To the Ministero della Giustizia of Italy, UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office, and the US Department of State:
The case of The State vs. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito will come before the Italian Supreme Court on March 25, 2015 and we, an independent group of advocates, ask for your assistance. Please investigate the activities of local law enforcement authorities and consular staff in the aftermath of the death of Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy on November 1, 2007. There were multiple violations of national and international laws by the prosecution which undermined the rights of defendants Knox and Sollecito to a fair trial and denied justice to the family of the late Meredith Kercher. We ask that those responsible for perverting the course of justice be held to account. Full details of our complaint are set out in the appendix.
Please sign this petition if you agree.
I. We request that the Ministero della Giustizia of Italy carry out an Inquiry into the handling of the case by Perugian officials, or publish the Inquiry that was requested by Rocco Girlanda and other MPs in 2011, if it was carried out. The Inquiry should investigate the following concerns:
A) Allegations from Members of Parliament that the prosecution's evidence against Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox is "contradictory and unreliable" which resulted in "unfair treatment of the defendants."
1) That the Perugian Authorities during the Investigative Phase (2007-2008) of Kercher's murder:
a) Suppressed and ignored evidence that should have been obtained from Miss Kercher's body, belongings or fixtures and surfaces in her bedroom.
b) Suppressed, manipulated or destroyed evidence that exonerated Miss Knox and Mr. Sollecito.
c) Interfered with and wiretapped witnesses without due cause.
d) Failed to ensure that Mr. Sollecito or Miss Knox had a lawyer present during their interrogations as required by law.
e) Failed to ensure that Miss Knox had a legally accredited interpreter present.
f) Failed to provide the defense lawyers or HM Coroner (UK) with factually correct information regarding the crime scene.
g) Were prejudiced against Miss Knox and Mr. Sollecito, subjecting them to mental and physical abuse, and illegally depriving them of their freedom.
B) Information that was known to be incorrect was used to influence a judge, thereby illegally depriving Miss Knox and Mr. Sollecito of their freedom between 2007 and 2011. Under Italian law, defendants are not imprisoned without good reason until a Judicial Truth is set down by the Italian Supreme Court at the end of the trial process. In this case, evidence was manufactured to this end.
1) There are multiple violations of national and international laws that should have protected Mr. Sollecito, an Italian citizen, and Miss Knox, a guest of Italy:
a) Italian Constitution: Articles 2, 10, 13, 15, 21, 24 and 111.
b) Italian Penal Code: Articles 368, 594, 595, 596, 597, 598 and 599.
c) Italian Criminal Procedure Code: Articles 64, 70, 97, 104, and 114.
d) Vienna Convention: Article 36.
e) The International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): Article 4, Section 2.
f) The European Convention for Human Rights (ECHR): Article 6, Section 2, and Article 8.
g) Scientifically invalid evidence was introduced and misrepresented in court:
i) Against Mr. Sollecito, testing of Miss Kercher's bra clasp in DNA Batch Run 5.
ii) Against Miss Knox, testing of Mr. Sollecito's kitchen knife, DNA Batch Run 2, 36b.
C) Seepage from Civil proceedings into the Criminal trial process, which was unavoidable because they were held simultaneously in the same courts and before the same judges and juries.
1) The Civil trial entered evidence into court that had been denied in the Criminal trial, thereby denying the defendants a fair trial.
2) Open court heard, on multiple occasions, constitutionally excluded information with no filter between Criminal and Civil proceedings.
D) The implications of Rudy Guede's "Fast Track" trial process for defendants Miss Knox and Mr. Sollecito's separate trials. Miss Knox and Mr. Sollecito were accused of participation in Miss Kercher's murder at a trial in which they had no representation and were unable to challenge evidence presented there or cross examine Mr. Guede.
1) Mr. Guede is the only person to leave physical evidence in the room where the murder occurred.
2) Mr. Guede opted for an abbreviated trial which produced a Judicial Truth in 2010 that set down a ruling that said, in effect, "multiple attackers" killed Miss Kercher and that Mr. Guede was a "bystander."
3) Mr. Guede's Judicial Truth deprives Mr. Sollecito and Miss Knox of their inviolable Italian constitutional rights to a fair trial, a presumption of innocence and the right to confront witnesses.
4) Mr. Sollecito and Miss Knox were named as perpetrators in Mr. Guede's trials.
5) Mr. Sollecito and Miss Knox were not defendants in Mr. Guede's trials and, thus, had no legal representation and could not participate in that trial. Even so, they were bound by the finding of "multiple attackers" due to that Judicial Truth depriving them of any presumption of innocence in their own trials or any right to confront witnesses, including Mr. Guede.
6) Mr. Guede's Judicial Truth effectively condemned Miss Knox and Mr. Sollecito by ensuring that they'd be convicted at their own trials. Moreover, such a ruling, if left to stand, could eviscerate the constitutional rights of defendants in future split trials.
II. We request that the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office launch an Inquiry into the activities of its diplomatic staff at the time of Meredith Kercher's death, November 1, 2007, to establish:
A) Whether the Kercher family were advised to retain their own lawyer and to commence simultaneous civil proceedings against any person or persons who were defending themselves against charges of murder.
B) What steps were taken to ascertain that the investigation into the death of Miss Kercher was being undertaken in a professional and competent manner.
C) What monitoring was carried out by the UK to ensure that the trial process was proceeding correctly and that justice for the Kercher family was being achieved.
D) If Her Majesty's Coroner received accurate information from the Perugian authorities, as outlined in Support for British Nationals Abroad, Article 41, 42 and 43, Section A and C.
E) If dispatches and other communication between the Italian government, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and Her Majesty's Coroner, regarding Miss Kercher's case, can be released to the public under the Freedom of Information Act.
III. We request that the U.S. Department of State actively and closely monitor the case before the Italian Supreme Court and any further actions by the Italian judiciary against Amanda Knox to ensure that such proceedings are strictly in accordance with Italian and European law and established international standards of human rights; and to immediately and vigorously protest any further violations of law and/or abrogation of Miss Knox's rights as a U.S. citizen.
We further request the U.S. Department of State to launch an Inquiry into the activities of its diplomatic staff at the time of Meredith Kercher's death, November 1, 2007, to establish:
A) If Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini's legal actions against two American citizens (Douglas Preston and Amanda Knox) in eighteen months warranted an investigation by embassy staff and notification of the US Department of State.
B) If the Perugian authorities notified embassy staff in a timely manner that Miss Knox was being investigated for murder as outlined in US Foreign Affairs Manual, 7 FAM 426.2.1, Failure To Notify.
C) If advice and assistance given to Miss Knox and her family abided by 7 FAM 011a, Consular Protection of US Nationals Abroad.
D) If Protests were warranted regarding denial of due process, criminal evidence against and media character assassination of Miss Knox by the Perugian authorities under the guidelines of 7 FAM 425, Abuse And Maltreatment.
E) If Dispatches/Protests contained specific notifications regarding the violations of Miss Knox's rights under Italian and European law.