CNN’s Larry King interviews Curt Knox and Edda Mellas tonight [now Friday] at 9:00 pm in the United States.
To prevent this thing turning into yet ANOTHER cloying spinathon + bawlathon, Larry, how about posing these questions?
And if you the readers of TJMK would like to add questions in Comments, we’ll be opening a new permanent page for them on TJMK.
So that instead of getting snowed as so often in the past, reporters can use the questions to cut to the heart of the matter.
Question for Curt Knox and Edda Mellas:
Don’t you think that Amanda’s latest of several defence positions is weakened by the fact that her new alibi - that she was with her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito all night - does not coincide with the alibi of Raffaele - who has used his right to not declare in their trial but stated just after the crime that he was at his apartment all night, and that Amanda left between 9 p.m. and 1 a.m. on the night of the murder?
(Raffaele’s defence lawyers and his father have confirmed to journalists covering the trial that while they have some defence issues in common with Amanda - for example, questioning the DNA analysis - Raffaele’s defence is not necessarily supportive of or in line with Amanda’s.)
Question for Curt Knox and Edda Mellas:
Why did Amanda cut short a questioning session (where she was accompanied by her lawyer) in December 2007, near the beginning of the investigation, and maintain silence - as is her right under Italian law - until the trial was well underway in 2009?
Question for Curt Knox and Edda Mellas:
Why do you need a costly, professional PR campaign aimed at an American audience, when your daughter is in an Italian trial? Some observers feel that since the legal case against Amanda is strong, your only hope is to influence the State Department and obtain its political intervention in this case. However, American diplomats - beyond providing basic, standard consular support - don’t want to touch this case with a ten-foot pole.
Question for Curt Knox and Edda Mellas:
Why do you question the honor and professionalism of the Prosecutor of Amanda’s murder trial through your Amercian focused PR campaign, when Amanda’s Italian defence lawyer had to apologise to Prosecutor Mignini for this campaign?
This campaign extrapolates the slight that an American fiction author (Douglas Preston) felt when he was momentarily arrested after stumbling into a police sting operation and when he was using a false name. This arrest was recently rejected for separate legal action against Mignini. On the basis of Preston’s bad feelings, the PR campaign tells us that Mignini has a “history” of inappropriate behaviour.
Do you agree that this smells of “spin”? Why can’t you fight Amanda’s legal battle on the basis of a solid, coherent alibi?
Question for Curt Knox and Edda Mellas:
Why would Amanda call you in the middle of the night in Seattle to tell you about what was still supposedly only a break-in in her house (before Meredith Kercher’s door was broken down by the police who soon arrived), when Amanda was accompanied by her Italian boyfriend who would know better than her how to react? Why to your great surprise at Capanne Prison could Amanda not even remember making that call? And why on the witness stand did it take you many minutes to summarize that 88-second call?
Question for Curt Knox and Edda Mellas:
Before the trial started, Amanda’s Italian defence lawyer publicly stated that Amanda had not been hit by police during her questioning on 5 November 2007 (during which she stated she was in the cottage when Meredith was murdered, and when she falsely accused Patrick Lumumba of being the murderer - an accusation which has given rise to an additional charge against her).
Once the trial had started, and coinciding with the arrival of Amanda’s stepfather Chris Mellas in Perugia, Amanda made a spontaneous statement in court that she had been slapped on the back of her head during this questioning, and her Italian lawyer had to incorporate these statements into her testimony.
Are you satisfied with the Italian defence team? Are they aligned with the talking points of the PR campaign?
Question for Curt Knox and Edda Mellas:
The justification that Amanda has been held in preventive custody since she became a suspect is due to the possibility that she may flee Italy (in addition earlier on in the investigation to the possibility that evidence may be tampered with).
On various occasions you have publicly regretted not getting Amanda out of Italy before she was arrested. Also, Seattle King County Judge Heavey (associated with the “Friends of Amanda” campaign) sent a letter to the Italian judiciary on State of Washington letterhead where he decried alleged irregularities and illegalities in the investigation (nobody knows what he based these allegations on). Such an official letter would suggest to Italian authorities that were Amanda ever to find herself in the United States before her legal processes have finished, that it could be difficult or impossible to extradite her back to Italy.
Are some of the public statements made on behalf of Amanda counterproductive to obtaining her early freedom?
http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/larry_king_on_cnn_friday_please_ask_mellas_and_knox_these_tough_questions/
