If it had just been a case of the wrong boilerplate article being published, then fair enough. I can even just about accept the (inadvisable) practice of saving time by adding predictive clichés to a text in advance, which can then be "fine-tuned" in the light of what actually happens.

But I can't see any legitimate reason for concocting fake quotes in advance. Why not just put "INSERT QUOTE HERE" in the draft text? That would make it easier for the journalist to "fine-tune" everything correctly, rather than risk accidentally leaving in false information, and if submitted by mistake it would alert subeditors that they were dealing with a draft.

The most benign explanation I can think of is that Pisa "fine-tuned" his "not guilty" version, but then sent in his rough "guilty" draft by accident - in which case why is he "angry" with the Mail rather than with himself?

We all know that the only reason the article was pulled was because Knox was found not guilty - had it gone the other way, we would have been none the wiser that Pisa's report contained concocted quotes and bogus details. Pisa needs to come up with something rather better than "bloggers don't understand reporters".

Funny how the word "petty", like "obsessive", is often used when what is meant is "inconvenient".

Certainly explains the almost reckless viciousness which seems to be the most notable aspect of her character.