Heads-up: Netflix's "Amanda Knox" is in possible line for a TV Emmy award in category 28. Via hundreds of key facts omitted that production, by longtime Knox PR flunkies (which Netflix kept secret), convinced millions globally that Italian justice sucks, and that Knox had zero role in Meredith's death - not even the Italian Supreme Court said that.



Seeds Of Betrayal: In Interview Knox Reveals To Italy Her Considerable Irritation With Sollecito

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters





For some odd reason, Amanda Knox has decided she is not loved enough in Italy.

Could it be because she is widely seen to have lied her way through trial, came across as loud, self-absorbed and callous in her 2009 testimony and court interventions, served three years for framing her her kindly employer, was reported as being just as grubby and tin-eared and sharp-elbowed as ever in prison, slimed Italy though her cohorts in much of the English-language media after her 2011 release, and has now written an illegal blood-money book which once again slams a benign Italy?

In particular it slams the justice system, one of the most popular and trusted institutions in Italy, and its officers of the court, with more proven lies and contradictions with past testimony being unearthed daily. 

Apparently in Knox’s mind it was all really Guede’s and Sollecito’s faults.

It was they who tarnished her image. Here in an interview in the current Oggi (which appears just as in contempt of court as last week’s Oggi article now the subject of a criminal investigation) she sets Italians straight.

Translation here was by our main poster Miriam, who is herself in Italy - and in disgust.

AMANDA KNOX: ITALIANS; WHY DON’T YOU BELIEVE ME?

Amanda Knox answers the phone with a bright voice and no signs of fatigue. Strange. She is a veteran of a promotional tour that would have knocked-out a bison. Her book “Waiting to be heard” is selling like mad [it is?] but it will not be published in Italy: our publishers have a - sound - suspect that it would set off a number of complaints for defamation, and they have decided to not publish it.

“I’m sorry” she says. “The Italians believe that I am full of hate for them, but if they had the opportunity to read my book they would discover that there is not a trace of anger in it. It hurts that so many believe that I am guilty, that I wrote the book out of arrogance, for money. It is not true.” Says Knox venting her frustration.

Following the Cassazione’s decision on March 26 to redo the appeal process - which had absolved Amanda and Rafaele Sollecito - the British publishers also pulled back.

“They asked me if I wanted to postpone the book launch. But it is my turn to talk now, and I do not intend to alter my story just because somebody threatens to sue me.” Amanda is nothing if not pugnacious.  “Compared to how I was before I came to Perugia, I am quieter, even timid. My family is disappointed: the sunny happy Amanda no longer exists.”

Your personality - the way you reacted to Meredith’s death - caused you many problems at the time.

“People involved in a tragedy can react in many different ways, and your behavior can be manipulated to reinforce the idea that you are the one who is guilty.”

What are you referring to?

“To the infamous images taken outside of the small villa on the day Meredith’s lifeless body was found. Those images were cut and obsessively repeated, so as to only show Raffaele and me kissing.” The message was clear: “their friend is dead and all those two think about is kissing.”

What were you feeling at that moment?

“I hadn’t understood what had happened; I had not accepted the fact that Meredith had died in such a terrible way. I felt lost and sad. I was desperately trying to understand. Raffaele kissed me to console me: since I did not speak Italian yet, there was a linguistic barrier between us that prevented us from giving each other verbal support. And then, to re-enforce the strangeness of my behavior, there was the contrast of the cries of my roommate Filomena Romanelli. She is Italian, she had understood. She had seen Meredith’s room, the body, the blood. Not me: I was in total confusion.”

In the book, Honor Bound, Sollecito writes that your behavior that day was “embarassing”

“I don’t think he was embarrassed . I can understand that he would find me “clingy”. I depended on him completely; I was absolutely clingy. However, he knew how they were looking at us, while I hadn’t considered at all how people might have judged us. I was simply reacting in my lost and disoriented way.”

One of the PMs believes that Guede didn’t act alone. Could he have had an accomplice?

“I can only base my opinion on what the prosecution brought to court.”

And?

“They found another person’s DNA in Meredith’s room, a person that has never been identified. A smaller amount of DNA than Rudy’s. There is Guede’s bloody handprint on the wall, his footprint, his DNA on Meredith’s body. This evidence leads me to believe he acted alone.”

John Kercher, Meredith’s dad, maintains that his daughter had studied karate as a child, and that she would have fought to survive. He believes one man would not have been able to subdue her.

“Of course Meredith fought, but what could she have done against an armed man? Rudy is athletic, and is not small. Mez was minute, she maybe weighed 54 kgs, what good could have Karate done her? Even a man if faced against the likes of Guede, armed with a knife, would not have stood a chance.”

How do you explain Rudy’s calm countenance during the trial? Before being arrested he had told a friend - Giacomo Benedetti - on Skye that you and Raffaele had nothing to do with the murder. After being arrested he started accusing you.

“Yes, it is a strange coincidence. I do not know if he changed his story based on his own ideas or those of his lawyers or the prosecution. I only know that after his story changed, the PM began calling him “poor Rudy” to demonstrate how fragile he was, and consequently how easily manipulated by me.”

When and why did you break up with Raffaele?

“When he “broke” my alibi (during a police questioning, Raffaele claimed to not remember if Amanda had left the house the night of the murder, editor’s note.) It was a shock for me.”

“A shock that combined with the fact that we did not communicate for a long time while in prison erased my feelings for him. In prison I had to focus on survival and put love aside.”

Back in Seattle, James Terrano became your boyfriend.

“We had been together in university. While I was in prison, we wrote a lot, but just as friends. When I came back home, we began looking at each other differently.”

Do you live with James?

“No. At first, I lived with a friend (Madison Paxton, who had moved to Perugia to be closer to her, editor’s note) now I live alone. James is often at my place, we’re very close, but we don’t live together.”

Did you see a psychiatrist to get over your prison experience?

“Only once, I started crying and never went back. I talk with my friends and with my family; I don’t need an “external consultant.” Writing the book was extremely helpful; I freed myself of all my anger and my wounds.”

What will you do now?

“I took a break from university to write my book; I’m going to go back and would like to graduate next year. I would also like to write other books, if I can afford do. My financial future is very uncertain.”

But everyone says the advance on the book was fantastic.

“I’ll just say that I still have not been able to meet my first goal: repay my family for all expenses incurred in defending and staying close to me.” (One and a half million dollars, editor’s note)

People have also mentioned a movie.
..
“I’ve heard the same. I don’t know how being on the set would be; perhaps not as terrible as I imagine.”

Is there anything you regret?

“Yes. I regret not having immediately contacted Meredith’s family, of not having expressed my feelings and sorrow to them. At the beginning, perhaps, it would have been possible. It hurts to know that John Kercher believes I’m guilty, and that this belief is based on faulty information. I had hoped that once absolved, the Kerchers would have believed me. But that didn’t happen.

Maybe the new trial will draw out the truth

“That is up to Rudy, but I doubt he will do it.”

In May 2014, Rudy could receive the first permit allowing him to enjoy a few days out of prison.

“That’s crazy. It’s simply insane for them to let a guilty man loose because they refuse to admit they were wrong about me.”



Yes Rudy! What about that? Why did Knox’s own lawyers and the Supreme Court accept that overwhelming evidence proved three people did it?

And why did you say she did it? And why do her own parents believe she did it? How did you accomplish those tricks? Amanda says: speak up.














Comments

Ha, it´s the psychiatrist thing once again!  So she´s sorry John Kercher actually still thinks she´s guilty ? If she wants him to think better of her, why doesn´t she just follow his advice ?

John Kercher asked Knox to keep a low profile after her release from jail.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/8814850/Meredith-Kerchers-father-hopes-Amanda-Knox-maintains-low-profile.html

That would mean NO book deals, NO movies, NO giving interviews.

Posted by aethelred23 on 05/18/13 at 12:11 AM | #

“Of course Meredith fought”  Thanks for that Knox, you’ve just confirmed that you were there when Meredith was murdered.

Posted by Urbanist on 05/18/13 at 06:17 AM | #

And so the spiral of betrayals escalates. James Raper and readers in Comments below have already identified half a dozen.

The next post, on Sollecito’s interview on NBC TV in the US yesterday, not only compounded his contempt of court felonies (does Sharlene Martin who arranged it have the slightest clue?) but also dropped Knox in it by implying evidence against him is none but that against Knox was overwhelming.

In fact evidence against the two was equal and Sollecito’s bloody footprint especially damning. A smoking gun in effect.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/Tips_For_The_Media_3_in_fact_theres_far_more_evidence/

Why didnt NBC’s gullible Savannah Guthrie ask him about that?

Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/18/13 at 07:06 AM | #

I just can’t understand how any one can believe a word that comes out of this obnoxious vulgar woman’s mouth.

She has given countless different accounts of her movements/whereabouts on the night of the murder. In her book she contradicts her own court testimony & police statements on many occasions.

She comes across as totally false and unbelievable on her vile and vulgar tv appearances to promote her blood money book.

When are the media going to wise up and admit they have been duped into sponsoring and pandering a brutal murder, who just happens to also have a conviction for lying?

Posted by Jeffski1 on 05/18/13 at 07:11 AM | #

Where did the certainty that her parents know come from? (Towards end of article).

Posted by thundering on 05/18/13 at 07:20 AM | #

On another topic but very important, there is a huge discrepancy between what she says her relation with Meredith was and what others say. So huge it isn’t smart at all.

She could easily have admitted they found out they were too different to really get along, or that they had had, yes, discussions about her personal hygiene or else, but she kept saying “she was my friend”.

Everything proves the contrary - the neighbor telling they used to go towards school together then stopped, Meredith’s frieds and family testimony, the fact that no picture of she and “her friend” survived in the pc’ ordeal, her not attending the vigil and buying lingerie with projects of an evening ooh la la instead.

If she is so adamant that they were friends and it is clear they were NOT… it is also a lie to be built on….

Posted by Patou on 05/18/13 at 07:44 AM | #

I’ve been thinking a lot about the cleaned up murder scene and following the debate on pmf.

I haven’t seen it ever mentioned anywhere, but was anything missing (besides money) from Meredith’s room?

What I mean is, could AK’s and RS’s DNA have been on something in the room that was then removed and disposed of in the clean up? For instance, Meredith’s clothes were found in the washing machine, wet. Who put them there? What else was altered for the staged crime scene? How would we know if anything else was missing? Well, my thinking here is, do any of Meredith’s friends have any pictures of her room prior to her murder?

I suppose it really doesn’t matter, but something is nagging at the back of my mind around this matter. Anyone know if there is any discussion anywhere about the staging that I can read through?

I looked through Kermit’s slideshow yesterday in it’s entirety, on a large screen, and the bathmat footprint blew me away. I’ve read the text of the slides before, but seeing it together with the images (which I’ve avoided looking at from day one btw) is mindblowing. Especially in light of the factual table demonstrating the footprint is RS’s - shown on this site.

What the hell was Hellman playing at?

@Patou - You’re absolutely bang on the money. AK said on the stand in her original trial something along the lines that she barely knew Meredith, and they’d only known each other a few weeks. That was viewed as a fairly cold, callous response so AK’s been banging the ‘she was my friend’ drum ever since.

Reading the reports at the time about how other people viewed that relationship is far more reliable than anything written today. Everyone’s opinions have shifted, so anyone keen to understand the relationship, read the press reports from the days around the murder itself for snippets from Meredith’s friends. Like the Kercher family, Meredith’s friends seemed to have conducted themselves with propriety. I bet some of them are ‘quirky’ too.

Posted by TruthWillOut on 05/18/13 at 09:07 AM | #

Hi TruthWillOut

(1) Don’t lose sight of the fact that these two had over eight hours to clean up. Also prints on walls or anywhere else are usually confined to below average height. People seem to have forgotten Knox’s clothes as well plus the cell phone records. If you look at the photos of them on that morning I see two people who have been up all night and are exhausted.

(2) I still think Hellman was bought off in some way. Of course that will never be proven and is a mute point considering the future for these two.

(3) Speaking of which they will hang together since they are turning on each other anyway. Sollicito might feel pretty safe by wrongly assuming the idea that Knox will never be extradited. “Go for it Raphael tell the truth. Think of the money.”

(4) The more a hungry American populous is, in particular anything of a lascivious nature the more people will see just what a shallow-none human-manipulative murderer Knox is. Curt must be turning in his grave….....eventually.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 05/18/13 at 09:52 AM | #

Oh I forgot. In England in the Eighteenth Century and dating back to the Norman Conquests. There was this thing called. “A Hue and Cry.” which was in English common law before there was any police force. This “Hue an Cry” was the result of a murder or some such when all the population of the town were aroused to chase down the murderers. Not too much different from this site, which is of course a great thing particularly when justice has not been served.

The general population for the safety of the population as a whole are/were obliged to take matters into their own hands. Not as a lynch mob you understand but as a real threat to these murderers because people will not stop until justice is served one way or another. This is why Knox and Sollicito will never rest easily until they are safely behind bars away from the general population because eventually they will pay for the murder of Meredith Kercher

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 05/18/13 at 10:13 AM | #

This farce is drifting, inexorably, to a close.

With both Sollecito and Knox facing the various appeals against the Massei verdicts, and new charges against them, consider:

“the Cassazione’s decision on March 26 to redo the appeal process”

It’s not a “redo” in the legal sense. The Hellman/Zanetti proceedings, another farce, are null and void.

“I hadn’t understood what had happened; I had not accepted the fact that Meredith had died in such a terrible way. I felt lost and sad. I was desperately trying to understand. Raffaele kissed me to console me…“and, “I hadn’t considered at all how people might have judged us. I was simply reacting in my lost and disoriented way.”

Who doesn’t believe those statements? Remember that old adage? - “Denial is not a River in Egypt”

One of the PMs believes that Guede didn’t act alone. Could he have had an accomplice?

“I can only base my opinion on what the prosecution brought to court…...This evidence leads me to believe he acted alone.”  !

My financial future is very uncertain.”

But everyone says the advance on the book was fantastic.

“I’ll just say that I still have not been able to meet my first goal: repay my family for all expenses incurred in defending and staying close to me.” (One and a half million dollars, editor’s note)

People have also mentioned a movie…..

The $N-million “payment”, or “advance”, may be P.R.-Hype.

Its hard to believe that Knox’s Contract doesn’t stipulate provisions, such as temporarily withholding actual $-transfer-to-Knox pending non-litigation against the Book Publisher re defamation, for a specified time-period, and commencement of Royalty-Payments delayed until such payments have reimbursed the Publisher a specified $-amount.

Knox’s only credible reason to await an inevitable formal extradition to Italy, is that Knox may not have to pay-in-advance her travel-costs.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 05/18/13 at 11:22 AM | #

Why don’t the Italians believe her? Maybe because when they (OGGI) ask her about the guy who killed her roommate, this bad guy who then blamed her for the killing, she isn’t outraged. Instead she says a little canned, “Yes, it is a strange coincidence,” and proceeds to excuse Rudy’s heinous lies that cost her so much and destroyed her family. She meekly says that maybe his lawyers made him say such things.

An innocent party would be absolutely enraged at Rudy for his lies. Her silence is proof that Rudy wasn’t lying.

@James Raper, the point about Knox’s menstrual timing is more proof to me that she was guilty. If she hadn’t been so proud, she might have gone for the PMS or PMDD defense. It also explains her going bonkers at the Questura. See Premenstrual Syndrome (PMS): the malady and the law at http://www.researchsea.com 

In a study of prison inmates it was found that out of a group of 42 women who had committed crimes of violence, 25 of them (62%) had taken place in premenstrual and one at end of menstrual phase. Dalton (1959) found that 46% of all admissions in psychiatry wards and 53% of attempted suicides were during menstruation or pre-menstruation. An 1994 study of 80 women arrested for Resistance to public officials, 71 were menstruating.

“New Knowledge About Premenstrual Syndrome” by Dr. Paul Eck and Dr. Larry Wilson at http://www.advancedfamilyhealth.com says “violent crime and alcohol abuse by women occur more frequently before the menstrual period.” Also Dr. Guy Abraham

Progesterone drops, there’s often hypoglycemia (hence cravings for chocolate) and fatigue and depression.

“Under acute distress, copper is mobilized from tissue storage. Copper has a stimulating effect on neurotransmitters. These are known to enhance emotions and cause anxiety, mood swings and other emotions commonly associated with PMS.”

There is a substantial link between PMS and behavior changes like:

depression
aggression
irritability
agitated depression
weepiness

I believe Knox was in a low hormonal PMS mode when she quarreled with Meredith and she was also impaired with intoxicants of alcohol and drugs. She was irrational and aggressive.

Also, she seems to be lying in the OGGI interview about the kiss. She blames the kiss on her confusion. She claims she didn’t know that Meredith was dead. Of course she did. She knew the police were there for a murder, she knew they’d been run out of the cottage because Meredith’s body had been discovered in the bedroom, she knew Romanelli was crying hysterically for that same reason.

She’s simply angry and incensed that Romanelli’s sincerely sad and frightened reaction to Meredith’s death put Knox’s total indifference into the limelight. So now she lies and says she didn’t actually understand what had happened, as if she had to know the details of the murder to summon any feeling. “I didn’t understand…” She used that lie dozens of times. Some honors student.

@urban: great point about “Of course Meredith fought.” How did Knox know?

@brmull Chin up wherever you are.

Posted by Hopeful on 05/18/13 at 11:44 AM | #

So now she lies and says she didn’t actually understand what had happened, as if she had to know the details of the murder to summon any feeling.

Yes, I agree. It just seems like another example of using language in a vague and imprecise way so as to mislead. Remember that Knox had written short stories and is supposed to be studying “creative writing” for her bachelors’s degree.

And yet can anyone give an example from real life of not having understood what had happened in similar circumstances?

Several years ago a woman whom I supervised at work did not show up for a couple of days and did not answer her phone, so I went round to her house after work and there were cars on the driveway, and dogs barking inside the house.

When I called her number with my cell phone the phone rang inside the house and went to the answering machine. The back door of the house that led into the laundry room lobby was open, so I could have entered the house.

I called the local cops and an officer came round and went in through the laundry door and found that in the bedroom her husband had shot her and then himself and that they were both quite dead.

I understood exactly what had happened, because even before the cop came I had a suspicion of something bad, and for that reason I did not enter the house or try to look through the bedroom window, so like Knox, I never saw the bodies.

Interestingly the cop told me that he had been called to the house before and was not surprised at what he found either.

When the police were called and the door to Meredith’s room was broken down, what was Knox expecting? Either you would expect to find an empty room or a dead body, surely? An innocent person would be hoping for an empty room, but a dead body would not be a complete shock.

Posted by Domingo on 05/18/13 at 02:30 PM | #

Incidentally, here is the link for the news report of the above vignette.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20030306/NEWS/303060386

To me the interesting part is that my very minor role is mentioned, but I am completely misidentified as I did not work at the prison where the husband worked, nor did the wife.

The story was somewhat hushed up by the police, possibly because they might have intervened and arrested the husband earlier, but also I think because he was a prison officer and would have lost his job if facing domestic violence charges, so the police went easy on him as a kind of fellow member of the law enforcement community. So much for that!

However my main point is that you can NEVER really get the true facts about something by relying on a newspaper article for accurate information.

Posted by Domingo on 05/18/13 at 02:46 PM | #

@Domingo, it’s true. Newspaper reports are often inaccurate. You were smart to call police rather than enter the home yourself. The 6th sense is real.

Raf in new interview on Today show with Ms. Guthrie was a picture of nonchalance and smiling optimism. What a contrast to the terrified Amanda of recent TV interviews. He may have been relaxed being on American soil far from the long arm of the law, but it seemed more than that. When asked if he had faith in Italian justice he said in paraphrase, we have faith in God and the justice system is an unknown quantity.

I think he truly does have faith in God, whom he may have asked for forgiveness and trusts to somehow miraculously and mercifully keep him out of prison despite his lies or crimes. He mentions Amanda labels him a “hero”, then humbly says he requires no gratitude for having saved her by providing her with an alibi. He gets shakey on the “we are innocent” line.

My armchair psychotherapy:

Raffaele in 2007 was trying to heal himself of guilt over his mother’s suicide by rescuing an irrational woman, in this case Amanda Knox. He had left his mother to go to college far from Bari, and was almost ready to graduate when he landed in a murder trial.

He shielded Amanda as well as himself, it was like saying to Dr. Sollecito, “Now you must fight for my mom in the form of Amanda Knox if you fight for me and so we will be united” as you and mother were not in life, you didn’t fight hard enough for her. This sudden unity of the doctor and Raf might undo the rift when Raf demanded that nobody named Sollecito attend his mother’s funeral. Raf paid off his guilt by destroying the college degree that he had left his mother to obtain. He spent 4 years in prison to expiate the 4 years of university study (which he later finished behind bars.)

He has brought his father on board to his cause like never before, melding himself and his father in a cruel crucible, partly to punish dad for being a helicopter parent. This is a very sad irony, because his dad was calling him around the time of the murder to tell Raf about the heartwarming movie of a father’s love for his son starring Will Smith: “The Pursuit of Happyness”.

After seeing his father’s faithfulness to him throughout the trial it allows Raf to transfer his affections from his deceased mom to Dr. Sollecito completely. These inner demons have driven Raf. Maybe now he feels the test is over and he’s free. He stood by Amanda where he may have felt he could not stand by his mother in her final depression. After he left for college she perished by her own hand (her suicide is controversial).

Maybe that’s why he is so blase and smiling on Today show this week. He feels he has suffered to atone and suffered enough. No doubt he has justified himself with his own private formula about any part he did play in Meredith’s death whether knife-wielder or only cleanup and coverup. He thinks oh it was an accident, she started it and Amanda finished it, Guede and Amanda went ape what could I do, it was too late to help, I’ll save Amanda anyway.

Comments on PMFs have shown Knox’s book boasts of her role in forcing her mom and dad to sit at a table for salad together to talk about her plan to go to Perugia. She wanted them to know this was the biggest decision of her life, and she had chosen a country that neither of her parents had “taken” or hailed from. She had visited Italy when she was 14 years old with her mother and mom’s family. The forcing of her two parents back together on this decision to let her travel abroad seems to strike a jubilant cord of sincerity.

Both she and Raf seem to have used Perugia and an innocent foreign woman to act out their need to holler “Daddy, daddy, look at me, rescue me daddy, do me some good for a change. See, I am powerful after all.” (and maybe mom will be avenged indirectly for you divorcing her and leaving us, oh you’ll be back, and we’ll bring you back willing or unwilling to save your own pride. I’m willing to suffer to make that happen, in prison if need be.)

Amanda reveals how she despises Filomena’s wild shows of grief and tears. I think this is her attitude toward Edda’s uncontrolled displays of emotion that have always forced Amanda to have to play the strong silent type, the sunny trooper, who soldiers on. She seems to sincerely grieve that now after prison the sunny Knox is absent, as caretaker to her parents’ emotional needs. (I’ve read about soul ties.) She fears her parents won’t like the new serious, somber Knox.

She covets her former role as powerful protector of the females in her family before Mellas joined them. She is very needy of their approval in some ways, yet very dismissive of her parents and poorly thanks them in interviews, at least not to the extent she should for their sacrifices. She resents being under obligation to them but fears them and what they know about her. Catch-22.

With Raf moving away to Switzerland, I guess the last heartbreak to his longsuffering father is complete. What a rogue, an only son who offers nothing back to a generous father but shame, worry, and more debts. All so he can make them say, “Well I liked the old Raf better, even if he did stay high and dawdle in school.” Momma Sol’s death removes her from knowledge of the shame, maybe her good opinion meant more to him.

Posted by Hopeful on 05/18/13 at 04:26 PM | #

Sometimes you look at AK and wonder: how did this child (because that’s what she still is, regardless of her biological age) end up like this?

We know about her father’s absence and of course that’s part of the mix, but how about Edda who is what mothers usually are (but writ large it seems )i.e the very image of doting unconditional love, even now. Watch her, preferably with the audio on mute, in the recent interviews with AK sitting next to her. Her lovely child can do no wrong. One example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhFRwMee8rs

The truism about children needing boundaries seems to apply here. It’s obviously not enough to be loved unconditionally, past a certain age. Kids need and actually want limits made clear to them. In an ideal family situation this message is conveyed by the role and sometimes the mere presence of the firm (but also fair and caring) father, though he would be normally be supported in this by the mother. When the father is absent it’s not easy for the mother to combine both roles, in my opinion.

Somewhere along the line AK (and millions of others) haven’t learnt what most of us take for granted as trivially obvious - there are necessary repercussions from certain behaviours: you can’t always do what you like and expect a big hug no matter what. On one level AK is playing with a stacked deck and that has to attract some understanding.

On the other hand, the image the family like to portray on the sofas in TV studios- as a family united in fighting injustice (even though Curt notably and necessarily has to distance himself physically when next to Edda)- is clearly a travesty of the truth: they may be united NOW in saving the “family honour” but in truth they were far from united and obviously dysfunctional. In this they were representative of far too many short-lived partnerships with children involved.  The results can be horrendous, as we are learning.

Posted by Odysseus on 05/18/13 at 04:28 PM | #

@hopeful

“her attitude toward Edda’s uncontrolled displays of emotion that have always forced Amanda to have to play the strong silent type, the sunny trooper, who soldiers on”. Very well put, I get that sense as well.

“She resents being under obligation to them but fears them and what they know about her.” What do they know about her that she fears? Do you mean with regard to the murder?

Posted by Odysseus on 05/18/13 at 04:48 PM | #

She claims to deeply resent Sollecito breaking her alibi. I don’t get this. If she only fingered Lumumba because she had been roughed up by the cops, should’t she presume Sollecito had only broken her alibi because he too had received similar treatment, even more so, seeing he is a bloke. So why the surprise and consternation?

Posted by John Forbes on 05/18/13 at 05:27 PM | #

From the jury’s point of view, I would think the shenanigans of the Knox/Mellas/Sollecito families are pretty much irrelevant.

While papa Sollecito might have some input on the timing of the water leak and Knox’s cockcrow phone call to her mother is a bit of mystery, these aren’t going to be primary evidence for the jury. Once the jury has made up its mind on the big issues, it can decide what these pieces of evidence mean.

The rest of the family stuff is just background noise.

Posted by Domingo on 05/18/13 at 09:34 PM | #

“If she only fingered Lumumba because she had been roughed up by the cops, should’t she presume Sollecito had only broken her alibi because he too had received similar treatment, even more so, seeing he is a bloke.”

Yes, but she wasn’t roughed up by the cops, so she would not have thought that.

Once you have looked at all the evidence and come to a fairly unshakeable conclusion that she played some part in the killing or the cover up,  then everything she says should be assumed to be either untrue, or possibly untrue.

I was once a foreman of a jury in a drunk driving case. OK not very relevant to this case, but what I learned from the experience was that as a juror you are essentially called on to decide which side is telling the truth and which side is lying, mistaken, or perhaps simply malicious.

Both sides cannot be telling the truth, and of course this is the real reason why defendants are rarely put on the witness stand. Did anyone really think OJ Simpson would take the stand? Of course not!

The reason usually put forward is that most defendants are not sufficiently articulate to joust with the prosecution advocate and may inadvertently give the appearance of guilt when they are merely inchoate, but another reason could be that most defendants are guilty, because clearly a prosecutor will very, very rarely bring a case to trial if he/she does not believe the defendant is guilty and that there is enough evidence to prove this.

Posted by Domingo on 05/18/13 at 09:44 PM | #

Interesting comments from you all above regarding the ‘family’ thing.

I will be intrigued to see how far the family will go to support her once it really is long-haul.

Will anyone move back to Italy to be near her and visit her?

She spoke in the DS interview about her struggle to find a way to tell her family to ‘move on without her’ (note the appeal to pity in the ‘without her’). 

She may have really wanted to do that.  As many have commented, she almost confessed to Mignini and wanted to come clean to Curt but was silenced.

It may be that she really did / does want them to ‘move on’ and leave her to ‘get on’ with some relief but the struggle lies in her fear of abandonment.

Posted by thundering on 05/18/13 at 11:23 PM | #

“Of course Meredith fought”  Thanks for that Knox, you’ve just confirmed that you were there when Meredith was murdered.

(Urbanist)

The first thing I said to Peter after I read the article.  Now I don’t know if Knox gave this interview in Italian and just mixed up her tenses, but to me it sounded like a major slip-up.  How would she know what Meredith did in her final moments if she wasn’t there?

This reminds me of something she said in her book, that there was skin and hair under Meredith’s nails.  That’s not true, if I remember correctly, and it’s an indication that someone was restraining her (which supports the hypothesis that there were multiple attackers).

The other thing that got my attention was this:

What will you do now?

“I took a break from university to write my book; I’m going to go back and would like to graduate next year. I would also like to write other books, if I can afford do. My financial future is very uncertain.

But everyone says the advance on the book was fantastic.

I’ll just say that I still have not been able to meet my first goal: repay my family for all expenses incurred in defending and staying close to me.” (One and a half million dollars, editor’s note)

It does raise some serious questions about the alleged $4 mil. advance.

- Was the $4 mil. number greatly exaggerated in order to make Knox seem like a sought-after celebrity?

- Are there tough conditions placed on the payment of this advance?

- Is she playing poor to make it seem like she’s not really benefiting from Meredith’s murder?

Regarding her comments about a possible movie, I’m guessing now that the reason she didn’t like the Lifetime one was because her input wasn’t requested. 

She’s probably on top of the world right now, having just published a book, giving interviews, contemplating a movie about her life, etc. This is what she wanted all along, and it’s absolutely ghastly that someone like her gets to do these things when there are so many young people out there who are genuinely talented writers and dramatists, but whose work will never be known beyond the small areas they live in.

I’m guessing she considers the years in prison (far too few for what she’s done) a small price to pay for what she’s doing now; a risk that was worth taking in exchange for celebrity.

Posted by Vivianna on 05/18/13 at 11:53 PM | #

@ Vivianna,

Yet there is a very real likelihood of her having to pay the price - at least more fully than thus far….......

Posted by thundering on 05/19/13 at 12:15 AM | #

P.S. I remember this photo at top well.  i think it was right at the beginning of the trial and she hadn’t seen RS for some time and not since he weakened her alibi.

If looks could kill .......

Posted by thundering on 05/19/13 at 12:17 AM | #

@thundering

Re: wanting her family to move on without her…  This is my feeling too. A part of her would actually like all of this to cease - she is finding it a colossal stress.(all the attention doesn’t make up for the stress). This was obvious in the last clip I saw, from CNN.

It is a strain, and impossible to relax or be at peace when one isn’t truthful and open as a matter of course.

I hesitate before I write or speak - I let what I would like to say be filtered - first I check it against my conscience and my knowledge.

I guess people with no or little conscience use words in an entirely different way - saying things calculated for the effect they will elicit. Hence my observation that there seemed to be no grasp of the concept of lying.

She seems annoyed rather than sorry when her inconsistencies are pointed out. She says it often ’ I should try harder’ ‘I should have been much stronger’...etc. Meaning she regrets her inconsistencies in her stories? Or regrets not being open and honest from the start??

Others have observed that the structure and security of being behind locks seemed to suit her, that her treatment there was fair, and she had a number of privileges.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 05/19/13 at 04:45 AM | #

Regarding karate etc - I thought the whole point of karate and martial arts were that they favoured the lithe, small, quick person and gave an advantage against bulk and size. Hence developed by the Chinese etc.

I would have thought it would have been most useful in a one to one struggle with anyone.  Certainly it would have been useless if pinned down by others.

One of the significant points of evidence is that there are barely any defensive wounds at all (a couple of light scratches on one hand if I remember correctly). This was one of the facts that led to the conclusion that self-defence had been rendered impossible by the presence of more than one attackers.

As I understand it, defensive wounds are considered important.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 05/19/13 at 06:10 AM | #

“Was the $4 mil. number greatly exaggerated in order to make Knox seem like a sought-after celebrity?”

Most likely, or it was like a reported $50 million contract for a soccer player that is conditional on winning domestic and international cups and scoring 50 goals in a season. Possible, but has never been done.

You cannot rely on ANYTHING reported in the press without original source backup, and I doubt that any reporter has seen the actual contract. Knox was represented in negotiations with publishers by a prominent Washington attorney Robert Barnett and do we really think they are going to release information like what kind of cut the attorneys got, or how much tax Knox will be liable for, how much was paid to the ghost writer, and so on?

What about press releases from Harper Collins? Nope, nothing about the advance paid to Knox.

http://www.harpercollins.com/footer/release.aspx?id=987&b=&year=2012

“Financial terms were not disclosed, but an official with knowledge of the negotiations said the deal was worth $4m for world rights. The official was not authorized to discuss the negotiations and spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-news-blog/2012/feb/16/amanda-knox-harpercollins-book-deal

This is a long, long way from saying that she was paid a $4m advance, and the book has not achieved world wide publication.

Also note that Harper Collins is a division of Murdoch’s NewsCorp, also owner of Fox News, so one would expect Fox News, basically a Murdoch propaganda station, to promote the book vigorously.

It seems likely to me that the book was planned all along to try to recoup some or all of the costs of the defense. Where does any family find $1.5 million? Her father holds a very good job, but I imagine her parents may have had to liquidate their pension funds to raise this kind of money.

Posted by Domingo on 05/19/13 at 08:27 AM | #

@Domingo

Yes. And money that need not have been spent if one true account of events had been given in the first place - instead of multiple ‘versions’ of the truth.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 05/19/13 at 08:57 AM | #

“I’ll just say that I still have not been able to meet my first goal: repay my family for all expenses incurred in defending and staying close to me.” (One and a half million dollars, editor’s note)

This seems typical of the way Knox speaks when she appears to say something, but really says nothing.

Like what kind of agreement does she have in place for replaying her family? How much has each person chipped in and was this always thought of as a loan?

And why does she say “staying close to me” instead of saying “expenses for travel and accomodation.” And surely those travel expenses could only be a tiny, tiny part of the $1.5 million? How much would it cost the family to rent a decent apartment and a car in Perugia for a year?  A round trip airfare from Seattle to Rome is about $2000. How much was paid to the PR agency and how much to the lawyers?

And what about the money she owes to Patrick Lumumba? Does the payment to her family come first, or has Lumumba already been paid?

Really she has told us nothing.

Posted by Domingo on 05/19/13 at 10:07 AM | #

@SeekingUnderstanding

True. And why else would the Knoxs engage a PR consultancy unless they thought organised lying (or as it’s turned out disorganised lying) might be the only hope for their daughter?

I sometimes think it’s really the family that’s on trial here, especially when you see them all together on TV presenting the best possible image of a happy loving unit, lol. Smoke and mirrors. AK is a convicted wrong-doer (correctly I believe) but nevertheless her background is a big factor.

It’s similar to the “identified patient” scenario in psychotherapy, where the problem(s)the individual presents to the therapist are actually tied up with poor patterns of communication and relationship within the whole family - the patient can be seen as an emissary, presenting and acting out the family problems to the outside world.

Posted by Odysseus on 05/19/13 at 10:16 AM | #

Just to add a little to what I said above about the family’s expenses that Amanda has to repay.

Obviously one could well argue that these are private and confidential matters, and nobody’s business but the family’s.

However if you are trying to write the definitive book on what it is like to be falsely accused of the murder of a friend and room mate, and the case is still live, then you are obviously to some extent constrained by legal considerations, but surely a breakdown of the financial damage done to one’s family and the story of how they financed the defense would be one of the most fascinating aspects that one could describe in detail as this is an angle on being accused of murder that is rarely considered.

Posted by Domingo on 05/19/13 at 10:51 AM | #

Recent article in the DM…Knox is skint…boo hoo.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327032/Amanda-Knox-claims-penniless-facing-libel-lawsuits-memoir-says-going-change-story.html

With regards to the aquittal, Raf doesn’t seem to have a true grip on reality and quotes:
“It’s something like a very far-away thought in my mind. I already know that I’m innocent and we already have proved it. So for me, it’s kind of nonsense.”

Posted by Urbanist on 05/19/13 at 03:56 PM | #

Recent article in the DM…Knox is skint…boo hoo.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327032/Amanda-Knox-claims-penniless-facing-libel-lawsuits-memoir-says-going-change-story.html

With regards to the aquittal, Raf doesn’t seem to have a true grip on reality and quotes:
“It’s something like a very far-away thought in my mind. I already know that I’m innocent and we already have proved it. So for me, it’s kind of nonsense.”

Posted by Urbanist on 05/19/13 at 03:59 PM | #

(Sorry, posted twice by mistake)

Posted by Urbanist on 05/19/13 at 04:06 PM | #

@ Vivianna
I don´t know ,even Adolf Hitler considered himself a gifted artist.
Knox is going way over the top now, actually reaping money at the expense of Meredith´s death, which is especially heinous given the fact that Mr Kercher pleaded that she stay out of the spotkight as much as possible( see my first comment above) .
And as far as her literary skills are involved, I can´t see her winning the Pulitzer Prize in the future. So let´s hope that the subject of Creative Writing will get entirely banned as an academic discipline!

Posted by aethelred23 on 05/19/13 at 04:42 PM | #

Stupid woman. Why does she act like some big victim just because she does not have enough money leftover after “paying back her family”? First of all, nobody asked them to hire some stupid PR firm and incur debts for millions of dollars. Secondly, why the hell does she expect that she should have money leftover after paying her expenses.

She says her “Financial future is insecure”...Well, why not be a normal person for once, and think of something like…work for your money maybe? Like the rest of the world does. Instead of acting like the world owes you something. So far, I have not heard a single word about any honest plans to make a living. Instead all I hear about are books, movie deals and basically anything that would allow her to benefit from the murder. 

And why is she going all “Mez this, Mez that” now? Did she even know what Meredith’s nickname was?

Posted by Sara on 05/19/13 at 05:58 PM | #

@Sara

My thoughts too. Financially insecure? Welcome to the human condition AK. Now get a job.

Posted by Odysseus on 05/19/13 at 06:06 PM | #

@John Forbes, you say “If she only fingered Lumumba because she had been roughed up by the cops”. Exactly! They keyword here being “if”. If a person had been roughed up, they would understand why anyone else who was in the same situation would do what they did. She was never roughed up, and so she cannot understand why Sollecito blew her alibi. Her mind cannot come up with a fathomable reason. If she had indeed been roughed up, her first reaction should have been “Oh poor guy, I wonder what they did to him to make him say it”. After all, she accused a completely innocent person, so why should this have come as a big surprise?

Posted by Sara on 05/19/13 at 06:13 PM | #

Sara, I also had the same reaction after reading the DM article.  While her criminal record will prevent her from finding employment in some fields, there’s nothing preventing one of their Rotary Club cronies from offering her a cushy office job which won’t require much energy or personal investment.  But ah, that’s the sort of job that boring, uncreative people get, and it doesn’t come with flashy contracts or publicity tours. She probably doesn’t have patience for that, just like it happened with her Bundestag internship.

Posted by Vivianna on 05/19/13 at 07:29 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 Contrary To Reported Claim By Amanda Knox There Is Zero “Wave Of Defamation Suits”

Or to previous entry Knox’s Interrogation: A Major Contradiction Between Knox’s Book And Her Trial Testimony