Saturday, September 12, 2015

Revenge Of The Knox, The Smear-All Book: We Get Down To Nailing ALL Her Invented Claims #6

Posted by Chimera



Also Implacably Nasty… Click here to go straight to Comments.

1. Overview Of This Post

My opinion is that this book is essentially Amanda Knox’s way of getting back at everyone in Italy she ever encountered, while falsely making her notoriously brash, sharp-elbowed, frequently drugged-up persona look endearing, naive, and squeaky-clean.

Knox includes numerous lies, smears, and stories to compromise literally dozens of others. None of them help clear up what happened to Meredith.  And given how rampant the lies are, it doesn’t really clarify anything about Amanda Knox either. All it really does is to muddy the waters, which may be the real desired benefit.

I previewed this series and explained why “Revenge of the Knox” in this post here.  Series post #1 dissected pages 1 to 66 of the new paperback edition.  Post #2 dissected pages 67 to 107. Post #3 dissected pages 108 to 172. Post #4 dissected pages 173 to 207 and Post #6 dissected pages 243 to 289.

2. Dissection Of Pages 243 to 291.

[Chapter 21, Page 244] ‘’ ... At twenty, I still had a childlike view of people. I looked for the saving graces in everyone. I thought people were naturally empathetic, that they felt ashamed and guilty when they mistreated someone else. That faith in humanity was being picked away, but I held to the belief that people were basically good. And that good people would believe me and set me free….’‘

  • You look for the saving graces in everyone, yet you assume everyone thinks you are a monster?

  • People are naturally empathetic .... so they DON’T tell someone that their friend had ‘‘their throat fucking slit’‘?

  • People are naturally empathetic .... so they DON’T say that ‘‘shit happens’’ regarding a murdered friend’?

  • People are naturally empathetic .... so they DON’T claim someone is a friend, then that you want to get on with your life?

  • Why would being good have anything to do as to whether you are believed or not?  Murder cases hinge on evidence, not feelings.


[Chapter 21, Page 244] ‘’ ... Part of the growing up I did in prison was learning that people are complicated, and that some will do something wrong to achieve what they think is right. Since my second interrogation with Mignini, I knew the prosecution was intent on undermining my alibi. Over the coming weeks and months, I would learn just how far they would go to try to prove me guilty….’‘

  • Some will do something wrong to achieve what they think is right?  So, falsely accusing PL, because getting away was right?

  • Which alibi was Mignini intent on undermining? The one that Raffaele refused, the party that he made up, or the one that he was alone on his computer while you went out?  Or was it your alibi (statements), that you were a witness to PL killing Meredith?  Or the one where you and Raffy were at his apartment?

  • 2nd interrogation?  It was his first ‘‘interrogation’‘.  To recap:

  • Mignini was not present at your 1:45 statement.  Chapter 10 in your book is 100% fiction.

  • Mignini was present (he was called from home), at your 5:45 statement, but asked you no questions.

  • You seem to remember your number of interrogations the way you remember how many times you met Guede

  • How far Mignini would go?  You mean, present your lies, false statements, phone records, DNA evidence .... that is what prosecutors DO.  There are these things (both in Italy and in America), called TRIALS.  You will learn more.


[Chapter 21, Page 245] ‘’ ... The prints couldn’t have been made by Raffaele’s newer Nike Air Force 1s, he said. “They had just seven concentric circles.” By show’s end he had removed the possibility that Raffaele had been at the murder scene and put another strike against Guede. Raffaele’s family must have felt euphoric….’‘

  • Well, the shoes might not implicate Raffy, but those bare feet, and that ‘‘hammer toe’’ will

  • Euphoric, at another strike against Guede?  Hmmm…. were you trying to frame him or something?


[Chapter 21, Page 245] ‘’ ... I knew this “evidence” could hurt us. I also knew that Raffaele had as much chance of coming into contact with Meredith’s bra as Meredith had meeting up with a knife from Raffaele’s apartment. Neither could be true, but the prosecution would use both these findings to tie us to the crime….’‘

  • Well, this is true, but in a manipulative way.  Yes, Raffaele would have as much chance, namely both incidents would only happen, if Raffaele were involved in the killings.

  • Victim’s DNA on suspect’s knife, and suspect’s DNA on victim’s bra?  Why would the prosecution see that as evidence?

  • Yes, they do tie you to the crime.  No need to be sarcastic.

[Chapter 21, Page 246] ‘’ ... I wasn’t implicated by the clasp, but I knew that the prosecution would never believe that Raffaele had acted without me. They’d say I gave him access to the villa. I was the reason he’d met Meredith. We were each other’s alibis. If they could show that Raffaele was directly connected to the crime, I would, at the very least, be charged as his accomplice…’‘

  • You are being disingenuous again.  While the DNA conclusively links Raffaele to the scene, you are implying that the police would leap to conclusions to connect you as well.

  • While you present these as fantasies, they are quite reasonable.  Raffaele’s connection to the house was you, his ‘‘girlfriend’‘.  You claimed you were with him, yes, you were each other’s alibis.  Yes, disproving the alibi of one would cast suspicion on the other.

[Chapter 21, Page 248] ‘’ ... This new claim was another barricade separating me from my real life—one more accusation on a growing list. Too many impossible things were being served up as “truth”—Meredith’s DNA on Raffaele’s kitchen knife, Raffaele’s DNA on Meredith’s bra clasp, and now Meredith’s blood on the soles of my feet….’‘

  • Separating you from your real life?  What, you just want to get on with your life?

  • Did you see the crime scene photos?  There was a lot of blood in Meredith’s room.  Yes, you could have stepped in some.

[Chapter 21, Page 248] ‘’ ... It was crazy enough to be told that “investigative instinct” had convinced the police I was involved in Meredith’s murder—that I was dangerous and evil. Now forensic science—the supposedly foolproof tests I was counting on to clear me—was turning up findings I knew were wrong. I, like most people who get their information from TV crime shows, was unaware that forensic evidence has to be interpreted, that human error and bias can, and do, upend results…’‘

  • It wasn’t investigative instinct.  It was those damn false accusation statements you insisted on writing.

  • Well, innocent people don’t write such things, and they tend to have just one (1) alibi.

  • The foolproof tests you were expecting to clear me ... and implicate Guede?

  • You are unhappy and surprised that TV and CSI lied to you?  Okay ....

  • Human error and bias can upend results.  So can falsely claiming to witness someone doing the crime.

[Chapter 21, Page 249] ‘’ ... I always liked seeing my lawyers, but now I had to brace myself for each visit. I didn’t have to wait long before they brought more devastating news. Less than a week later, investigators reported that they’d found my DNA mixed with Meredith’s blood ringing the drain of the bidet in our shared bathroom. The implication was that I’d rinsed my hands and feet in the bidet after slashing her throat. They said that my skin cells had shown up—not Raffaele’s or Rudy Guede’s—because I was the last person to wash up in that bathroom…’‘

  • You are unhappy because the lawyers only bring bad news?

  • Mixed DNA in the bathroom?  What about the mixed DNA in Filomena’s room—you omit that.

  • You know, for all your TV interviews, you claim ‘‘no evidence’‘, but your own book lists quite a lot of it.

  • You were the last person to wash up there?  Finally, another truthful statement.

  • You sure didn’t ‘‘shower’’ in that blood soaked bathroom the morning after, did you?

[Chapter 21, Page 250] ‘’ ... The pictures of the chemical-stained bathroom did what, I have to assume, the police wanted. The public reaction proved that a picture—especially a “bloody” picture from a crime scene—is worth a hundred thousand words. At least. I knew what people were thinking. Who but a knife-wielding killer would take a shower in a “blood-streaked” bathroom? Who but a liar would say there had been only a few flecks of blood? The answer? Foxy Knoxy….’‘

  • You are trying to be flippant and sarcastic here, but most people would draw the same conclusions.

[Chapter 21, Page 250] ‘’ ... My lawyers complained to the judges that the prosecution was using the media to our disadvantage, but the judge said that whatever was reported in the press wouldn’t be held against us. The flow of information between the prosecution and the media was an accepted but unacknowledged fact….’‘

  • Using the media to your disadvantage?  Did the prosecution hire a PR firm or something?

  • The PR didn’t convict you, the evidence, which you have been listing so well in your book, does.

[Chapter 21, Page 251] ‘’ ... The denial, fear, and bafflement I felt in the beginning of this nightmare had turned into quiet indignation and defiance. I finally accepted that I was my only friend inside Capanne. I clung to my dad at every visit. The rest of the time, I used the only coping tool I knew: I retreated into my own head….’‘

  • You are your only friend?  What about the bisexual Cera, or Lupa, who believes in you?

  • Retreating into your head is okay, just please don’t sign any more statements.

[Chapter 21, Page 251] ‘’ ... Cera’s sense of control came from cleaning. When I moved in I liked that her cell was spotless. I didn’t understand that it was her obsession, until she demanded that I dry off the walls of the shower before I dried myself; place the shampoo and lotion bottles in a perfect line on the counter, equally spaced apart; tuck in my bedsheets with military precision; arrange the apples in the fruit bowl stem up; and avoid using the kitchen sink. I tried hard to get along with Cera. I helped her with her schoolwork and either cleaned alongside her or stayed out of the way. My job, after she was done mopping and drying the floor, was to take a panno spugna—a spongelike cloth—and clean the baseboards on my hands and knees. I complained bitterly to Mom about these things when she came to Italy over her spring break…’‘

  • Why include any of this?  It doesn’t help clear anything up.

  • You are falsely imprisoned, and you are complaining about having to clean?

[Chapter 21, Page 252] ‘’ ... One morning, when I was walking into the bathroom to put something away, I bumped into Cera, and she kissed me on the lips. I just stood there staring at her, too surprised to know what to say. “Your face is telling me that was not okay,” she said quickly. “I’m really sorry.”  She never made physical advances after that, but she did once ask if I was curious what it was like to have sex with a woman, like her. My stock answer—an emphatic no —made her feel bad…’‘

  • So, you proudly announce (and publish) that you are a random slut, but being a lesbian puts you off?

  • Even if any of this is true, why include it?  Are you just trying to humiliate Cera, they way you publish personal details about Meredith?

[Chapter 21, Page 253] ‘’ .... My only hope and constant thought during that winter and spring was that the judge might allow me to live with my family in an apartment, under house arrest. My first plea had been rejected, but my lawyers had another hearing scheduled for April 1. Even though Carlo and Luciano weren’t confident about the outcome, I was sure it would happen. I was counting the days….’‘

[Chapter 21, Page 254] ‘’ ... Luciano and Carlo came to see me the next day. They reassured me that no one, not even the prosecution, believed Guede. “He ran away, he’s a liar, a thief, a rapist, a murderer,” Carlo said. “No one could ever consider him a reliable witness, because he has everything to gain from blaming you. The prosecution is making a big deal about it because it incriminates you.”  “Please, Amanda,” Luciano said. “This is not what you need to worry about. You need to stay strong.” Still, I couldn’t be consoled. With Guede’s testimony against me, there was absolutely no chance a judge would free me from prison….’‘

  • Knox is distorting things once again.  Yes, accomplices turning on each other is powerful, but prosecutors usually suspect that the one is minimizing his own involvement for a reduced sentence.

  • And it is not Guede that got house arrest denied.  There was PLENTY of other evidence.

  • There was also those psychiatric evaluations, which were a large factor, yet you don’t publish them

  • http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_17

[Chapter 21, Page 254] ‘’ ... In early April, Carlo came to Capanne. His face gave away his worry. “Amanda,” he said, “the prosecution now says there’s evidence of a cleanup. They contend that’s why there’s no evidence that you and Raffaele were in Meredith’s bedroom—that you scrubbed the crime scene of your traces.”

  • No evidence of you in Meredith’s room?  What about that size 37 shoeprint, which was NOT Meredith’s?  Or Raffy’s DNA (which you describe), or the bra clasp?

  • This is a twist of what the prosecutors believe.  They thought you tried to selectively clean up, but that there was still evidence there.

[Chapter 21, Page 254] ‘’ ... “Amanda, the investigators are in a conundrum,” Carlo said. “They found so much of Guede’s DNA in Meredith’s room and on and inside her body. But the only forensic evidence they have of you is outside her bedroom. Raffaele’s DNA evidence is only on the bra hook. If you and Raffaele participated in the murder, as the prosecution believes, your DNA should be as easy to find as Guede’s.” “But Carlo, no evidence doesn’t mean we cleaned up. It means we weren’t there!” “I know,” Carlo said, sighing. “But they’ve already decided that you and Raffaele faked a break-in to nail Guede. I know it doesn’t make sense. They’re just adding another link to the story. It’s the only way the prosecution can involve you and Raffaele when the evidence points to a break-in and murder by Guede.”

  • This is once again twisting things.  Five (5) spots of mixed DNA Amanda/Meredith were found, including in Filomena’s room. Guede’s DNA was NEVER found in Filomena’s room, even though it is where he ‘‘supposedly’’ broke in.

  • Just because these 5 mixed spots were not in the bedroom, does not mean they must be ruled out.

  • And what about your shoeprint in Meredith’s room?  Wait, that is not on Meredith’s body.

  • Sollecito’s bloody footprint on the bathroom mat, should that be excluded simply because it was not in the ‘‘murder room’‘?

  • Should that bathroom in general be excluded, simply because Meredith was not killed in the bedroom?

  • Should Filomena’s bedroom be excluded, despite the (alleged) burglary point of entry, simply because Meredith wasn’t killed there?

  • Should the other bathroom, where Guede left his poop be excluded, since Meredith was not killed there?  Wait, that is evidence against Guede ....

  • Should the hallway, where the luminol revealed bloody footprints be excluded, just because Meredith was not killed in the hall?

  • Should Sollecito’s kitchen, where the murder weapon was found, be excluded, simply because Meredith was not killed there?

  • So, there may be no evidence here… but only if you redefine what the crime scene is.

[Chapter 21, Page 255] ‘’ ... Judge Matteini sent me her decision about house arrest on May 16: “Denied.” By then the prosecution had stacked so much against me that Guede’s testimony hadn’t even figured in her decision. Even though I hadn’t left the country before my arrest, the judge was certain that Mom would have helped me leave when she was to have arrived in Perugia on November 6. That, she said, is why the police planned to arrest me before Mom could get to me. It turned out that they’d gotten her itinerary the same time I did—by bugging my phone….’‘

  • Judge Matteini send the decision about house arrest on May 16th?  That long?  Matteini is the Judge who you saw back in November 2007, and it was the Ricciarelli court in Noivember 2007 and the Italian Supreme Court (Cassation) in April 2008 who heard the appeal and denied house arrest.  You are mixing these up, either accidently, or on purpose.

  • The police planned to arrest you?  Okay, so when they called Raffaele about his alibi, they knew you would show up?  They knew you would beg to be let in (after they told you to go home)?  They knew you would bring your homework, and start doing guymnastics?  They knew that after some questioning, your mind would suddenly imagine an innocent man committing the crime?  They knew you had such communication problems, that your statements would only get more confusing?  Wow, these cops are diabolical.

  • If they knew your Mother was coming, wouldn’t they have ‘‘set the trap’’ sooner, to make sure you were locked up in case Mom came early?

[Chapter 21, Page 256] ‘’ ... This new setback conjured up all the desperation, the nauseating helplessness, I’d felt that morning. I could hardly breathe thinking about it. I remembered how relieved I’d been that my mom was flying over, how much I needed her. As soon as she said she was coming to Italy, I realized I’d been stubbornly, stupidly insistent that I could help the police find Meredith’s killer on my own.  I’d been tricked…’

  • You could help the police find Meredith’s killer?  Well, you did, you just layered it in total B.S.

  • After days of claiming to know nothing, you had a vision, or conniption, that you witnessed someone else do it.

  • In your later statement, you said that Raffaele ‘‘might’’ be there.

  • In the statement after that, you say you don’t know what is true, and you made things up

  • You helped, in that you left some of Rudy’s forensic traces behind.

  • You’d been tricked?  You mean CSI and TV lied to you?

[Chapter 21, Page 256] ‘’ ... Cera started trying to prepare me for the chance of another fifteen years in prison. “I think you should say you’re guilty,” she advised me one day, “because it will take years off your sentence.” “I will not lie!” I yelled, spitting out one word at a time. “I’m not scared of Guede or the prosecutor! I’m ready to fight! I don’t know anything about this murder, and I will go free!”

  • You will not lie?  Wow, that is a first.

  • You’re not scared of Guede?  More likely he is scared of you.

  • You’re not scared of the prosecutor?  You found out he’s not the Mayor?

  • You don’t know anything about the murder?  Ummm…. those statements you signed….

[Chapter 22, Page 261] ‘’ ... Oh my God. I’ve been formally charged with murder. I wanted to scream, “This is not who I am! You’ve made a huge mistake! You’ve got me all wrong!”  I was now fluent enough in Italian to see how ludicrous the charges were. Along with murder, I was charged with illegally carrying around Raffaele’s kitchen knife. It was galling. Real crimes had been committed against Meredith; the police owed her a real investigation. Instead, they were spinning stories to avoid admitting they’d arrested the wrong people…’‘

  • Not who you are?  That is irrelevant, it is what you did on one day.  Why do you seem so concerned with how you appear?

  • No, I think they have it pretty right.

  • Police did owe Meredith an investigation, and it overwhelmingly concluded that you, Sollecito, and Guede were involved.

  • They arrested the wrong people?  Well, Lumumba was innocent, but who was it who got him locked up?

[Chapter 22, Page 262] ‘’ ... Finally we could combat all the misinformation leaked to the media. We could explain that the knife had never left the kitchen, the striped sweater had never gone missing, the receipts weren’t for bleach, the underwear I bought wasn’t sexy. We could describe how the prosecution had come up with the bloody footprints. We’d explain why Meredith’s blood had mixed with my DNA in our shared bathroom, how my blood got on the faucet, and correct the notion that the crime was a sex game gone wrong. We could object to the prosecutor painting me as a whore and a murderer. My lawyers would finally get to see the prosecution’s documents. No more surprises….’‘

  • Yes, you could combat the misinformation leaked to the media.  You still have Marriott’s number?

  • You could ‘‘explain’’ the knife never left the kitchen, but you aren’t actually saying here that it never did.

  • You could ‘‘describe’’ how the prosecution came up with the bloody footprints?

  • You would ‘‘explain’’ Meredith’s blood mixed with your DNA, how your blood got on the faucet?

  • The prosecution never claimed it was a sex game gone wrong.  It was a ‘‘misinformation leaked’’ by your own people

  • Objecting to the prosecutor calling you a whore might be difficult, as he never did that.

  • Objecting to the prosecutor calling you a murderer… well, that is what trials are for.

  • Your lawyers would get to see the prosecution’s documents.  It is called ‘‘discovery’’ and is standard in Western courts.

  • For all your ‘‘no evidence’’ claims, you oddly seem to be listing a lot of evidence here.  I am confused.

[Chapter 22, Page 263] ‘’ ... “We’re taking you off your restricted status.” Just like that. While I was being investigated, I was under judge’s orders to be kept separate for my own safety. But now, as an accused criminal, I passed from the judge’s responsibility to the prison’s…’‘

  • Like much of the book, this makes little sense.

  • If you were being kept separate, it would be for your protection, or because you were deemed to be a threat to other inmates.  The state of your investigation would be irrelevant.

  • Once you entered Capanne, you were the responsibility of the prison.  The judge is responsible for reviewing the legal case, but the prison monitors your welfare.  Are you being deliberately deceptive?  (And am I being rhetorical)?

[Chapter 22, Page 263] ‘’ ... Prison officials had always claimed I was kept separate—I had cellmates but, with the exception of a few prescribed events, couldn’t interact with the broad population —because other inmates would probably beat me. Now, with only the mildest caution —“Be careful of the other girls!”—Argirò opened a second door. Instead of having passeggio by myself, I was in the company of fifteen sweaty women.

  • As soon as I walked outside, the gaggle of prisoners started hooting and hollering, “She’s out! She’s with us! Way to go!”

  • You were in danger of being beaten up?  Did you report this when you had representatives from the state department visiting?

  • Really?  You got a cheering for being out with other women?  Ego tripping here?

[Chapter 22, Page 265] ‘’ ... Wilma’s behavior wasn’t that different from that of other prisoners—most were manipulative and liked to stir up drama—but she wasn’t smart enough to recognize this and to fake loyalty to the other women. People were able to see through her actions….’‘

  • Most are manipulative and like to stir up drama? It’s a shame you didn’t fit in better here.

  • People can see through her actions?  Too bad you didn’t realize that people can see through yours.

[Chapter 22, Page 266] ‘’ ... As soon as I read the letter, I realized it was real. I was shocked that he was writing me. I’d felt betrayed by the months of silence and by his comments in the press distancing himself from me. And of course there was the issue of his previous claim that I had left his apartment the night of the murder and asked him to lie for me. He wrote that he’d been aching to contact me, and that it was his lawyers and family who hadn’t permitted him to get in touch. He said everyone had been afraid when we were first arrested, but that now he realized it had been a mistake to abandon me and wrong to submit to police pressure and acquiesce to their theory. “I’m sorry,” he said. “I still care about you. I still think about you all the time.”

  • You feel betrayed by Raffaele’s ‘‘distancing’’ comments?  But isn’t he serving time rather than throw you under the bus?  Hell that was the whole premise of ‘‘Honor Bound’‘.  Wait, it was all a crock.

  • So, you acknowledge Raffaele ‘‘did’’ say you asked him to lie. So you are admitting evidence of a false alibi exists?

  • He realizes ‘‘now’’ that abandoning you was a mistake?

  • He submitted to police pressures? You told Oggi that you broke up with Sollecito after he withdrew your alibi, yet considering you were ‘‘pressured’’ as well, you think you would be a bit more understanding.  Wait, the ‘‘pressures’’ never happened.

  • Raffaele is in this mess largely due to Amanda.  He likely DOES think about her a lot.

[Chapter 22, Page 266] ‘’ ... I felt completely reassured by his letter. It wasn’t lovey-dovey, and that suited me fine. I no longer thought of us as a couple. Now we were linked by our innocence. It was a relief to know we were in this fight together. It was only much later that I learned how his interrogation had been as devastating as mine. I wrote him back the next morning. I was explicit about not wanting a romantic relationship anymore but added that I wanted the best for him and hoped he was okay. I knew I shouldn’t write about the case, so I only said I was optimistic that our lawyers would prove the prosecution wrong….’‘

  • You are fine with not seeing Raffaele and yourself as a couple?  Guess you moved on with your life.

  • You were linked by your innocence, or in the hollow claims of your ‘‘innocence’‘?

  • If you wanted the best for Raffy BEFORE Meredith’s death, you would not have involved him in your scheme.

  • If you wanted the best for Raffy AFTER Meredith’s death, you wouldn’t have dragged this court case for 7+ years.

  • You were in the fight together?  Good to know Raffaele would corroborate your alibi at trial, and wouldn’t ask to sever the Florence appeals, or say on American TV that he has questions about your behaviour, or hold a press conference to denounce you, or go on Porta a Porta to denounce you….

[Chapter 22, Page 269] ‘’ ... All this happened while Luciano and Carlo were preparing the defense for my pretrial. They didn’t have everything they needed to break down the case completely —Meredith’s DNA on the knife and my “bloody” footprints were going unanswered. Two days before the pretrial started, we got news that was both heartening and unnerving. Police investigators revealed that they’d found an imprint of the murder weapon in blood on Meredith’s bedsheets, making it clear the weapon wasn’t in fact the knife with the six-and-a-half-inch blade the prosecution was claiming. The imprint was too short to have been made by Raffaele’s kitchen knife….’‘

  • You are omitting a lot here.  Forensic evidence is not the only thing the defence needs to ‘‘break down’‘.  There is also those false accusation statements you insisted on writing, your false alibis, you and Raffaele turning off your phones, the details you knew (such as Meredith screaming and having her throat cut).  These things have not been successfully challenged EVER.

  • Actually, the knife imprint WAS quite clear, so the police knew exactly what kind of knife they were looking for.

  • And the impression doesn’t have to be for the ENTIRE knife, if it is fairly distinctive.

[Chapter 22, Page 269] ‘’ ... I reminded myself that we also had common sense on our side. There was no motive. I had no history of violence. I’d barely met Rudy Guede. Raffaele had not met him at all…’‘

  • Common sense is telling me that it is odd, you keep saying you had no history of violence, rather than just saying you didn’t do it.

  • You had barely met Guede ... but the details on that are very ... flexible.

  • Raffaele and Guede lived 100m apart, yet never met.

  • Speaking of motive: Raffaele is your ‘‘boyfriend’‘, and from this book, Guede has the hots for you.  Coincidence?

  • Speaking of motive: While it is useful to be able to explain a crime, motive is not required to prove in any country.

[Chapter 22, Page 270] ‘’ ... Carlo, the pessimist, said, “Don’t get your hopes up, Amanda. I’m not sure we’ll win. There’s been too much attention on your case, too much pressure on the Italian legal system to think that you won’t be sent to trial.”

  • So, your lawyer is telling you that the justice system is being leaned on to prosecute you?  If someone called Carlo Dalla Vedova, would he confirm this?

[Chapter 23, Page 272] ‘’ ... “You’re going to be a good girl so we don’t have to handcuff you, right?” another guard said. I had always been so polite and docile that a guard had once said to me, “If all the inmates were like you, we wouldn’t need prisons.”

  • True, Knox and Sollecito were not handcuffed going into court, but there is speculation this was a visual in order to seem ‘‘less harsh’‘

  • This seems a bit illogical, if all inmates were like you, we wouldn’t need prisons?  Yet you need to go to prison to be an inmate.

  • Yes, Knox was polite.  The guards also called her controlled and manipulative.

[Chapter 23, Page 273] ‘’ ... My first thought wasn’t They think I’m a murderer. It was Meredith’s parents? I finally get to meet them…’‘

  • Well you are charged with their daughter/sister’s killing. They probably do think you are a murderer.

  • You finally get to meet them?  Surely, they would delighted to get to know you.

[Chapter 23, Page 273] ‘’ ... I was devastated. I’d anticipated meeting them for a long time. I’d written and rewritten a sympathy letter in my head but had never managed to put it on paper. Now I felt stupid. How had I not anticipated their reaction? Why are you so surprised? What do you think this has been about all along? My grief for Meredith and my sadness for her family had kept me from thinking further. Of course they hate you, Amanda.  They believe you’re guilty. Everyone has been telling them that for months….’‘

  • You anticipated meeting them for a long time?  Killing Meredith is an odd way to expand your circle of friends.

  • A sympathy letter?  Saying sorry for your loss?

  • Your grief for Meredith?  Didn’t you say at trial that you only knew her for a month, and you were trying to move on with your life?

  • They hate you?  Well, they might hate you less if you told the truth about what happened, and showed actual remorse.

[Chapter 23, Page 273] ‘’ ... The first day of the pretrial was mostly procedural. Almost immediately Guede’s lawyers requested an abbreviated trial. I had no idea the Italian justice system offered this option. Carlo later told me that it saves the government money. With an abbreviated trial, the judge’s decision is based solely on evidence; no witnesses are called. The defendant benefits from this fast-track process because, if found guilty, he has his sentence cut by a third…’‘

  • Guede requested the abbreviated trial because he feared you and Sollecito would pin it all on him, yet you omit that part.

  • Of course witnesses are called.  Who do you think has to testify about the evidence?  However, all least some facts have to be agreed upon to go short-form.

  • If he is guilty, his sentence is cut by 1/3. Absolutely right.  THAT is why Guede got those deductions, not from any deal, or testifying against you.

  • Out of curiosity, why didn’t you or Raffaele opt for the short form trial?

[Chapter 23, Page 274] ‘’ ... Guede’s lawyers must have realized that he was better off in a separate trial, since the prosecution was intent on pinning the murder on us. The evidence gathered during the investigation pointed toward his guilt. His DNA was all over Meredith’s room and her body, on her intimate clothing and her purse. He had left his handprint in her blood on her pillowcase. He had fled the country. The prosecution called Guede’s story of how he “happened” to be at the villa and yet had not participated in the murder “absurd”—though they readily believed his claims against Raffaele and me. One of the big hopes for us was that with so much evidence against Guede, the prosecution would have to realize Raffaele and I hadn’t been involved….’‘

  • In your book, your lawyers say there is no evidence against you.

  • No evidence against you?  Did you read your own book?

  • In your book, you reference the missing sweater (Filomena saw you wear that day), but it still was never found.

  • In your book, you mentioned the writings (you said you would kill for a pizza)

  • In your book, you claim the blood on the faucet was from your pierced ears.  (According to Barbia Badeau, your mother said the blood was from your period).

  • In your book, you acknowledge Raffaele took away your alibi.

  • In your book, you claim that Guede backs your alibi, but refutes Sollecito, which doesn’t make sense if you were together.

  • In your book, you say you were there. (You claim it meant RS apartment), yet you let PL remain in prison.

  • In your book, you admit writing a letter (you claim it was misinterpreted), claiming that Raffaele killed Meredith and planted your fingerprints.

  • In your book, you sarcastically admit you were the last person to wash up in a bloody bathroom.

  • In your book, (the Matteini decision) you say that the prosecution had stacked so much evidence Guede’s testimony wouldn’t have mattered.

  • In your book, you mention the police arresting the wrong people, but hypocritically, omit your false accusation of PL

  • In your book, you reference Meredith’s DNA on the knife (which RS claimed was during a cooking accident)

  • In your book, you reference your bloody footprints

  • In your book, you reference the bra clasp having Raffaele’s DNA

  • In your book, you acknowledge claims of a partial crime scene cleanup.

  • And we still haven’t gotten to those pesky statements you wrote and signed.

  • No evidence against you?

[Chapter 23, Page 274] ‘’ ... I felt the way about Guede that Meredith’s family felt about me. As soon as I saw him, in a subsequent hearing, I thought angrily, You! You killed Meredith! He didn’t look like a murderer. He was wearing jeans and a sweater. It was almost impossible to imagine that he had cut Meredith’s throat. But if he hadn’t, his DNA wouldn’t have been everywhere in Meredith’s room. And he wouldn’t have lied about Raffaele and me. The other thing I noticed: he wouldn’t look at me….’‘

  • Why would you feel angry?  You said in court you only knew her for a month.

  • He didn’t look like a murderer?  Don’t you keep repeating that you are not the type of person to do this.

  • It is difficult to imagine he cut Meredith’s throat?  Right, because you knew before the police did that her throat was cut.

  • There were traces of Guede’s DNA, but it was not everywhere.  And you omit your own DNA mixed with Meredith’s

  • He wouldn’t have lied about you? Well, you lied to Judge Nencini in your email, and claimed you never met Guede.

[Chapter 23, Page 275] ‘’ ... The prosecution spun this assumption further. According to Mignini, we found Meredith at the villa and said, Hey, that stupid bitch. Let’s show Meredith. Let’s get her to play a sex game. I was horrified. Who thinks like that? In their scenario, I hated Meredith because we’d argued about money. Hearing Mignini say that I told Guede to rape Meredith was upsetting. He added that I was the ringleader, telling Raffaele to hold her down. When he said that I threatened Meredith with a knife, I felt as if I’d been kicked. Even worse was hearing him say that when Meredith refused to have sex, I killed her…’

  • Again, prosecutors never said it was a sex game.

  • Who thinks like that? Well, who stages a break in on her Seattle roomies for fun?

  • Hearing Mignini say you told Guede to rape Meredith was upsetting?  Didn’t you publish a rape story on MySpace?

  • You were the ringleader?  Well, you arranged the ‘‘break-in’’ in Seattle.  You have leadership skills

[Chapter 23, Page 276] ‘’ ... Starting right after we were indicted, Raffaele’s and my lawyers had requested the raw data for all Stefanoni’s forensic tests. How were the samples collected? How many cotton pads had her team used to swab the bathroom sink and the bidet? How often had they changed gloves? What tests had they done—and when? Which machines had they used, at what times, and on which days? What were the original unedited results of the DNA tests?

  • Her response was “No. We can’t give you these documents you continue to ask for, because the ones you have will have to suffice.”

  • If this were actually true, it would be grounds to open up the case.  Did you actually appeal on these grounds?

  • Interestingly, lawyers for you, Sollecito, and Guede all refused to attend the testings, but later claimed contamination.

[Chapter 23, Page 279] ‘’ ... I was morbidly curious about Guede and simultaneously completely repulsed. Mostly I was disappointed. I had thought we’d have the chance to confront him. But he let his lawyers do all the talking…’‘

  • You only testified at trial with strict protections as to what topics would be covered.  Your lawyers constantly interrupted.

  • Raffaele never took the witness stand at trial.

  • You never took the stand at the 2011 Hellmann appeal

  • Raffaele never took the witness stand at the 2011 Hellmann appeal.

  • You refused to attend the 2013/2014 Florence appeal.

  • Raffaele refused to take the witness stand at the 2013/2014 Florence appeal.

  • You were refusing to attend the 2015 Cassation appeal.

  • Yet… Guede let his lawyers do all the talking?  Pot, meet kettle.

[Chapter 23, Page 279] ‘’ ... “Isn’t that possible?” Biscotti asked. “Isn’t that what the evidence shows? It shows him being there, and he’s admitted to that. He says he left because he was scared. Of course he was scared! He’s a young black man, living the best he could, abandoned by his parents. He stole sometimes, but out of necessity. I don’t think there’s enough evidence to say that he killed. The knife has Amanda’s DNA, and the bra clasp has Raffaele’s. Rudy admits that he was there, he tells what happened, and I believe him.” No witnesses were called for Guede. His lawyers could only interpret the evidence the prosecution had provided. They argued that his DNA had been found at the crime scene because he was scrambling to help Meredith and that he left because he was afraid. I remember his lawyer saying Guede didn’t go to the disco to give himself an alibi but to let off steam. He escaped to Germany because he was worried that he’d be wrongly accused….’‘

  • It’s too bad Guede didn’t have the money and PR to proclaim his innocence the way you did.

[Chapter 23, Page 280] ‘’ ... Still, there were reasons to be worried. Because the prosecution was withholding information, there was evidence I couldn’t refute: the knife, my “bloody” footprints, Raffaele’s DNA on Meredith’s bra clasp. And how would we fight the prosecution’s claim that we’d cleaned up the crime scene? I went to sleep every night telling myself that it would work out because we were innocent—and because it was so clear that Guede was guilty and lying. My lawyers argued exhaustively that Meredith and I had been friends—that there was no animosity between us. They argued that we had no connection to Guede, that Kokomani was a lunatic. But the case hinged on DNA, not on logic…’‘

  • What is the prosecution withholding?  It seems they released very powerful evidence.

  • Accusing prosecutors of withholding evidence, if false, is calunnia.  Don’t you ever learn?

  • It was so clear Guede was lying?  Well, you would know better than anyone, except maybe Raffy.

  • Your lawyers argued exhaustively you and Meredith were friends?  Why wouldn’t you just testify to that? Oh, right, cross examination.

  • Also, why wouldn’t any of Meredith’s other friends testify to how things were between you?  Oh, right, they did.

  • Murder cases often do hinge on DNA, and not lawyerly logic.  Good point.

[Chapter 23, Page 281] ‘’ ... When the prosecution rested their case, Mignini demanded a life sentence for Guede and a full trial for Raffaele and me. After the judge retired to his chambers, we were each taken to a different empty office in the courthouse to wait for his decision. Raffaele folded a page from that day’s newspaper into a flower, which the guards brought to me. But I was focused on Guede, who was being held in the room next to mine. I could hear him talking with the guards, cracking jokes, and chuckling. I was fuming! I wanted to beat on the wall and tell him to shut up. His nonchalance incensed me. I thought, Does no one else feel this?...’‘

  • His nonchalance?  Were you not the one flirting with people in court?

  • Were you not the one wearing the ‘‘ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE’’ shirt to court?

  • Rested their case?  Listening to ABC or CNN, I thought there was no evidence against you.

[Chapter 23, Page 282] ‘’ ... I entered the courtroom. I could barely walk. Judge Micheli read Guede’s verdict first: Guilty for the sexual assault and murder of Meredith Kercher, with a sentence of thirty years. The verdict didn’t surprise me at all—for a second, I was enormously relieved. I thought, He’s the one who did it. The judge’s delivery was so flat he could have been reading the ingredients off a box of bran flakes. Still, my chest clenched when I heard “thirty years.” Not because I pitied Guede. I’d been so focused on whether he would be found guilty or innocent, I hadn’t thought about the length of his sentence. I was twenty-one; thirty years was more time than I’d been alive—by a lot. I breathed in. “The court orders that Knox, Amanda, and Sollecito, Raffaele, be sent to trial.” I broke down in huge, gulping sobs. I’d made a heartfelt plea—“I’m telling you I’m innocent! I’m sorry for any of the confusion I’ve contributed.” The judge hadn’t believed me….’‘

  • Just to be clear on this: Guede’s 30 year sentence was the MAXIMUM the judge could hand down in a short-form trial.

  • Was your chest clenched, because you weren’t sure how merciful the judge(s) might be in this case?

  • Maybe if you had actually testified, you might be believed a bit more.

  • The confusion you caused?  Getting an innocent man locked up is more than just confusion.

  • It surprised you that the judge didn’t believe you?  You listed so much evidence against you just in this book.

[Chapter 24, Page 286] ‘’ ... “Spiegare che cosa?” I asked, baffled. “Explain what?” I could see that the headline said something about me. “It’s an interview,” she said. “It talks about Cera.” “You know I don’t give interviews!” I said. The inspector turned the paper around so I could read the article. The reporter claimed to have interviewed my mother, who talked about things I’d said. “You need to tell your mother to refrain from speaking about the inner workings of the prison,” the ispettore said sternly. “My mom would never do that!” I screeched. “She only gives interviews to talk about my innocence. She would never reveal our private conversations.” But the article was full of insider information. They’d gotten Cera’s name and certain details right. They said she kissed me once and that I feared further sexual harassment. They knew she was a cleaning fanatic and that she wouldn’t let me make coffee because it would leave water spots on the sink….’‘

[Chapter 24, Page 287] ‘’ ... Cera had been the one to tell me how mean, how crazy, how awful, prisoners could be to one another. I hadn’t wanted to believe her, and I’d promised myself that I’d never become bitter like she was. But I was getting closer. I refused to become so cynical and angry that I felt spite, but my natural hopefulness was flagging….’ The only place I found peace was inside my own head. I started expecting nothing. The one thing that surprised me was the occasional time another prisoner, like Fanta, treated me kindly. As excruciating as this was, it forced me to develop a sense of independence, a faith in myself.

  • Really?  You claim you are innocent, yet you have been in jail a year, have just had Judge Micheli (at pretrial), send you off to trial, and you’re hopefulness is flagging?  Why is that?  You thought you’d be able to lie your way out of it?

  • Innocent people wrongfully in jail would be pissed off.  You aren’t.  Why?

[Chapter 24, Page 287] ‘’ ... Don Saulo was the one person who cared about any of us. In spite of the awful way the other prisoners treated me, he restored some of my faith in humankind. “It doesn’t matter what people think you did,” he told me. “What matters is what you did do.  Don’t worry if people can’t see your goodness. The only important thing is your conscience. You have to take heart and strength in that.”

  • Father Saulo, normally that is good advice, but what happens if the person doesn’t have a conscience?

[Chapter 24, Page 287] ‘’ ... We held onto the belief that the law would be on my side when my trial started. I was innocent. No matter how the prosecution misconstrued things, there would never be evidence enough to convict me. And I had the great consolation of knowing that prison wasn’t my world. In time, I’d be set free. I could survive this as long as it took.  But I never thought it would take years….’‘

  • The law on your side?  The law isn’t supposed to be on anyone’s side.  It is supposed to apply to all.

  • The prosecution didn’t twist anything.  They gave you every chance to explain things.

  • There would never be enough evidence?  Did you read any of the earlier chapters in your book?

  • (Chapter 13) you mention a LONG list of what you and Raffaele talked about, but don’t remember if you read or had sex?

  • (Chapter 17) you reference the missing sweater (Filomena saw you wear that day), but it still was never found.

  • (Chapter 17) you mentioned the writings (you said you would kill for a pizza).

  • (Chapter 18) you claim the blood on the faucet was from your pierced ears.  (According to Barbie Nadeau, your mother said the blood was from your period).

  • (Chapter 18) you acknowledge Raffaele took away your alibi.

  • (Chapter 19) you claim that Guede backs your alibi, but refutes Sollecito, which doesn’t make sense if you were together.

  • (Chapter 19) you acknowledge the knife with your DNA on the handle, Meredith’s on the blade—the infamous double DNA knife.

  • (Chapter 20) you say you were there. (You claim it meant RS apartment), yet you let PL remain in prison.

  • (Chapter 20) you admit writing a letter (you claim it was misinterpreted), claiming that Raffaele killed Meredith and planted your fingerprints.

  • (Chapter 21) you reference RS DNA on the bra clasp but saying it does not implicate you directly.

  • (Chapter 21) you admit (and I believe this), that much of your knowledge comes from crime TV.

  • (Chapter 21) you sarcastically admit you were the last person to wash up in a bloody bathroom.

  • (Chapter 21)—the Matteini decision—you say that the prosecution had stacked so much evidence Guede’s testimony wouldn’t have mattered.

  • (Chapter 22) you mention the police arresting the wrong people, but hypocritically, omit your false accusation of PL.

  • (Chapter 22) you reference Meredith’s DNA on the knife (which RS claimed was during a cooking accident).

  • (Chapter 22) you reference your bloody footprints, and mentioned Raffaele’s

  • (Chapter 23) you reference the bra clasp having Raffaele’s DNA

  • (Chapter 23) you acknowledge claims of a partial crime scene cleanup.

  • (Chapter 25) you acknowledge Filomena testifies you brought other ‘‘friends’’ to the house.

  • (Chapter 25) you acknowledge the cut on your neck, which you claim was a hickey.

  • (Chapter 25) you acknowledge telling the police Meredith always locked her door, though you try to spin it.

  • (Chapter 25) you acknowledge your cellphone and Raffaele’s were turned off, though you give different reasons why.

  • How much evidence does the prosecution need?  These notes all came from YOUR book. THIS BOOK.

[Chapter 24, Page 288] ‘’ ... The only place I found peace was inside my own head. I started expecting nothing. The one thing that surprised me was the occasional time another prisoner, like Fanta, treated me kindly. As excruciating as this was, it forced me to develop a sense of independence, a faith in myself….’‘

  • You developed a sense of independence?  By relying on your family to clean up your mess?

  • You could find more peace if you would own up to what you did to Meredith.

[Chapter 25, Page 289] ‘’ ... The pretrial had been like the first reading of a play. No costumes, no audience, no reporters, and very few players. It was held in chambers and closed to the press. The lawyers wore suits. Only two witnesses—the prosecution’s DNA analyst and a man who claimed to have seen Rudy Guede, Raffaele, and me together—testified….’‘

  • I hope you are being sarcastic here.  The pretrial was like the first reading of a play?  This is a murder case, not some theatre production.

  • Really?  None of the police officers (whom you accused of police brutality), testified here?

  • Really?  None of the CSI’s from the home, only the DNA guy, testified?

  • You still could have testified on your own behalf, if this was a misunderstanding. Why didn’t you?

[Chapter 25, Page 289] ‘’ ... The full trial for Raffaele and me was like opening night. I wasn’t prepared for the spectacle…’‘

  • Again, this is a murder case, not a theatre.

  • Although, if you are this detached from reality, is that why you wore the ‘‘ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE’’ shirt?

[Chapter 25, Page 289] ‘’ ... Three no-nonsense guards—one in front of me and one on either side—led me in through the door in the back of the packed courtroom. Police officers, including some who had interrogated me fourteen months before, were lined up against the back wall. I knew that almost every observer thought I was guilty and wanted me to suffer….’‘

  • The police didn’t interrogate you.  You were giving a witness summary, until you were informed Raffaele removed your alibi.  You then proceeded (without provocation), to try to frame Patrick, and it backfired.

  • 14 months ago, and now you are at trial?  Wow, that seems a bit faster than the U.S. and Canadian systems.

  • They don’t want you to suffer, they want to know exactly what happened to Meredith.

[Chapter 25, Page 290] ‘’ ... I knew I wasn’t alone. I gave them a little wave and a big smile to let them know how glad I was they were there. I never anticipated that that smile would be reported as “Amanda Knox beamed as she was led into an Italian court.” And the Daily Mail amped up my regular walk: “She made her entrance like a Hollywood diva sashaying along the red carpet.” I don’t know if the reporting was skewed to sell papers or if the presumption of my guilt colored the way the reporters saw me. Anyone reading or watching the TV reports would have come away believing the girl called Foxy Knoxy was amoral, psychotic, and depraved…’‘

[Chapter 25, Page 291] ‘’ ... In the United States, civil and criminal trials are held separately; in Italy, they’re combined. The Italians clearly believe their jurors can compartmentalize—the same eight people decide all the verdicts. Moreover, jury members are not screened for bias, nor guarded from outside influence. The government was trying Raffaele and me for five crimes: murder, illegally carrying a knife, rape, theft, simulating a robbery, and a sixth just for me: slander. The Kerchers, believing Raffaele and I had killed their daughter, were suing both of us for €5 million—about $6.4 million—€1 million for each of Meredith’s five family members, to compensate for their loss and emotional anguish. Patrick Lumumba was suing me for slander for a yet to be determined amount. The owner of the villa was suing me for €10,000 for damages and lost rent….’‘

  • You are insulting, but there is a logic to it.  In the U.S., if someone were found guilty in a criminal case, often a civil one would follow.  Of course, not being convicted would make the civil case harder.

  • Jurors are screened for bias.  You are being blatantly dishonest—again.

  • You are being sued by the family of the woman you murdered, the man you tried to frame, and the homeowner whose property you damaged, and had turned into a crime scene.  Makes sense.




Comments

Chapter 21, Page 249 Quote: ‘The implication was that I’d rinsed my hands and feet in the bidet after slashing her throat’.

Gruesome words. I don’t think an innocent could write that.

Chimera, great work.

Posted by DavidB on 09/13/15 at 02:31 PM | #

Also, ‘after slashing her throat’.

Not Meredith’s throat.

Would an innocent person say ‘her’. ?

It reads to me that only someone who did it would say ‘her’.

Posted by DavidB on 09/13/15 at 02:38 PM | #

Chimera, tremendous amount of work, I salute you.
*
With respect to lack of empathy, there’s an article in the Daily Telegraph today (UK) entitled ‘Would you recognise a psychopath ?’...explaining that psychopathy is on a continuum from normalcy to full blown, and also the two different kinds of empathy : cognitive empathy and feeling empathy.

Good to remember at this point how this type of person can so often take others in, and pass for being ‘clever’..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10737827/Psychopaths-how-can-you-spot-one.html

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_case_for_more_observation_and_firmer_action/

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 09/13/15 at 04:00 PM | #

Hmmm.  Quote from Telegraph article:

Quote: “The list in full is: glibness and superficial charm, grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, cunning/manipulative, lack of remorse, emotional shallowness, callousness and lack of empathy, unwillingness to accept responsibility for actions, a tendency to boredom, a parasitic lifestyle, a lack of realistic long-term goals, impulsivity, irresponsibility, lack of behavioural control, behavioural problems in early life, juvenile delinquency, criminal versatility, a history of “revocation of conditional release” (ie broken parole), multiple marriages, and promiscuous sexual behaviour. “

Who does it remind you of?

Great analysis of the book’s lies, Chimera.  There are so many, it’s been a mammoth task for you.

Posted by Slow Jane on 09/13/15 at 05:11 PM | #

Quote: “The verdict didn’t surprise me at all—for a second, I was enormously relieved. I thought, He’s the one who did it”

What a strange way to phrase it.  As though it’s a revelation.  Is relief appropriate?  It might be, if what is really meant is:

“(We did it, we got them to believe)  He’s the (only) one who did it.”

So now we can see why the relief.

Posted by Slow Jane on 09/13/15 at 05:21 PM | #

Another excellent dissection Chimera, I take my hat off to you for managing to wade through Knox’s fables and still retain your sanity and sense of humour.

It is very clear that she thinks if she takes a scatter gun approach and just denies absolutely everything regardless of how ludicrous it seems and makes up child-like stories, best truths and black-hearted lies, then people will get lost in the fog and believe her. Astonishingly, it has worked for her too. With the notable exceptions of the regular contributors here.

I think it was Adolf Hitler who said “if you tell a big enough lie and tell it often enough, it will be believed”. Knox took this to a whole new level telling multiple lies and telling them repeatedly. Regardless of the glaring contradictions contained in her lies, printed and spoken, (and which her cult members have selective blindness on), she just ploughs ahead and piles more and more manure on.

I’ve never seen anything like it in my life. That someone who is so obviously guilty and so obviously terrible at lying can still fool a substantial number of people almost beggars belief. Without the PR machine at her back, she would have had no chance.

There will be a day of reckoning for her. Her brand of psychopathy dictates that she will encounter law enforcement again. Her reputation will go before her next time all right.

Meantime, she looks like an intensely unhappy human being and we can all be grateful for that. She deserves no joy. No happiness. No good will. Nothing.

Posted by davidmulhern on 09/13/15 at 07:54 PM | #

Hi SeekingUnderstanding

My guess is that there is might be more chance of a damning explosion of chutzpah, opening eyes everywhere, than a repeat crime.

In fact it was Sollecito’s chutzpah in visiting the Caribbean hideyhole of his nefarious relatives twice in 2013 that has got Italian law enforcement looking at the whole situation.

For the false accusations in the book Knox WILL be going on trial. Linda Kulman also. That is certain. Some of this will have to be answered for. For that purpose the book finally is in Italian; available for anyone who can use it.

On psychopathy and NPD I have never seen a film like “Gone Girl” for driving home psychological facets.

There are not exact parallels (in the movie we get to see a lot of pre-planning, the gone girl is not that far gone) but this discussion in the IMDB forum is pretty interesting.

“Can anyone diagnose Amy’s psychology?”

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2267998/board/thread/245265939

Here is the first of the long comments:

Anti-social personality disorder is typically marked by impulsive behavior, tendency towards aggression and violence, the inability to control one’s behavior, ignoring social norms, etc. Amy is very controlled and calculating, so I don’t think this one fits.

Whether she is a psychopath is debatable. Most definitions for psychopathy include a lot of anti-social behaviors, but these definitions are probably more accurate for male psychopaths. A lack of planning and goal-setting is another characteristic. I think she had a very clear vision of their marriage and future life together, one that did not involve moving to Missouri or being cheated on.

She wouldn’t be histrionic or borderline as others have suggested either because those people are typically very outwardly emotional and erratic. Again, Amy is methodical and her emotions are always under control. While she obviously has a flair for the dramatic, it’s all related towards her need to be adored and seen as perfect and desirable.

I would say that she has narcissistic personality disorder. She has a lack of empathy towards others, she views herself more highly than others, she is deceptive and manipulative, and she needs to be adored.

On IMDB the movie gets a very high reader rating (8.2) from 461,000 readers (I gave it 10 stars) and on Rotten Tomatoes it gets 88% from critics.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2267998/

And yet on IMDB also, it gets a majority of one-star and two-star reviews (656 v 371 for 6-10 star reviews right now. I’ve never seen that before on IMDB.

All the 656 shrill reviews are by men as far as I can see, maybe harboring the notion “There but for the grace of God…” Many just dont ever, ever see it happening - though on US crime shows, similar killers are profiled daily.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/14/15 at 07:54 AM | #

Hi davidmulhern

Quote: “Meantime, she looks like an intensely unhappy human being and we can all be grateful for that. She deserves no joy. No happiness. No good will. Nothing.”

The last time she looked consistently happy was back in Capanne. She was secure there and under treatment and didnt have to mount a facade the whole time.

Plus she was well away from Curt Knox and Edda Mellas who did her no favors with the angriest, dumbest PR scheme ever. 

In fact Knox is just quoted by Dalla Vedova as wanting to go and live in Italy.

Maybe better to live among those who see the guilt but sorta forgive her than near lusty adherents like Heavey and Fischer and Steve Moore making her keep up the lie.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/14/15 at 08:01 AM | #

As Chimera shows, more than anyone else has ever done, there is a mantra-like aspect to the Knox book.

Things said again and again and again in the hope that they stick.  “Poor little me… so kind… so trusting, in a universe of mean others.. so generally amazing”.

It was Linda Kulman who wrote the book. Thats her style. She based it on interviews and some FOA documents. She will be charged with Knox as Gumbel is with Sollecito.

She sure did zero due diligence and it is her style to take a few zero-researched snippets and turn them into mantras. Maybe Knox will turn on her and renounce her for that.

For better or worse, Sollecito’s book doesnt contain such mantras and oddly comes across as a tad more honest, though RS and Gumbel are poles part now.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/14/15 at 08:12 AM | #

In fact Knox is just quoted by Dalla Vedova as wanting to go and live in Italy.

Maybe better to live among those who see the guilt but sorta forgive her than near lusty adherents like Heavey and Fischer and Steve Moore making her keep up the lie.

Hi Peter:

This reminds me of “In Cold Blood.”  Killers couldn’t resist going back.  Fascinating stuff.  Also, her words make for compelling close- reading.  I’m eager for her next WSH installment after the Tacoma, weird, cool? piece.  That is if they don’t kick her to curb.

Posted by whatswisdom on 09/14/15 at 09:11 AM | #

“Stay away from the grave, Amanda Knox is told by Meredith Kercher’s family after she said she wanted to pray there”. That’s today’s headline 9/14/15 in Daily Mail UK (online version) Again Sister Stephanie comes to the defense of her perished sister and says her grave is off limits to Knox and Sollecito. Probably part of what makes Knox determined to defy orders. The rest of the article is general review of case.
(Chimera, your post is fabulous and deserves a real response soon. Your work on Knox’s book shines a light on so many of her untruths.)

Why Knox’s fixation on Meredith’s grave?

Here are my opinions:


Now that she’s out of danger legally, she wants to use the trip to London for “prayer at grave” as a cover for her itchy feet desire to travel abroad again. Wants to return to Perugia, but not be obvious that’s her true destination, so a detour in England and Continent first.

+She’s envious that Raffaele visited the grave while she was effectively a prisoner in the USA waiting for final verdict.

+It’s atavistic triumphalism over Meredith at its rawest.

+Part of Knox is truly sorry that her whacko drug night caused Meredith such a loss, and she has a sincere need to say, “Forgive me”.

+Knox is influenced by today being Rosh Hashanah, with High Holy Days a season of reflection and repentance.

+She wants to go back to Europe in order to do it right this time, be Amelie.

+She’s sick of her parents and family in Seattle and wants a “worthy” reason to leave them again.

+She wants a break from Colin.

+She has quit her job at newspaper.

+She wants to enroll in grad school at some European university AGAIN.

+Muscle memory that this time of year was when she packed her bags to go to Europe and arrived in Perugia so excited. Cool snap, the autumn, new beginnings, harvest time.

+Darker motive: To plant some token at the grave and leave smirking self-satisfied.

+Simply to defy the Kerchers.

+Angry at Maresca their lawyer’s big-Euro lawsuits against her formerly.

+Wants to stand at grave and revel that she’s still alive, and thus use Meredith once again to ease her own feelings, to make her feel grateful for life despite the 8-year ordeal.

+Mean spirited sociopathic need to gloat over the defeated enemy and touch site of one’s personal power over life and death.

+Wants to travel with Colin from grave to Perugia and get a do-over of her misspent youth by doing the trip in reverse.

+Wants to vicariously become Meredith and maybe flit around England to each and every place Meredith enjoyed while alive, in some vampirish pilgrimage. Colin would be on board.

+Wants to make new headlines along the journey.

+Secret rendezvous with Sollecito to discuss his potential lawsuits against Italian justice

+Thank you sessions with Carlo dalla Vedova and Ghirgha, maybe discussions.

+Return to Perugia to peek at hidden evidence she left behind as souvenir, or to remove it.

Her fascination with Meredith’s grave would be the last thing on her bucket list if she were truly innocent of the crime.

Not sure but if someone’s sudden death had caught me up innocent in 8 years of prison turmoil, especially someone who was not a really close friend or kinsman, I’d want legal vindication and freedom from bars first and foremost. Having achieved that, I’d probably have a psychic revulsion to anything having to do with the cause of my suffering, and refuse to give the past any more power over me. I’d reject Guede, Raffaele, and Meredith and everything Perugian. I’d crave freedom from the chains of that association, not more bondage to it. I wouldn’t be heading to the grave of a person I felt (however irrationally) had been the cause of so much pain for me when I had merely befriended them for one month. Would you?

But Knox can’t let Meredith go, she’s too invested in her, and the initial investment was not love and admiration.

I’d truly like to hear from SeekingUnderstanding whether she thinks this obsession with Meredith’s grave could come about from an innocent Knox due to years of fusion with Meredith’s murder case, or is her focus on the grave more a reflection of guilty connection to the murder and Meredith? We do become one with those we suffer with, in some strange way against our will?

Add your own ideas. I doubt “prayer” is Knox’s real purpose. There is no distance in prayer. She can pray for Meredith and her family right there in Seattle. Heaven and the Word of faith are near us, even in our mouth. She can pray anywhere if she’s sincere.

Posted by Hopeful on 09/14/15 at 09:30 AM | #

+she is tortured by the truth inside her

+she cannot run away from herself

+she is not free

+her freedom is slavery

+only the truth can set her free

Posted by whatswisdom on 09/14/15 at 09:43 AM | #

I read in a book about sociopathic killers that murderers do feel possessive about their victims.  Proprietal, rather like how a rapist might feel about their object of rape or a conquering country that vanquishes another.

AK will see Meredith as “hers”.  The visit to the grave can have nothing but a sinister connotation.  It remains a link with RS, no matter how much they grow to hate each other.

The public karaoke of ‘Zombie’ was no random choice.

Posted by Slow Jane on 09/14/15 at 12:25 PM | #

A typical adult has about 5-6 litres of blood. If a major artery is severed, about 2-3 litres of blood (at least) will be coming out on the floor. Contrary to popular belief, blood is not really much thicker than water (it gets thick with time due to clotting) and it flows freely. I am not an expert, but I do not see any evidence of “lots of blood” on the crime scene. The photos show smears of blood that is not how it should have been originally. I do not see any evidence of lots of blood.

Perhaps most of the blood was removed by the murderers.

Posted by chami on 09/14/15 at 12:50 PM | #

Very insightful indeed Hopeful. Brief but no less insightful by whatswisdom. And spot on by Slow Jane.

This site remains a valuable cathartic tool for those of us who were deeply affected by this case, even though we never knew Meredith.

Much Kudos to Peter and his band of merry men and women who keep the flame going for Meredith and her dignified family.

Posted by davidmulhern on 09/14/15 at 07:48 PM | #

Pete—I actually had been wondering about the Knox book.  There are traits such as: (1) how the chapters are organized; (2) the lead ins; (3) the attempts to turn everything into stories rather than just narrate; (4) and the attempts at self reflection.  To me this shows that someone with some skill at least set up the book’s structure.

That said, even if Linda Kuhlman did this much for Knox (and wrote much of it), Knox must still have done an extensive edit or ‘‘rewrite’‘.  WTBH reads like an angry 12 year old girl with little connection to reality.

It would be interesting to know if Ms. Kulman ever saw the final draft before it was sent off.  After all, her name is also on it.

Also, the afterward (the 20 extra pages in the 2015 edition), is more or less simple narration.  While factually wrong in nearly all areas, it seems toned down in the ‘‘smear-factor’‘.  So who wrote that?  Is Knox’s ‘‘ghostwriter’’ even still around?

If Knox did re-write Kuhlman’s book, (as is very possible), then Knox may find herself a target.  It may very well go the way of Sollecito/Gumbel.

‘‘Honor Bound’’ does take many nasty whacks at Italy.  But that aside, it comes off as drunk/stoned partial confession.
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_sollecito_trial_for_honor_bound_2_false_accusations/#comments
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_sollecito_trial_for_honor_bound_4_the_angles/#comments

Posted by Chimera on 09/14/15 at 07:56 PM | #

Thanks for your feedback everyone.  Glad to know that this is catching your interest.

About the obsession with wanting to see Meredith’s grave, (please don’t come down on me): I think on some level Knox probably gets turned on thinking about her ‘‘victory’’ over Meredith.  Why else ask to go there?  Why else all the smiles and laughs when asked her ‘‘friend’‘?

An idea for future posting (perhaps 2-3 posts worth): point by point comparison of the two books.  Yes, others have commented, but I would like to do one.  It is weird, on some areas there is absolutely collaboration, and in others they contradict each other.  It is as if they are reading from (part of) the same script.

Posted by Chimera on 09/14/15 at 08:21 PM | #

Got to agree wholeheartedly with Chimera’s last comment. There appears real evidence of deep seated loathing towards Meredith whenever Knox mentions her. Rarely does she mention her by name, it’s always “my friend” or her “broken body” etc etc. The fact that Meredith is still referred to in glowing terms by all media, even pro Knox idiots, must still rankle with Knox.

On some level Knox is absolutely lapping up the notoriety and the fact that she got rid of her nemesis and got away with murder. But it seems to be eating her up inside that she can’t shout from the rooftops that she did it and that she is glad she did.

The nearest she can come to revelling in her crime is to do exactly as she does i.e. continue to tell whopping great lies about every aspect of it and make it obvious that she did it but, especially now, also know that she’s unlikely ever to be called to task for it. So effective and powerful has been the PR campaign undertaken on her behalf.

I suspect she absolutely despises the bovine stupidity of those who believe in her innocence and this helps to feed her burgeoning ego and messiah complex as well.

I’ve met some horrible people in my time but I can’t think of anyone that I’ve met, or read about, who had absolutely no redeeming features (even Hitler loved his dogs). Knox appears, to me at least, to be just such a person.

I think she will be unable to keep her secret and it may well end up in a death bed confession type thing when she’s very old. If she gets that far.

Posted by davidmulhern on 09/15/15 at 05:24 AM | #

I’ve been more active recently on comments sections on YouTube videos etc regarding this case.

I can say without fear of contradiction that the majority of people still believe Knox/Sollecito got away with murder. Moreover, the majority of those commenting appear to be women. Must admit, I’d trust a woman’s instincts on matters such as these (involving a woman) than I would a man’s.

I find that very telling indeed. I’d imagine women would tend to have more solidarity with Knox and I think they would if not for the fact they they see right through her. As Roger Waters wrote in the opening song of Pink Floyd album “The Wall”:

“If you wanna find out what’s behind these cold eyes, you’ll just have to claw your way through this disguise”

Not much clawing required I don’t think, her disguise is terrible and ill fitting.

Posted by davidmulhern on 09/15/15 at 05:36 AM | #

Has Knox lost her job? Probably not, at least not yet.
I predict that her sorry excuse for a life will spiral down into further hysteria and madness for she cannot escape because, as Hopeful has pointed out, she and Meredith are tied together for the rest of her shallow life.

Her supporters don’t matter at all because above everything else she now takes them, plus her family, for granted and is bored and afraid of the future at the same time. She is afraid that she will be found out and abandoned that is why she is scared.

Also I see nothing with her so called fiance where there is nothing but a vast silence. He seems to have disappeared, very wise if he did, ghost exorcist rock musician indeed.
 
Of course there will always be those who for personal gain and sensationalism, such as Steve Moore and his idiot wife, will hang on until the bitter end, and an ending there will be.

I wonder if Knox is seeing a psychologist? I would be surprised if she is since her ego and her denial will not allow it, perhaps someone should check on that?

NO! It’s just a question of time. Sollecito is the same except being the baby of the family he has some sort of a support group to protect him from himself. That will end also. Knox knows this as well.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 09/15/15 at 10:08 AM | #

@chami - “A typical adult has about 5-6 litres of blood. If a major artery is severed, about 2-3 litres of blood (at least) will be coming out on the floor.”

Yes, but the artery severed in Meredith’s was the Right Superior Thyroid Artery. It is not a Major artery. Meredith died from a combination of blood loss and inhalation of blood into her lungs.

It is probable that as the minutes went by the accumulated loss of blood built up, but that amounted to a quantity less than Litres, and she was dead before exanguination.

Blood did spray in multiple directions but amounted to less than Litres. It may have looked to her murderers as “Lots of blood”.

You went on to say:

“I do not see any evidence of “lots of blood” on the crime scene. The photos show smears of blood that is not how it should have been originally. I do not see any evidence of lots of blood.
Perhaps most of the blood was removed by the murderers.”

Agreed - most of the blood was removed by the murderers; but that did not amount to Litres

Posted by Cardiol MD on 09/15/15 at 10:35 AM | #

Even a small amount of blood, perhaps 300ml, can seem like a great deal in my experience. The way it spreads quickly and has viscosity makes it hard to clean up well.
*
I would agree with Graham that Ms K is scared of abandonment.
Regarding seeing a psychologist - I believe it was Kurt Knox who said ‘Amanda will never ever go into therapy’ or some such. She may well be untreatable at this point - and if so, a professional therapist should be obliged to decline to take her on, - though of course there are also psychologists who can be motivated to take on something that seems impossible, as a challenge for themselves.
*
Regarding this acutely insensitive idea of visiting Meredith’s grave to ‘pray’ :
First of all, an innocent person would unquestionably not even be considering it. This is because it is known that it is the Kerchers’ wish.
The Kerchers have suffered, very cruelly and unjustly. Their suffering moreover has been dreadfully increased by unnecessary actions. What they have been subjected to is shocking, especially in civilised countries, and should never, ever be.
They are innocent, and have suffered. A person who was innocent, and had suffered (due to an unwarranted prosecution) would therefore have empathy would them. They would know how that felt, and therefore would not dream, in any circumstances, of perpetuating or increasing such suffering. The fact that it is the Kerchers’ wish would produce a respectful silence on the topic.
So it shouldn’t be broached at all.
We can only speculate on the myriad of possibly muddled impulses AK has for wanting to go. (Note I don’t call them ‘reasons’).
Much of what Hopeful suggests may be along the correct lines. Really, she should be working these things out in private - without involving others in her confusion and desires.
Hopeful is entirely right about prayer. One learns to pray standing at a bus stop - or anywhere. But achieving ‘prayerfulness’ is an accomplishment never even started without something called honesty.

“...is truly sorry her whacko drug night caused Meredith such a loss, and she has a sincere need to say, “Forgive me”.’
I’m afraid I do not believe this can be the case. That a part of her is truly sorry, yes…but for the way it has harmed her own life, in the main. To be sincere in seeking forgiveness would first necessitate a process in her - which there is no indication has begun, at all. She would have to have acknowledged to herself the unreasonableness of her feelings towards Meredith, which I suspect are based on primeval Envy. She would have to feel sorry that she had those feelings in the first place.
That is a big ask…
But if she genuinely were to seek forgiveness she would begin by honouring M, and all that she held dear, her values…and of course her

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 09/15/15 at 05:02 PM | #

@Chimera, Knox’s false claims abound, many a result of evading the full truth. Lying by omission. Craftily editing the truth and removing any features that would reveal to the reader the natural conclusion to be drawn. Reader is never given the full story, but a sharply edited one by a smooth voiced carver of convenient fiction.

It’s poetic justice that Knox landed in a cell with a cleaning freak like Cera. It must have shown Knox how mild and reasonable Meredith’s few cleaning wishes were, by contrast. In Capanne to keep Cera sweet, Knox admits to being down on her knees wiping the baseboards of the prison cell and “bitterly complaining” to Edda about it when mom visited over spring break. I imagine Knox finally envied her mom’s happy life and resented Mom even having a spring break. Knox was being taught how to put apples in order with stems up by the OCD jailmate named Cera, it’s totally appropriate after she balked at doing the slightest thing at the cottage when urged to clean more. I am laughing at the irony.

Knox took away 8 good years of a young man’s life, a man just stepping into adulthood. If Raffaele did nothing but cover the crime for her and didn’t participate in the violence (unlikely but possible) that showed very little love for Raffy. Now rumor has it that Raffy has dumped Gerta Maldonado his Italian girlfriend. She was a support during the final days of his Via Dolorosa trek to Supreme Court redemption, then she had served her purpose. I knew he was never serious about her because of his vague answers when asked about their relationship. She was crazy to waste her time on a possible murderer. At least she escaped him. She can go cry on Colin’s shoulder soon.

Again back to the Knox fixation on Meredith’s grave: her request to pray at the grave and to visit the Kercher family is probably nothing but a bold bluff. She knows the Kerchers will say no, but by making the request she appears to be the brave innocent who has the courage of a clear conscience to meet them with. It’s all a bluff. Knox is good at lies, as her boss can attest.

Posted by Hopeful on 09/15/15 at 05:14 PM | #

Hi Chimera and Hopeful

Of course even Judges Bruno and Marasca have come up with a version of events on the night that sharply conflicts with the two books.

And Miriam did email this report that says that Sollecito and Greta Manegaldo split a while back. It deosnt say who dumped who.

http://www.leggo.it/NEWS/ITALIA/raffaele_sollecito_greta_menegaldo_rottura/notizie/1564442.shtml


Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/15/15 at 06:16 PM | #

@SeekingUnderstanding, thank you for your opinion about Knox’s focus on Meredith’s grave. You conclude (correct me if I’m mistaken) that Knox’s attitude about the grave visit does not reflect innocence, and that her false imprisonment if such were the case would have made her more in sympathy with the Kerchers’ sufferings.

Thus Knox would never go against their wishes or try to cause them more harm or more unjust suffering. She would be very sensitive to their wishes, not careless of them. So Knox’s claim to want to pray at Meredith’s grave does not come from an innocent passion.

You also believe Knox has not gotten to the point of wanting forgiveness from Meredith because that would require her to face herself and confess to a crime, “a big ask”. Yes, especially as her survival mode has been to the do opposite for almost a decade. By now the lies must be cemented in her mind as firmly as any truth. She wrote the script and it’s her go to script for public statements and self-protection. Now she has no problem with the false script, it has become true to her because she has said it so many times to save herself from prison. She feels justified in protecting herself by a lie because she thinks it also saves her family from humiliation and condemnation, so the lie gets stronger and stronger. She has justified it, it has become her protection and her weapon, her needed friend. It has become herself. She has traded the truth for a lie but she believes she has done so out of necessity.

The lie conflicts with the open honesty required to form a confession and ask for forgiveness. Knox does regret what her actions did to her own life, but is not deeply bothered about their results to Meredith.

Knox’s vague impulses rather than clear “reasons” do seem to drive her. These impulses form a treacherous foundation that may lead who knows where, but far from any stable or honest direction.

I was watching old reruns of “Dallas” on dvd recently. At South Fork Ranch the young Lucy Ewing, a relative of the famous J.R. Ewing the oil tycoon, expressed her anger at her fatherless upbringing. She said she was going to “make the whole world pay” for her inconsolable childhood loss of a father to protect her. Is it possible that is what makes Knox tick?

Posted by Hopeful on 09/16/15 at 06:58 AM | #

Hello SeekingUnderstanding and Hopeful

Yes, Knox is after the elusive public forgiveness not vouchsafed by a mere legal aquittal, since she knows very well that everyone and their dog will always thinks she’s guilty.

A suitable case for treatment indeed, but an unlikely one with a poor prognosis. 

It must be difficult if not impossible for out and out narcissists to understand any action that doesn’t have as it’s ultimate aim the manipulation of their image in the eyes of others. We have to remember they are almost unfathomably without a centre - mere players on a stage. “The lights are on but nobody’s home”.

Of course we all know that there is only one road she needs to take that offers a slight possibly of finding some small measure of peace. She needs to tell the truth, for once in her life, about what happened that night in Perugia.

Posted by Odysseus on 09/16/15 at 07:08 AM | #

The future as I see it is as follows.
Knox could care less about the Italian Courts verdict. Oh sure a momentary feeling of satisfaction since she thinks she has got away with murdering Meredith Kercher, at least so far since her freedom, which is only an esoteric point in the belief of a few gullible fools.

No she is far more concerned with others around her who secretly know that she is guilty. In that she will have to keep up appearances which as time goes on will become more and more difficult.

She will never seek therapy since in order to do so she would have to drop the mask she has so carefully constructed and that will never do because then she would have to face herself and really except the slime that she is.

There is however a far more compelling point here and it concerns Sollecito.

Sollecito will get married and live a bucolic life, at least in her eyes, and in that the jealousy will manifest itself by a huge all consuming amount as it already has. Point being that even if Knox gets married to someone (not the current victim) her marriage, should it happen at all, will be short lived because whoever it is will run away as fast and as far as he/she can. If it was a she, as in Eileen Wuornos who she has started to look like anyway.. I can see some short term companionship which won’t last either. Knox is going to be Oh so alone for she cannot afford anything else. After all people will always find out in the end.

She will never find happiness but flit from one to the next always in the faint hope that she can keep on fooling people with her little poor me image. If you look at her dress she has taken on the appearance of a bag lady anyway.

Those of you who know about PTSD will understand that as time goes by denial of events you have been involved in come back to haunt you and eventually will kill you unless you do something about it.

Knox will never do anything for the reason I have stated. She has no future or at least a future controlled by drugs and failure. I do not see her keeping her silly job much longer either so in order to keep in the public eye she will seek acceptance by admitting her guilt but claiming that it wasn’t her fault since she really is sick. Only then will she go into therapy but of course by then it will be too late. It will either be that or she will commit suicide a fitting end to failed life.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 09/16/15 at 08:11 AM | #

Box at the top now reads: “Heads-up: the Marasca/Bruno report has been professionally translated. Hoping to post it and share with the PMFs and Wiki [amended] in several days. The English and the legal accuracy are being checked by Machiavelli, Catnip and Olliesnep.”

Machiavelli advised that the report is very definite that RS and AK were there and definite on some other incriminating aspects as well and is working to get the English in those passages extremely precise.

A jury would convict for wrongful death in the US and UK on the basis of this report. No wonder the massive silence from the RS and AK inner circles.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/16/15 at 02:25 PM | #

An email or faxed press release to all the major English-speaking newspapers, perhaps?

Posted by Slow Jane on 09/16/15 at 04:05 PM | #

Hi Slow Jane. Absolutely. We may get a “main points” out before a polished final.

We have dozens of sleepers in press releases that between them add up to a devastating picture, not only of guilt but also of the gigantic hoax of the US here.

Its only now with all our postings on the Knox book, and previously the RS book, and the interrogation hoax, that we have had enough “hard stuff” to make elements of the media really pay attention.

At least 3 of them based right here in NYC (no names, obviously!) could be thrilled to have a giant hoax on a plate that they could make a real splash with.

Meanwhile the RS and AK forces have never been more hamstrung. Bongiorno did openly try to get the case away from First Chambers, but I think only semi-lucked out in the Fifth Chambers and Bruno. Thats the problem with judge shopping as she found out with Hellmann, the results tend to be erratic….

She WAS shocked at the verdict in March and has suppressed RS’s macho urges since, so she seemingly instantly saw that the judgement had feet of clay. Mignini’s charges against Maori explaining how 2 laws were broken (see recent post below) show why the verdict has left the defense forces pensive.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/17/15 at 10:52 AM | #

@ Hopeful,  I have never seen Knox’s threat to visit Meredith’s grave as anything other than precisely that; a threat!  She knows full well that the Kerchers view her as responsible for the death of Meredith, John Kercher made that more than clear in his book!  Therefore, it follows that she would also know full well that such a visit would cause the Kerchers even more pain and anguish!  Her disgusting and public comments were intended to hurt the Kerchers because Knox is a twisted sadist.

Knox’s envy of Meredith, and her gut twisting hatred of Meredith, continue just as strongly to this day.  I would not be surprised if she went to her deathbed just as full as hate!  In the same way, I believe the murder itself continues to give her great satisfaction.  The high she felt was written all over her rattish face in the days afterwards.  There are no redeeming qualities in sad excuses like Knox, she is evil and worthless.

Posted by MHILL4 on 09/17/15 at 01:36 PM | #

MHILL4 I wouldn’t be surprised if she paid a secret visit to the grave and then boasted about it afterwards.  That’s what RS did, or perhaps it was his pal who spilt the beans.  OTOH RS has free movement as an EU citizen.  It’ll be harder for AK to tiptoe in without anyone noticing.

Pete:  There is a lot badly wrong with the Marasca MR.  It will be great when the whole thing comes to a head, as it must do.

Posted by Slow Jane on 09/18/15 at 09:37 AM | #

“Its only now with all our postings on the Knox book, and previously the RS book, and the interrogation hoax, that we have had enough “hard stuff” to make elements of the media really pay attention.”

Peter:  Always I appreciate all you’re doing.  And I’m disappointed to have seen some sniping from the other board towards you.  We all have a common purpose here, so cut the aggression, please.  Eyes on the prize, etc.  The biggest frustration is the difficulty in getting anyone interested here in US.  Even my wife doesn’t give a rats.  None of my friends, co-workers could be bothered to read posts despite my pleading.  The exhaustive coverage, analysis and opinions shared here are too much info to hold the attention of the average Joe.  With all the horrors of Syria and rest of Middle East, immigration and countless other daily major news—and that’s not even mentioning all the big stuff here with politics, guns, economy, climate…  It’s no wonder that Knox PR masterstroke has kept everything off the radar.  Italy’s corrupt SC with the incredible luck she has had from the benefits of lost in translation has really made this the sleeper story of all ages—in the true crime category, for sure.  We need some serious and credible op-eds; letters to editor; stories that grow legs.  Big stuff.  This just can’t end.  I respect the incredibly dignified and gracious Kercher family.  But I hope they find the right team to take this to where it has to go.

Posted by whatswisdom on 09/18/15 at 12:53 PM | #

Hi whatswisdom

Agreed. Italy has to be the sharp end of the stick. Due to legal rules this has been difficult for them but reactions are beginning to mount up and already there is lots like the books and calunia and fellow-travelers to build on here.

There ARE quite a few in the US media and legal talking heads delighted to take a whack at Knox. The Daily Mail does so 1/2 the time. See how the Knox drug dealer story spread. Wait a few weeks? Let us get some documents and press reports out, and I think you’ll find this story again has legs.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/18/15 at 02:36 PM | #

THE STRANGE CASE OF FEAR OF THE TRUTH

It had bothered me because I could never truly understand why all the noise about Amanda Knox being innocent was so hysterical when she is so obviously guilty of murdering Meredith Kercher .Just why these idiots were extolling her none existent virtues when anybody with a half a brain could see that she was guilty as sin, and I said so on blogs and on Facebook and anywhere I could. Steve Moore tried his best (which was a joke) to come down on me like a ton of bricks. I got a huge laugh out of that since being the coward he is he got a pal of his from the FBI in Seattle to phone me with some nebulous half baked threat. Of course he believed that at the very mention of the term FBI i’m supposed to soil myself with fear. Didn’t work did it Stevie? Thanks for the joke. So why was I such a threat?  After all it was my point of view and all I did was tell the truth US State department notwithstanding.

Then the reason became obvious. The defenders of Amanda Knox had something else they wished to promote and protect. Steve Moore and his mad wife in particular. So lets see now, Steve Moore has a web site called G Man Moore which is a joke in itself. 

His web site did not exist before 2007. However, in it he tells anyone interested just what a great guy he is and how he was in the FBI. Fine so he was, at least as a pilot ferrying people around. In other words he was just some glorified bus driver getting people from point A to point B. He got on my case because I had the temerity to dig into his background as a self styled FBI head of counter intelligence in LA. This claim of his is a complete lie and is known as padding your resume. He says he’s a sniper. That also is a huge joke as well because he is incapable of hitting a barn from the inside. Then there’s the famous Pepperdine University which he was fired from, supposedly for defending Amanda Knox. If you think about that you will see just how stupid the reason is. I think it was more to do with him sneaking into the girls student quarters but we will never know for certain.

However consider this. You are an attached member of the FBI with a great pension, a huge salary, free medical and dental, great holiday time off, free travel to just about anywhere in the world including hotel stays that can be written off and you give it all up in order to become a security guard. That is so much BS and of course is the reason Steve Moore does not want anybody including me, checking up on his so called bona-fides. The only bona fide he ever had was the time he overdosed on viagra. Enter Amanda Knox who to Steve Moore was a gift from heaven because she is a member of the same lying cesspool and it underscored his and other peoples need to take the heat away from them and concentrate on Knox who is in the same boat. ie Don’t look to closely at the evidence just except what you are told and are spoon fed like good little sheep.

Then there’s Greg Hampikian DNA expert to the stars. Don’t look too closely at his qualifications either because he wrote them himself. He has this organization/hobby the famous so called ‘Innocence Project’ Strange that they have never saved anyone at all. check it yourself. His organization/hobby is there in order to extract money from unsuspecting people such as the families of the accused who always believe their family members are innocent. Mind you Hampikian dropped Knox like a hot potato when he found out what a lying liability she is.

Steve Moore in this regard has never saved anybody either but continues to try to extract money from people in order to keep his wife sedated and himself in the public eye. Poor Steve Moore, who just like Sollecito and Knox, live in a comic hero book world of their own making. There was a time when Stevie was interviewed on CNN. When interviewed he maintained that Guede was a Mafia snitch. This gem brought forth such howls of laughter he hasn’t been interviewed since.

Then there’s retired Judge Micheal Heavey. You may remember him, He was convinced that Knox was innocent because she went to the same school as his daughter. (No fool like an old fool) That’s the problem with some so called educated people who have anything to do with the legal system. They are convinced that nobody can fool them. (Bernie Madoff and Lehman Brothers notwithstanding,) Amanda Knox, plus Gogarty Marriot plus Frank Sforza has told them what they want to hear and they have swallowed it whole and begged for more. Knox has certainly done that, but more to the point Frank Sforza for example, swindled $500 bucks plus a month out of Heavey since Sforza claimed he could prove that Mignini was crooked. That didn’t work because Sforza is a thief and a crook wanted on three continents fora variety of crimes. Heavey fell for it which made him an even bigger laughing stock than when he was a judge.

Frank Sforza has tie-ins with the Mafia. Even that loose cannon Raphael Sollecito blurted that gem out thereby confirming once more what people already knew. To underscore this you may recall Frank Sforza was kicked out of the Knox family house for trying to bed dear Amanda. i’m sure she wouldn’t have minded either since she’s had more pricks than a dart board but it was too close to home. The fact that her defenders now claim she is a born again virgin is great. Nobody except Knox herself could actually invent this since it’s so ridiculous, but then if you want to lie tell a big one, a-la Joseph Goebbels of Nazi infamy.
Towards that end you will also note that Knox rock musician fiancee has disappeared over the horizon, probably because he found out just what a murdering slut she is. You will note that his presence is now represented by a vast silence.

Then there’s that well known failure Bruce Fischer, who is twice bankrupt and even changed his name so he could be confused with someone else and thereby hide the fact. He is also a hard core defender of Knox and proponent of Ground Report which in spite of his best efforts has ceased to exist. Bruce Fischer, as his sorry family will tell you, is a scared little man who tries to keep his real identity secret for fear of retribution. Speaking of which. What do you suppose happened to the writers of blogs on Ground Report who wrote wondrous claims extolling Knox who is their savior and de-facto leader of the cult? What happened to them? Well, if you can hold your nose long enough, you can still find them on Knox blog still churning out pro Knox garbage for financial renumeration.

Saul Kassin is another one who cashed in on Amanda Knox. These liars and parasites know no bounds. In fact they couldn’t care less as to guilt or innocence for the real victim Meredith Kercher. To some of these con artists she does not exist at all, rather like Knox herself who never mentions her name and has wiped her from her memory rather like someone with Post Traumatic Stress which always comes back to haunt you
and keep you up at night. I wonder if Knox has ‘Sleep Apnea? another symptom of the guilt which is impacting upon her. You can tell this because she recently won the Eileen Wuornos look alike contest.

Of course there are many others of the same kind who have used Knox to their own ends. This does not include the simple idiots who churn out lie after lie rather like Lyn Duncan in Wellington New Zealand. She is the prime example of a sorry lost child who leaches onto Knox because she has nothing else. Lyn Duncan also believes that Jody Arias is innocent. I checked her Facebook page. She has nobody except the two family members which are not family members at all, they are just acquaintances. These two Charlotte Taylor Brown and Monica Sambrizzi by name are a prime example of the epitome of air head. Anyway out of curiosity I checked. Charlotte Taylor Brown lists all the levels of the video games she has managed to get to win while Monica Sambrizzi is only concerned with the zodiac and hair styles. These kinds are typical of the none thinking morons who believe Knox is innocent.

Therefore these people fall into two groups The liars/parasites such as Steve Moore who are in it for the money, and the simple sheep come lemmings who must believe that Knox is innocent.
As to the latter they are this way because to them Knox must be innocent so they can be innocent as well. To them psychologically, if Knox is guilty then so are they. That being the case they will fight in order to prove that they are innocent instead of guilty of aiding and abetting a murderer. It is this reason among many others than Amanda Knox must not be allowed to get any breathing room at all. It is sincere wish that, at the very least Amanda Knox will be like Casey Anthony and be scared to leave the house. That is until the eventual justice will be served upon her one way or the other and true justice for Meredith Kercher will be realized.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 09/18/15 at 05:22 PM | #

“It is sincere wish that, at the very least Amanda Knox will be like Casey Anthony and be scared to leave the house.” 

I’d like to see her have to talk a lot in response to the many articles that I hope will emerge soon in print.  And lots of reporters at her house with lots of cameras looking for a sound bite.  I also want to read lots more of her compelling eerie irk, cool? pieces.  Hey, maybe she can do a column series refuting the mounting accusations by the troublesome media that somehow just won’t lay off after all these years.  Just not cool?  Right?

Posted by whatswisdom on 09/18/15 at 06:03 PM | #


Make a comment

If you are reading this please log in to post a comment.

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Revenge Of The Knox, The Smear-All Book: We Get Down To Nailing ALL Her Invented Claims #7

Or to previous entry Knox Calunnia Trial #2: Testimony In Florence Court Today By Some Accused By Amanda Knox Of Crimes