Hi Will, congratulations on completing your recent book on the Meredith Kercher case. Though we will most likely disagree on most points, I understand the work it takes to write a book so I appreciate your effort. My name is Bruce Fisher. I am the author of a book on the case titled Injustice In Perugia. I have to say that I am quite surprised that you were able to give such a detailed account of Amanda's life without ever meeting Amanda or discussing any details with any of her family members. I am also surprised that you were able to write a detailed book on the case without access to case files.
I won't deny that I am critical of your book. You have written many details about a family that I care about with absolutely no way to confirm the validity of those details. I will await any response you might have relating to sources before I elaborate any further on that point.
I was a little surprised to see the list of evidence that you recently posted on your blog. This list honestly looks like it was lifted right off the pages of Perugia Murder File (PMF). PMF is a hate site run by people obsessed with smearing Amanda Knox. I would hope that your research went far beyond browsing through that website. You have also befriended the owner of another hate site called True Justice. You will be very disappointed in the coming weeks that you have made this friendship. You may want to distance yourself from that relationship while you have the chance.
I took a look at each point you made and provided information on each claim. As you will see, my responses are in red.
• What about the bloody barefoot print on the bathmat that is compatible with Sollecito and is in Meredith’s blood?
Raffaele’s defense expert, Professor Vinci conducted an independent investigation using more advanced techniques than the prosecution. His analysis clearly showed that the measurements made by the prosecution’s expert were incorrect. The print on the bathmat does not match Raffaele’s foot.
The footprint sample of Raffaele’s foot shows considerable differences from the print that was found on the bathmat. The court does not properly explain how the print on the bathmat was allegedly attributed to Raffaele. There is a lack of support of the distal phalanx of the big toe feature which makes Raffaele’s toe highly distinctive. The footprint on the bathmat has a big toe joint that is seamless with the forefoot, which is absent in Raffaele's sample print. The court ignores these differences and chooses to focus on the measurements of Dr. Rinaldi. His measurements are incorrect.
The defense argues that inspection of the bathmat clearly shows that the tip of the second toe blended with the top of the big toe. Dr. Rinaldi measured the big toe including the top of the second toe. This error caused the width of the toe to measure 30mm. Dr. Rinaldi did not observe that the second toe had blended in with the big toe on the bathmat. The error by Dr. Rinaldi is clearly visible and demonstrates the presence of the second toe stamped on Raffaele’s sample pad. The nature of the absorbent carpet may have lead to natural spreading of blood. This print was made is bloody water, not pure blood. This would have attributed to the spreading of the liquid as it was absorbed into the rug. This error in measurement is crucial because the prosecution based the compatibility of Raffaele’s foot on the width of his big toe. Read more here: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/appeal4.html#anchor_162
• What about the 5 spots in the house that were mixed with Knox and Kercher’s DNA (Some were mixed with the blood of them both)?
Investigators found the mixed DNA of Meredith and Amanda in a total of six samples among dozens that were taken. Three of these samples were from the bathroom that was shared by Amanda and Meredith. The other two housemates used a different bathroom. Mixed DNA was also found in a latent shoe print in the hallway. A swab from Filomena's room revealed Meredith's DNA with what appears to be a very weak profile for Amanda.
Your statement: "Some were mixed with the blood of them both" is completely false. There were no samples collected that contained blood from both Amanda and Meredith. Here are the facts regarding the mixed DNA.
All of the mixed DNA samples from the bathroom were visible bloodstains. Most likely they were composed of Meredith's blood mixed with an organic residue containing Amanda's DNA. No test was performed to determine if any of these samples contained the blood of both Meredith and Amanda, and there is no evidence that any of them did.
The other three mixed DNA samples were taken from latent stains revealed with luminol. Patrizia Stefanoni claimed these stains were never tested for blood, however in July 2009, Stefanoni's notes confirmed the stains were tested with tetramethylbenzidine which is extremely sensitive for blood. All of the stains detected with luminol tested negative for blood.
The prosecutor has tried to insinuate that these findings are incriminating. The most plausible explanation is that the mixed DNA is simply a result of cohabitation. As an example for the sake of comparison, investigators used luminol in Raffaele's apartment and found a latent stain with the mixed DNA of him and Amanda. Here is an example that you can relate to in your own home. If you cut your finger and your blood lands on a sink in a bathroom shared by another person in your house, you will get the exact same result. Your DNA will be mixed with the DNA from the other person that also used the bathroom. All it means is that two people have been sharing the same space.
• What about the plethora of lies told by Knox and Sollecito, including that they told the postal police (who arrived at 12:30pm) that they had already called 211 (when they didn’t call 211 until 12:54pm)? And let's not forget that make-believe party that Sollecito claimed he and Knox attended on the night of the murder with that make-believe friend.
• What about the staged break-in?
• What about Mr. Quintavalle, who said that Knox was in his store at 7:45a.m., the morning after the murder—when she claimed that she didn’t wake up until 10:00a.m., that morning?
Here is the information I have regarding Marco Quintavalle:
Quintavalle is the store owner that testified that he saw Amanda in his store the morning after the murder. Quintavalle claimed Amanda was in the store and she was showing an urgency to buy something in the cleaning section but left without buying anything. Investigators checked Quintavalle's roll of tickets and found no bleach detergent was purchased. Yet the court concluded Amanda purchased bleach anyway. No bleach receipt was ever produced. In fact, there was already bleach at the cottage.
The court inexplicably ignored the testimony of Inspector Orestes Volturno who subsequently questioned Quintavalle after the initial questioning that happened within a day or so of the murder. Volturno's service record shows he questioned Quintavalle on November 19, 2007. The record makes it clear he was shown photos of Amanda and Raffaele and he said they had been to his store two or so times but not on November 2nd. and they were always together. The record shows Volturno went with officer Stephen Gubbiotti. The record indicates that they spoke with Quintavalle and then his two employees. On March 21, 2009 Volturno testifies to the same. Volturno showed Quintavalle pictures of Amanda and Raffaele and Quintavalle denied she was in his store on November 2, 2007.
Quintavalle only came forward almost a year later following contact with a reporter which ended up getting him on TV. Quintavalle claims Amanda was wearing a cap and scarf and she wore a grey jacket. Quintavalle states that he only saw the side of Amanda's face. Then he claims it was Amanda's blue eyes that he remembers despite earlier saying he never saw the front of her face. No grey coat was ever found to be part of Amanda's clothing and it doesn't match anything anyone else ever saw. Ana Marina Chiriboga who worked in the store was asked in October, 2008 if she had seen Amanda on November 2, 2007 and she said no which she repeated in court on June 26, 2009.
• What about Knox’s written confession?
Amanda Knox did not write a confession.
• What about the bloody shoe print found on the pillow under Kercher’s body, which experts claimed was compatible with Knox?
I am shocked once again that you are still making this long refuted claim. You seem to have written your book based on the talking points coming from True Justice and Perugia murder file. Read about the shoeprints found in the murder room here: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/footprints-04.html
• What about the other 2 footprints, revealed only by luminol (1 attributed to Knox and one to Sollecito)?
There were no footprints detected with luminol that could be attributed to anyone. These stains were undated and could not be linked to the murder in any way. The prosecution didn't even take foot impressions of the other residents of the cottage. There is simply no way to conclude when these prints were made or who made them. One thing is clear, the stains contained no blood.
I look forward to hearing back from you. If you prefer to respond on the blog I will check back here. If you would like to send an email that's fine also: injusticeinperugia,org
Thank you for your time.