    Accused murderer, drifter and petty criminal                                                           .                              from the Ivory Coast

Diya Lumumba                              Tavern owner in Perugia, Italy

Giuliano Mignini                           Prosecutor

Meredith Kercher was found murdered in her apartment in Perugia, Italy on Nov. 2, 2007.  She had stab wounds under her chin, and her throat had been deeply cut (cause of death).

Amanda Knox was one of Meredith’s roommates.  They and a few other girls rented a house in Perugia.  Two weeks before the murder, Amanda had begun dating Raffaele Sollecito, also a student, who lived within a 5 minute walk from Amanda’s apartment.  Amanda occasionally worked in a local tavern owned by Diya Lumumba.

On Nov. 6, 2007, Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and Diya Lumumba were arrested in connection with the murder.  Lumumba had been implicated in statements made by Amanda.  However Lumumba had an airtight alibi – he was tending his tavern at the time of the murder, as attested by numerous witnesses.  Lumumba was released without charge on Nov. 20 for lack of evidence.  Rudy Guede had fled to Germany, and could not be immediately taken into custody.

The Italian evidence technicians actually did a very good job of collecting evidence – with a few exceptions noted later.  Guede’s DNA was all over the place, in large amounts.  It was in the bloody handprint on a wall, it was on Meredith’s purse, on her body and in her vagina.  None of Amanda’s DNA was found at the crime scene, zero, and there never would be.  None of Raffaele’s DNA was found initially.

In Italy, rents are paid in cash.  Meredith Kercher was found murdered on the second day of the month.  The day after the murder, Rudy Guede was observed spending money he hadn’t had before.  Shortly after the murder, Guede fled to Germany.

Sounds pretty “open & shut”, doesn’t it?  Clearly, Guede robbed Meredith for the rent money, molested her, killed her, and fled to Germany.  Not so fast.  Italian prosecutor Guiliano Mignini believed that Amanda and Raffaele were not “acting normally” subsequent to the murder, and solely on that belief, he insisted on prosecuting Amanda and Rafaelle for the murder.  However, he had one very big problem – he didn’t have any evidence.

On Dec. 6, 2007 Guede was extradited from Germany, and jailed in Italy.  He was granted a ‘fast track’ trial, and was convicted of murder on Oct. 28, 2008.  He was sentenced to 30 years in prison, but the sentence was subsequently reduced to 16 years on appeal on Dec. 22, 2009.  Note that in criminal justice systems, it’s common practice for a convicted person to have his/her sentence reduced for agreeing to testify against others, and this frequently results in false testimony.

Since the prosecutor had no evidence against Amanda and Raffaele, with the exception of Guede’s “snitch” testimony, evidence technicians went back and again searched Meredith’s apartment 7 weeks after the murder.  Meredith’s bra had been torn from her body, and under a dirty rug, they found the clasp from that bra.  A minute amount of Raffaele’s DNA was found on a corner of the clasp.  The technicians also went back to Raffaele’s apartment, and in the kitchen knife drawer, found a large knife that had a minute amount of Amanda’s DNA on the handle and a minute amount of Meredith’s DNA on the blade.  The Italian authorities claimed that the knife looked like it had been “carefully cleaned”.

On Oct. 28, 2008, Amanda and Raffaele were indicted on murder charges.  Their trial began June 16, 2009.  On Dec. 4, 2009 Amanda and Raffaele were found guilty.  Amanda was sentenced to 26 years in prison and Raffaele to 25 years in prison.  The only physical evidence in the case was the DNA on the knife blade and handle, and on the bra clasp.

On Nov. 4, 2010 an appeals court trial began for Amanda and Raffaele.  On Dec. 16, 2010, Italy’s highest criminal court upheld Guede’s conviction and 16 year sentence.  It’s at this point that Prof. Greg Hampikian, one of the world’s preeminent forensic DNA experts, became interested in the case while on a trip to London, and agreed to work on the case pro bono.  Prof. Hampikian is with Boise State University, and is also the Director of the Idaho Innocence Project.


Before we go further in understanding the case, we need to have an understanding of the mechanism of DNA transfer.  Detectable DNA transfers can be placed into one of three categories:

Primary – You touch something, bleed on something, or get your saliva on something, and your DNA is left on the object

Secondary – Somebody, or some object, touches the object that you have previously deposited your DNA on, and your DNA will be deposited on that person or object.

Tertiary – If the person, or object, who has your (secondary) DNA on it, touches another object, your DNA will then be deposited on that new object.  Tertiary transfer DNA deposits can be detectable, but beyond that (quaternary), they are realistically not.

Quite logically, as transfers progress from primary to secondary to tertiary, the amount of DNA in the deposited sample gets to be less and less.  The only transfer that can logically, and legally, implicate someone is a ‘primary’ transfer.  For this reason, forensic DNA analysis places limits on the amount of DNA in a sample below which it cannot be considered a primary transfer; otherwise, it’s not possible to say where the DNA came from.

When a DNA sample is analyzed, the results are recorded on an “electropherogram”.  A typical electropherogram looks like this:

The horizontal axis is scaled in units of “molecular weight”.  The vertical axis is scaled in units of “relative fluorescence units” (RFU’s).  Molecular weight identifies the specific DNA molecules in the sample.  The RFU’s identify the amount of that particular DNA molecule in that sample.  On this chart, the molecules that are present in an amount greater than 150 RFU’s are identified as valid DNA components in this sample, so they are marked with a vertical gray line and a box below the axis showing the corresponding molecular weight.  Any molecules that are present in amounts less than 150 RFU’s cannot be considered as resulting from a ‘primary transfer’, and it’s not possible to tell where that DNA came from.  The RFU “cutoff” used by the FBI is actually 200 RFU’s, so a 150 RFU cutoff would be even more inclusive.


In the Amanda Knox case, in order to determine Meredith’s DNA on the knife blade, it was necessary for the DNA analysts to go down to an RFU level of 15 – one tenth of the cutoff of the most inclusive DNA analysis.  This could not have resulted from a primary transfer; that is, the knife blade could not have been in direct contact with Meredith, much less her blood.  The Italian authorities had claimed that the knife had been “carefully cleaned”, but we’ll come to that later.

The data was similar for Raffaele’s DNA on the bra clasp, meaning that Raffaele could not have directly touched it.

So how did Meredith’s DNA get on the knife blade, and Amanda’s on the knife handle, and Rafaelle’s on the bra clasp?  With the DNA levels detected, it had to be secondary or tertiary transfer.

a)  Meredith and Amanda were roommates and friends.  Amanda certainly had Meredith’s primary and secondary DNA on her.  All she had to do was to be cooking in Raffaele’s apartment kitchen, and she would have left her own DNA on the knife handle, and could certainly have left Meredith’s DNA on the blade.

b)  Raffaele and Amanda were dating, and consequently, he knew Meredith, and had contact with her.  All he had to do was to shake hands with Meredith, and she would have his primary DNA on  her, and she would transfer his secondary DNA to her bra clasp.

c)  A combination of two things.  To begin with, Amanda and Raffaele were allowed back into the apartment after the initial evidence collection – not a good idea.  While viewing video of the Italian evidence technicians collecting the evidence, Prof. Hampikian noticed that they were not changing their gloves between handling different pieces of evidence.  This creates a situation for secondary or tertiary transfer both in the initial evidence collection procedure and subsequent to Amanda and Raffaele being allowed back into the apartment.

Recall that the Italian authorities had claimed that the knife had been “carefully cleaned”.  When the appeals-court-appointed Italian DNA experts examined the knife microscopically, they found that it was coated with potato starch.  So much for careful cleaning.

Prof. Hampikian advised Amanda’s legal team about the DNA issues.  The Italian court appointed two independent, Italian DNA experts to review the evidence, and their conclusion was that the DNA evidence presented at trial was not scientifically supportable, and consequently not valid.

The end result?  Amanda is back in Seattle with her family.

In retrospect, it is this editor’s opinion that this was all the result of a “rogue” prosecutor.  Just a little bit of research into Mr. Mignini’s background will reveal that it is not unblemished.

63 responses to “What Really Happened in the Amanda Knox Case?

  1. Docile Jim Brady – Columbus OH 43209

    Has a definite “ick” component, but beheaded rogue prosecutors can still benefit society:

    1 They no longer can trash defendant’s rights
    2 If healthy, their blood can be donated to Red Cross
    3 Healthy organs can be appropriately placed
    4 Unused parts can go to medical schools
    5 Bones can be used for china plates to feed hungry
    6 Scraps remaining can be used in compost piles
    7 Wannabe rogue prosecutors will think twice …

    ☺ As I’ve been told, some tweaking of the Constitution would be necessary ☺

  2. Excellent analysis of this case. I really appreciate the details about DNA transfer. Very interesting. Thanks so much.

  3. Great impressions of the “case” presented against the bystanders in Italy and the voodoo uses of the science of DNA analysis. What a wonderful site; you have gathered together some impressive analysts and I hope you can make a difference for people all over the world caught up in inherently wrong situations.

    As a follower of injusticeanywhere.org, I hope to see some of you commenting and contributing your collective expertise. I look forward to seeing more articles from each of you. Thank you again.

  4. Very interesting case. This makes it easy to understand. 🙂

    • Easy to understand but contains factual errors. Also, omissions: 1) Raffaele shot down Amanda’s alibi by denying she was with him at the time of the murder. 2) Amanda then changed her story and said she ‘seems’ to remember being at the cottage with Lumumba who killed Meredith. However Lumumba has a solid alibi. 3) After Raffaele’s trying unsuccessfully to break down Meredith’s door, Amanda told the police not to be concerned about Meredith’s door being locked, since Meredith always locked it. Filomena then arrived and was upset because Meredith never locked her door. Why did Amanda try to talk the police out of breaking down the door when Raffaele had recently tried unsuccessfully to break it down? Theory: Raffaele was trying to get in to retrieve an incriminating object such as Amanda’s lamp, rather than to assure himself that Meredith was okay.

  5. It never surprises me when authorities “stretch” the evidence (in this case minute DNA) to fit their “theories”. The theory in this case was that Meredith was the victim in some sort of bizaare sexual behaviour. Of course little heed was given to the fact that Amanda and her boyfriend had been dating only about two weeks. Don’t know about anyone else but it usually takes more than two weeks for me to reveal my “weirdness” to a new person. So here you have the basis for many wrongful convictions. Assassination of the suspect’s character, some kind of motive established (no matter how far-fetched) and some judgement of what is “normal” behaviour in the aftermath of what hardly anybody can say they have actually experienced (the vicious murder of a friend). It then becomes easy to “cook up” the rest (i.e. “carefully cleaned” knife. And the final straw? Snitch testimony from someone who gains substantially by lying. Not hard to win convictions using these tactics. It happens all the time.

    • Both Amanda and Raffaele were profiled and neither have any indication in their history of anything even remotely related to violence. There is ALWAYS some kind of sign from their past.

      • Wrong. Raffaele once attacked a girl with scissors. He has a knife collection and always carries a switchblade, color-coordinated to his outfits. He collects ‘manga’ which are extremely violent Japanese comics. The second to last film he watched was Suicide Club. Amanda wrote short stories about rape and was arrested for hosting a party where guests threw things at passing motorists. That’s just off the top of my head. There could be more.

  6. Surely Hampikian didn’t tell you that the amount of Sollecito’s DNA on the bra clasp is not compatible primary transfer. That is simply false. If I may give some advice, if you want to be an armchair detective and solve Meredith’s murder, start in Filomena’s room. The 10lb rock that was supposedly thrown 13 feet in the air through an 8 inch window, landed in a paper bag which toppled over ON TOP OF CLOTHES THAT WERE ALREADY STREWN ON THE FLOOR. See the pictures for yourself, the clothes were on the floor before the rock landed. You can believe Filomena is a liar and kept a messy room, or you can believe the break-in was staged. You don’t have to be a footprint or DNA expert to throw a 10lb rock at a vertical surface. Try it and you’ll see what really happened in the Meredith Kercher case.

    • The truth matters!

      What bmull (a prominent ‘guilter on tjmk) is failing to mention here, is that Filomena had already picked up clothing and moved items around when she was looking to see if anything had been stolen. Filomena also snuck back into the cottage after it was supposed to be quarantined and *removed her laptop from her bedroom without the police knowing it* . She even specifically stated that when she picked it up off the floor, she had to shake out chardsof glass. Also check out rudy guede’s previous 5 or 6 crimes committed in the 2 months prior to him murdering meredith they are very similar

      • The bit about Filomena returning is irrelevant since the judgment of staged break-in was made before she returned. Also, it is impossible for Rudy to have climbed into that window. There’s a video on youtube showing a climber doing it but he appears taller than Rudy and the video is interrupted at a crucial point. Also, Rudy knew there were easy ways to break in from around back. btw Rudy was not a ‘drifter’ but a long-time resident of Perugia, having been adopted by a prominent citizen. While I’m at it, if Meredith’s secondary DNA would have been all over Amanda, why wouldn’t Amanda’s secondary DNA have been all over Meredith’s room? The law professor’s biological explanation seems confused. A trace amount of DNA can be the result of cleaning the site of a large amount.

    • you have GOT to stick to your own area of expertise.

  7. You have to be an idiot to believe that Raffaele only touched a small portion of the clasp on Meredith’s bra, but not Meredith’s bra itself, Meredith, or anything else in the room. When you top that with the belief that the break-in was staged, even when you know that Meredith was sexually assualted and raped by a BURGLAR, well then you are just extra special now aren’t you?! Intelligent people use a little thing called logic when forming opinions. When you combine logic with evidence, you get the truth, but I am sure that is asking way too much of some people.

  8. The evidence from the nature of the stabbings is consistent with more than one person. Amanda and RS lied on mulitple occasions. The times of switching their phones on and off. There are other points in addition to these which are not addressed in your post.

    • Do you realize how far of a stretch someone would have to go to believe you? That is a full on lie. There is no evidence whatsoever of this anywhere. Show us…please.

      • I hate to resort to “argument from authority” but Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz says there was ‘very substantial’ evidence against Amanda Knox and she would have been convicted in most American courts.

      • *smile* Good old Alan has his own problems. He made a fool of himself in his interview. Got several facts established in court wrong demonstrating his ignorance of the case.

        How did his prediction play out? 🙂
        A little egg on your face, Alan?

      • Must have missed this comment from wayyyy back. Yes, you might want to talk to him about this very subject again. That’s all I’ll say. Saw him at a Gala. He spoke with my husband.

  9. Interesting description of the case and especially the analysis, but how can it happen that “None of Amanda’s DNA was found at the crime scene, zero,…” if they both shared a flat? This rather implicates that some major cleaning took place…

    • Open your eyes to the TRUTH of their innocence!

      the crime scene meaning meredith’s bedroom. None of Amanda’s DNA was found inside the bedroom where she was murdered and where rudy guede left DNA, hand/finger/foot/shoe prints, along with his semen.

      I challenge you to view to pathetic DNA collection video. The idiot doing the collecting actually uses the SAME SWAB to rub 3 different spots on the sink! Yes – that is correct. The person swabs the blood sample on the faucet, then runs the same swab over the blood sample on the side of the sink, then rubs the same sample on the hte bottom of the sink. Even an untrained idiot knows that will contminate the sample! Look at all the REAL evidence and you will see that Amanda and Raff are INNOCENT.

  10. The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming. They gave completely different accounts of where they were, who they were with and what they were doing on the night of the murder. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis despite three attempts each. All the other people who were questioned had one credible alibi that could be verified. Innocent people don’t give multiple conflicting alibis and lie repeatedly to the police.

    The DNA didn’t miraculously deposit itself in the most incriminating of places.

    An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp. His DNA was identified by two separate DNA tests. Of the 17 loci tested in the sample, Sollecito’s profile matched 17 out of 17. Professor Novelli pointed out there’s more likelihood of meteorite striking the courtroom in Perguia than there is of the bra clasp being contaminated by dust.

    According to Sollecito’s forensic expert, Professor Vinci, and Luciano Garofano, Knox’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra.

    Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on the handle of the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade. Sollecito knew that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade which is why he twice lied about accidentally pricking her hand whilst cooking.

    According to the prosecution’s experts, there were five instances of Knox’s DNA or blood mixed with Meredith’s blood in three different locations in the cottage. Even Amanda Knox’s lawyers conceded that her blood had mingled with Meredith’s blood.

    Knox tracked Meredith’s blood into the bathroom, the hallway, her room and Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged. Knox’s DNA and Meredith’s blood was found mixed together in Filomena’s room, in a bare bloody footprint in the hallway and in three places in the bathroom.

    Rudy Guede’s bloody footprints led straight out of Meredith’s room and out of the house. This means that he didn’t stage the break-in in Filomena’s room or go into the blood-spattered bathroom after Meredith had been stabbed.

    The bloody footprint on the blue bathmat in the bathroom matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito’s foot, but couldn’t possibly belong to Guede. Knox’s and Sollecito’s bare bloody footprints were revealed by luminol in the hallway.

    It’s not a coincidence that the three people – Knox, Sollecito and Guede – who kept telling the police a pack of lies are all implicated by the DNA and forensic evidence.

    Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith’s murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007. After she was informed that Sollecito was no longer providing her with an alibi, she stated on at least four separate occasions that she was at the cottage when Meredith was killed. At the trial, Sollecito refused to corroborate Knox’s alibi that she was at his apartment.

    Knox accused an innocent man, Diya Lumumba, of murdering Meredith despite the fact she knew he was completely innocent. She didn’t recant her false and malicious allegation against Lumumba the whole time he was in prison. She admitted that it was her fault that Lumumba was in prison in an intercepted conversation with her mother on 10 November 2007.

    • The amount of times Amanda and Raffaele have supposed to have changed their story changes more times than they actually did change their story, (a lot more)! and is never detailed. In fact trying to remember what you did on a largely uneventful night is perfectly normal. This can happen without a crime being committed. I can’t remember what I did in the evening 3 days ago! Why? Because it was uneventful, if put under pressure to remember I would change my story naturally in an effort to make sense of a mundane evening, it was no different with Amanda and Raffaele!! If they had committed a murder an adrenalin kick would have determined events and they would have rehearsed the timeline of events to perfection, they had plenty of time to do this but they didn’t. Why?

      Amanda and Raffaele did have alibis. Each other!! In order to get Amanda the cops just criminalized the alibi. The evidence of Raffaele being at the cottage on the night of the murder is non-existent! . The account of the slandering of Patrick is couched in an illegal interrogation with no lawyer for Amanda or Raffaele and no recordings either! yet is upheld by the Supreme Court! If they wanted to slander Patrick why didn’t they do it earlier in the timeline of events to blindside the police and allow Rudy to get out of the country, they didn’t. Why?

      The DNA on the bra-clasp is ridiculous as indicated in the article and an abundance of other sources! Of the tiny sample on the bra-clasp 17% was attributed to Raffaele depending on the way the DNA was interpreted, how did it get there and NOWHERE ELSE AT THE CRIME SCENE? The other higher percentage was between 4 and up to 8 (depending on the way the sample is interpreted) of unknown individuals, (on a woman’s bra-clasp)!! but the police didn’t identify the others! They also didn’t test the semen stain on the pillowcase, why?

      The accidental ‘prick’ with the knife was written once in Raffaele’s diary. According to Raffaele this happened at the cottage but with a different knife. John Kercher’s book determines that the knife prick scenario was regarded as inadmissible in court and never submitted as evidence! Yet this has become the trump card that confirms guilt according to some. Even though it was totally disregarded in the first trial it keeps getting regurgitated! Why?

      The prosecutions blood evidence has been thoroughly discredited. There is no evidence of mixed blood only mixed DNA which is quite understandable since Amanda lived at the cottage, and could happen with no crime being committed. The explanation for Amanda’s alleged blood sample was due to multiple ear-piercings, there has been no effective counter to this argument!

      Amanda did not track Meredith’s blood anywhere. The luminol enhanced footprints that were attributed to Amanda were tested with TMB and were negative. In court Steffanoni had denied the prints had been tested but under pressure from defence lawyers she relented and admitted they had, she also admitted that TMB tests were negative for blood. Consistent denial of these facts still streak on internet. Why?

      There was nothing “precise” about the bloody footprint on the bathmat, it was measured wrongly and were more convincingly attributed to Rudy than Raffaele. However if you looked at the print in detail it is quite clear that they could have belonged to a sizeable percentage of the population of Italy (if commonsense were allowed to prevail)!! Raffaele’s DNA was not attributed to this print.

      Nothing of what Amanda wrote was voluntary on the night of her illegal interrogation, any argument to suggest that her statements were prior to her being a suspect is ridiculous. She had been a suspect from day one and had been treated as such by having her phone calls tapped and being constantly brought in for questioning by the police.

      Amanda makes no such admission about being at the cottage in her 6th November statement what she does say is this…” In regards to this “confession” that I made last night, I want to make clear that I’m very doubtful of the verity of my statements because they were made under the pressures of stress, shock and extreme exhaustion. Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn’t remember a fact correctly. I understand that the police are under a lot of stress, so I understand the treatment I received.”…… This seems more an indication of police brutality than anything else!! In spite of that she appears to be quite magnanimous towards them!!

      At the trial to prosecution at no time were able to get Raffale to say that Amanda was anywhere else but at his flat. He wrote a whole book endorsing this!

      Amanda did apologize to Lumumba in her December 11th appeal statement that goes…..Patrick? I don’t see you. But I’m sorry. I’m sorry because I didn’t mean to do wrong to do you. I was very naïve and not courageous at all; I should have been able to withstand the pressures that caused me to do harm to you. I didn’t mean to contribute to what you have suffered. You know what it means to have unjust accusations imposed on your skin. You didn’t deserve what you experienced and I hope you will be able to find peace.” ……Why would she apologize for a slander she never committed!?

      I hope you will find peace too, but you won’t find it in the relentless pursuit of innocents!!

    • Can you explain how Knox and Sollecito managed to remove only their DNA from the room and Meredith’s clothing (except the 5mm clasp) and body, but leave Mr. Guede’s?

      • My apologies, I was replying to TJMK.

      • Yes. They had all night to clean it. But, not enough time to clean the hallway or the bathroom. Where did all the blood go that was in the bedroom? Somebody cleaned it. Do you think Guede stayed and cleaned it but left his hand print?

  11. Jaslynn johnson

    She is not innocent. Amanda know is my cousin..& I find it wicking everyday to find posts about people actually believing she is innocent. She was jealous & decided to take meridths or what we called her meridys life..

    • Jaslynn johnson

      Amanda Knox.

      • Your use of the term “wicking” as wrongful indicates you live so where in the British Isles. Why lie about being Amanda Knox’s cousin? To make your opinion of her guilt seem more reasonable?

    • I doubt you are truly related to Amanda Knox. Why would you call Meredith “meridys” ? Why would you claim AK was “jealous” of MK? It is not reasonable to claim that AK was SO jealous of ANYONE that she was willing to murder them after 2 weeks of knowing them, especially since she was alone in a foreign country. You obviously have never been outside the USA, and if you ARE AK’s cousin, then you obviously are jealous of HER and the attention she received thru no fault of her own. The evidence presented in court proves she is innocent.

    • Amanda Knox is not your cousin, your English proves that. And people called Meredith “Mez”, not Meridy.

  12. I just came across this debacle recently and ths girl was my age when she went to prison. It makes me so sad to think that she had to waste four of her prime years for something she wasn’t even a part of! It makes me wonder about all the people who are wrongfully convitcted , who suffer because they are an easy target for the screwed up judicial system.

  13. Pingback: Calculating Bad Math’s Contribution to Wrongful Conviction | Wrongful Convictions Blog

  14. Quentin M. Zoerhof

    Please everyone ignore this and everything said by anyone associated with TJMK. This deranged and anonymous group of haters has been thoroughly exposed by Nine Burleigh in Time Magazine: http://world.time.com/2013/03/29/the-amanda-knox-haters-society-how-they-learned-to-hate-me-too/

    Suffice it to say that everything that the editor of TJMK says is false and has been shown to be so over, and over, and over again in court. Knox and Sollecito are a terrible fit for the crime. There was no motive, no credible witness, no confession and not a single bit of the physical evidence withstands scrutiny. All the prosecutors (and TJMK) have is a mighty fact-free rant. But when you analyze the case point by point, it all falls apart–every last bit of it.

  15. The crime lab tested the knife and found nothing. I think the prosecutor told the crime lab supervisor to keep testing the knife until Meredith’s DNA is found on it. It was said they found the DNA in a scratch on the blade under an intensive light. I don’t think it is possible for the human eye to see anything this small. 5 human cells, as I recall. These are my opinions.

    Amanda implicated Patrick under duress

  16. Dr Mull, signing in a brmull to comment, is directly associated with the hate site known as the Perguia Murder File or PMF. He stalks the internet to spread false and hateful information about the case.

    Dr Mull has his own history that is unsavory and actually makes him more of a suspect than Amanda Knox ever would be.

    Nothing he posts, or others associated with the hate sites as exposed by Nina Burliegh, can be trusted at face value. They are not able to provide supporting documentation for their accusations. Typically their assertions actually have contradictory documentation from court testimony or documents filed with the court.

    What they do have are a host of fantastic theories that would make the writers for the SciFi channel envious with the creativity. Unfortunately, none of them fit the evidence or testimony.

    • “Hate.” Ahh, the ‘h’ word that silences all! So Mr. and Mrs. Kercher and Meredith’s friends are haters? Does it take hate to do what was done to Meredith? That’s the sort of hate that truly matters. Innocent people falsely accused of a murder, particularly when they are intelligent and articulate college students, do not make up one lie after another. If we believe Raffaele, Amanda lied about her whereabouts and Raffaele himself admits to lying. An innocent person who is not poor, not black, who is well-educated, the child of professionals, has no reason to desperately fish after alibis and falsely accuse others. He or she can simply tell the truth and wait for the inevitable exoneration.

      • Ah, Peter,Peter,Peter. It’s over! Amanda win! She has a paper column, loving friends and family from all over the world. She wrote a successful book. The Supreme Court for all of Italy declared he innocent because she “did not commit the crime”!!!

        You can moan and groan all you want. Spin all the fairy tails and twists andcpipe dreams you want.

        But the ISC heard Mignini’s claims and found them completely lacking.

        Are you the ballerina stalker that runs a hate site? You and the doctor strangler Dr. Mull? Along with the “God from Atlantis”? What a group, doing it all for Meredith.

  17. I love it when BR Mull posts on forums, his comments are just so lame! Of all the jackals you are going to come across Mull is the feeblest of the pack!! The rock was not thrown from the ground, it was thrown from the parking area that is level with Filomina’s window. The rock may have been thrown at a DOWNWARD TRAJECTORY!!! Mull knows this but he will try to bluff his way through by telling enormous fibs and hoping the others are too stupid to notice the difference! Rudy was a basketball player and had good hand-eye co-ordination since he practiced regularly at the nearby courts (TJMK will tell you this). Rudy had committed an almost identical crime at the offices of attorney Paulo Brocchi and knew what he was doing. Will Mull tell you this? Of course not he wants you to be manipulated not enlightened!!

  18. The information provided by the professionals here is by far the most valuable information I’ve ever read about this case. Understanding DNA evidence is complex and it is explained here extremely well.

    For all its wonderful aspects, the internet has unfortunately enabled far too many people to make comments about things they really know nothing about.

    I don’t know enough about DNA, forensics or the law to condemn anyone to a life in prison, just because I don’t like the way they come across. It’s amazing how many people claim to ‘know’ that someone is guilty, simply by looking at them and ‘sensing’ that something isn’t right. So what? It’s difficult to really know what is intuition, and what is simply your own bias at work.

    We must surely have overwhelming, irrefutible forensic evidence before putting anyone behind bars – especially for any extended period of time.

  19. Pingback: Amanda Knox Interview on ABC Tonight in U.S at 10pm EST…. | Wrongful Convictions Blog

  20. These braindead morons will never accept that the so called evidence against them is no more than suspicion. You cannot find someone guilty on mere suspicion, there is no smoking gun. Instead you have these tossers finding her guilty by her eyes. Just think lunatics like this sit on juries.

  21. The English translation of the Italian Supreme Court report which explains why Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito’s acquittals were annulled can be downloaded from the Perugia Murder File website:


  22. magnificent put up, very informative. I wonder why the opposite experts of
    this sector don’t realize this. You must proceed your writing.
    I’m sure, you have a huge readers’ base already!

  23. Will someone explain to me how anyone could continue to believe that 2 people who barely knew each other would suddenly bond to become sex murderers with another person they barely knew? Would someone explain to me how this horrific crime that has the DNA signature of one man, a person who had a history of burglary, in the victim’s vagina, in her purse, is called “poor Rudy” by the prosecution. Would someone explain to me why the prosecution will not test a possible second semen stain? Would someone explain to me how every minute Amanda Knox spent in jail was scrutinized, but not Rudy Guede’s? Would someone explain to me how it could be possible for Amanda to have only cleaned up her DNA? Would someone explain to me why a judge would expect a person to show remorse for a crime she did not commit? Would someone explain to me how it is that so many people feel comfortable assigning guilt based on “the look in her eyes.” Would someone explain to me why the Kercher’s accept that Rudy Guede is going to freed in 2014?

    • Elle, great post. I have dozen’s more questions that I am quite certain can not be answered. The extent to which the prosecution perverted the evidence and ignored the obvious conclusion in an effort to convict two innocent people is chilling. To think Raffaele would serve 25 years because of a speck of DNA found in a location that is all but impossible to leave DNA without leaving it elsewhere, and found by a forensic team using dirty gloves, improper collection technique (I’m being kind) and failed to store it properly, causing it to rust and render it unable to be tested again, is incomprehensible. That Amanda would server 26 years without a speck of forensic evidence of being at the scene is even harder to comprehend.

      That a few ‘troubled’ people, such as “harryrag” and “bmull”, have spent 6+ years carpetbombing the Internet spreading lies and disinformation in an effort to convince an uninformed public that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty is… well, very bizarre at best. They claim to have only the quest for justice for Meredith in their hearts yet it is they who have tried to turn Guede, the one person for whom indisputable evidence exists, into a sympathetic figure . While Guede works the system and is in position to be released after serving just seven years, these people tirelessly spend countless hours fabricating a case against two innocent people. If that’s their idea of justice, I’m glad they aren’t on my side. You’d think after six years they’d be able to offer up a credible motive or a timeline of the crime but all they’ll say is “it’s not required for a conviction”. Well, that’s true, but it sure is helpful in cases where there is virtually no physical evidence and the entire concept of their being guilty flies in the face of common sense.

  24. Good article. After working Homicide for many years I was shocked to hear of the non-glove change. The description of DNA transfer problems is correct. Guede was a predator of the night. He loves surprise, stealth and taking action when he is , or thinks, he is not being seen. It would have defeated his entire motive, what excites him and how he gets his high if other people were present. Any crime scene such as this one must deal with a bigger problem than evidence at the scene. This is evidence that is NOT present and should be. The victim suffered over 40 cuts or stabs. She was fighting. Three people would be covered with DNA, cuts themselves, blood spatter etc. I know this, all of the negative posters here should be placed in a Homicide team and told to now do it. The posters here would learn the truth quickly. These negative posters would be the same as the people of the 1700’s who screamed at scientists they were wrong…the Earth obviously sits on a giant turtle. If Guede finally told the truth and presented a video that he actually buried, as he videoed this murder…of him alone as the killer, the posters on here would still say NO, “I’m right your wrong, the Earth rests on a turtle.” Its worthless to argue with such posters, they know.

  25. Where did you work homicide and it what capacity? Being an amateur sleuth I’ve read about many cases where there was a lot of victim’s blood and DNA but very little to no perpetrator DNA. Also, didn’t the accused have plenty of time to shower after the crime? Also, isn’t this idea that Amanda’s DNA was not found at the crime scene a fabrication? And, wasn’t there also evidence of a clean-up.

  26. More information. There were three of them against one. Amanda had a scratch on her neck. Two men could easily subdue a woman without getting scratched which is the reason the court believed there were multiple attackers. Mixed samples of Knox and victim’s blood were found in 5 places in the apartment. The hallway was sprayed with luminol and numerous footprints matching Sollecito, Knox and Guede were uncovered. The bra clasp DNA was a very strong sample of several hundred RFU matching Sollecito. The knife samples had only two DNA matches- the victim and one Knox. The knife was not “coated” in starch. The victim DNA on the sharp edge of the knife blade was a primary transfer in though low copy number due to lack of any other DNA present. Why the staged break-in? Why the multiple false and inconsistent alibi’s? Why the false accusation of Lumumba? Why lie to the postal police that victim always locked her door? How would she know victim’s body was moved before investigation uncovered this fact?

    • Repeating lies does not make them the truth.

      All of the crime scene experts except the Kerchrr’s expert said the attack could have been done by one person. Even the prosecutor’s expert. Read the testimony.

      And there was NO scratch on Amanda’s neck. She had a hickey that had to be enhanced to get any image.

      Typical guilter propaganda that has NO basis in facts or proof.

  27. Great!! thanks so much for this!!

  28. The scientific forensic kit manufacturers instructions highlighted a minimum level of DNA evidence collected before a reliable valid result could be obtained.

    Dr Patrizia Stephanoni under cross examination stated they where not compliant European Compliance with ISO 9001 and laboratory ISO 25075(i think).
    Therefore this evidence was not legal in european law. Stephanoni stated ‘it didnt matter’ as not many labs whete compliant in Italy.
    In dentistry in the UK we have inspectors checking ISO protocols.
    How the hell did they get away with it?

  29. The problem with the rogue prosecutor theory is that 37 different judges, not the prosecutor, made the rulings. Take away the DNA evidence and you still have plenty of circumstantial evidence that would have convicted Knox and bf in an American court.

    • And that is based on your expert legal opinion? Plenty of commentators have stated she wouldnt have been convicted in an American court. Clearly you havent been paying attention.

  30. there is something which does not count on this case. why did rudy refused to testifie. also amand amanda amanda. i just believe you are true actor. only god will pass your verdict

  31. wanetta@live.ca

    There should b charges or a way of prosecuting the prosecutor that was so wrong he should not b allowed to disclose any kind of info to the press till the case is over. Unprofessional

  32. Pingback: Let’s Be Clear About DNA | Wrongful Convictions Blog

  33. The only thing I learned or think is that I’ll never visit Italy. Which if I’m thinking it, I know others are too. So the only thing this has done is hurt Italy’s reputation.

  34. I grew in Germany italy cause of the military. In italy I was often arrasse cause of my father work for the US army.in the States cause of my accent.
    I understand her cause she is veeery pretty. Sometime I fall into that category. They hurt my children and I can’t stop this. My husband raped me put me in jail even if was personal defense and i feel her completly. My children are Ill cause the Italian social service bully them and me.
    God help us … and so the media… cause I still like pizza… I still have friends everywhere… Amanda I feel lonely too.. God will see this don’t worry. Its the law of God… before than is our . From a mother victim of rape

  35. Pingback: Amanda Knox Returns to Italy. | Wrongful Convictions Blog

  36. I think both ms knox and her boyfriend have looked inappropriate in all photos. They do not look appalled by what happened or incredibly unhappy for the victim and her family. Their reactions appear to lack empathy and their expressions are cold and unfeeling. However this does not neccessarily mean they were involved. They may just have highly inappropriate reactions to a horrific and sad event. Mr guede also shows complete lack of feeling in his demeanour. Obviously the dna and the stolen purse point to his guilt. He appears to have had an awful family background. However it s awful that none of the accused have shown empathy for the victim or her family.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s