Skip to content

Defamation Of The Dead Is Not A Right To A Defence @GraziaUK

Posted in Business and Law, Justice, and Media Spotlight

Meredith (Mez) Kercher was found murdered on 1 November, 2007 in her bedroom, and has a right to justice, yet she has been denied that right due to a combination of the failures of the Italian investigative procedures, and a high scale American media campaign that promoted the innocence of Amanda Knox. The latter was instigated when all the evidence concerning the murder wasn’t even collected or the results released.

Today, Netflix will release a documentary on Knox, in an attempt to prove her innocence. I am disappointed in Grazia (UK) publishing a piece entitled Amanda Knox Has A Right To Protest Her Innocence’ where the writer admits she didn’t think Knox was guilty. This is a magazine Mez would have been reading today, and the title is abhorrent and a disgrace to the word innocence. Isn’t a magazine supposed to encourage justice and not injustice? Knox was ‘exonerated’ by the courts for the murder charge due to a lack of physical evidence that the authorities had not processed correctly, but while she was entitled to a defence in court, she has no right to defend herself by defaming the murder victim who is unable to defend herself. It is left to those who knew Mez to stop any further tarnishing of her name or character. To defend, does not give one the right to sully the name or character of one who is unable to respond to those accusations.

In law, you defame someone by harming their reputation and the burden of proof is then on that person to prove that. As Mez is dead, she cannot defend herself while the Knox camp infer she behaved in a promiscuous manner, inviting men back to her home for casual sex. How do I know she wasn’t that type of girl? She was the kind of girl that would have her girlfriends stay over after a night out, either at her house or their house. I know because that’s how I met her. In brief I’d worked with her friend and needed some last minute staff to help me out on a job. I called her to see if she could help me out, and she told me she was staying at a friend’s house, but would come in to help me. I asked if she knew anyone else that could help, and told me her friend Mez could come, and that’s how I met her and got to know her.

A brief glance at the pro-Knox propaganda suggests that Meredith invited Rudy Guede to the house, and was casually dating him. This is contradictory, first, because she had a boyfriend she had started dating, and two, it is out of her character for her to do so. Why would she be interested in an uneducated drifter who had nothing in common with her, that couldn’t speak English? Journalists and those who did not know her may accept this as a possibility, but Mez was shy and quiet at times, and livened up only with those she knew well. To paint her as a loose woman is disrespectful, but was the only way to account for Guede being in the house.

It has been said many times that the Italian justice system failed Meredith because of a lack protocols being followed, and they admit that. Sadly, that’s when people get away with criminal actions, because it is what can be proved that matters. There are two people who know what happened that night, and two others who may know more:

  1. Meredith Kercher ~ Murdered in her own home. Forensic evidence shows more than one party was involved as she was restrained while being attacked, and there were no signs of ligature marks. The identities of the other party or parties has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
  2. Rudy Guede ~ His DNA was found everywhere in the crime scene, and creates doubt over his story (which no one could corroborate) that he was invited there, and why didn’t he call the police if he was innocent? If he was invited there, then why was the staged burglary (where nothing was taken) created? Did he break in or did Knox invite him, as it wasn’t Meredith? It is more than likely he is lying about being invited as Meredith would have told her friends that night, and also she called her home in the UK when she arrived home that evening. While he could be stupid enough to leave his DNA everywhere, he didn’t attempt to flee Italy immediately. One can assume he felt safe, as he may have been assured by the other party that they would remove all the DNA. Clearly he knows more, but has lied so often it will be hard to know the truth.
  3. Raffaele Sollecito ~ The question as to why his DNA was found on Meredith’s bra strap has never been answered? The evidence was missed initially and that is the fault of the police investigation. His alibi stories around the time of incident have gaps in them, and were inconsistent. Apparently he had only known Knox for five days.
  4. Amanda Knox ~ She has committed perjury, and that’s a crime that has irrefutable evidence, when she accused Patrick Lumumba of being a suspect. Despite what others have written that she was coerced, or that it was a false confession (it’s only a false confession when you implicate yourself), the fact is she chose to implicate him, and it was only on her evidence that the police took action. Lumumba had multiple independent witnesses who saw him working in his bar at the time of the murder, therefore should have never been a suspect.

Meredith and Knox had only known each other for five weeks, and were roommates and not friends. Did the other housemates support and defend Knox? I don’t recall any of them doing so, and they, more than anyone else would know what she was like to live with. One fact we do know is that there were at least three people present at the murder scene—one is dead, one has been convicted (but is claiming he is innocent), and evidence of the other parties has been thrown out as unsafe. Perhaps the show should be subtitled, ‘How to get away with murder’ instead? Regardless, while I believe in free speech, the media should support justice and not promote those who got away with crimes. Shame on you Grazia.

Please read my other article on the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply
