Category: Examples 70-90
8. How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #70 To #90
Posted by Chimera
(Click here to go straight to Comments. Long post.)
1. The Full Series And What It Proves
And so we conclude this expose of yet another 90 Knox lies.
This series demonstrates how Knox, testifying for two days on the stand in 2009, was blatantly contradicted by Knox herself 90 times in her 2013 book.
The extended-version 2015 paperback corrected NOT A SINGLE LIE despite the numerous obvious defamations. Italy still has another several years to charge Knox, just as Sollecito was charged and put on trial in a Florence court.
In that Florence court Sollecito of course lost. He himself conceded he had maliciously made things up. He could really offer no defense.
Knox’s book is much, much worse. Her malicious stalking knows no bounds.
1. Click for Post: How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies OVERVIEW
2. Click for Post: How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #1 To #16
3. Click for Post: How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #17 To #26
4. Click for Post: How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #27 To #34
5. Click for Post: How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #35 To #38
6. Click for Post: How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #39 To #52
7. Click for Post: How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #53 To #69
8. Click for Post: How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #70 To #90
2. Telling Contradictions 70 To 90
70 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
FM: You underwent pressure, as you said, from the police who were asking you for information. Was that also true in your interrogations of the 2nd, the 3rd and the 4th, or only for the one from the 6th?
AK: The police repeated their questions and wanted, above all, for me to tell them who could have done this, but I didn’t know how to respond. I told them about all the people that I knew. The most intense pressure was in the Questura between Nov 5 and 6, because I never lived through anything like that. Before that, they would ask me and then say “Okay, fine.” They wouldn’t say, for example, “Maybe you don’t remember well” or “Maybe you’re a liar”, for example. The didn’t say those things.
GCM: So, there was a difference. All right. Go ahead.
FM: So the other statements were made in a more natural, a lighter way.
AK: Lighter, yes. But still always repeating.
FM: Who was present, the same policemen or different ones?
AK: There were so many policemen…
FM: When you say “so many”, what do you mean? Five, ten, fifteen, twenty?
AK: Well…
FM: For you, “so many” means how many?
AK: In the sense that I didn’t recognize the policemen from one time to another. There were some who were always there, for example, like the person who led the interrogation on the 5th. That was a person who was already there the first days that I was there. But in the sense that one person said they were from Rome, one was from Perugia, one from Cabria that was going to arrive, so it was difficult to know them all.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] AK in one sense seems to be backtracking on the number who were actually there. Of course, no explanation as to why they would all be there to spring this trap on AK. Remember, she showed up: (a) uninvited; (b) unannounced; and (c) refused to leave
71 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
FM: In your room in via della Pergola, was there a central light?
AK: There was one but it didn’t work, so I used the little bedside lamp.
FM: The lamp.
AK: The little lamp, yes.
FM: And you previously stated that you didn’t look for the lamp either; you only looked for your computer when you went into your room. You didn’t look for your money, you didn’t look for your lamp.
AK: So, I saw the window only the second time that I entered the house. The first time I went into the house I didn’t even think of looking to see if anything was missing, because I saw going into the living room, it really looked like someone had just gone out of the house, everything was in order, just as I had left it. But the second time, I didn’t even think of looking for the lamp: the computer was the important thing for me. All my documents were in it.
FM: But the first time, when you took your shower and then you returned to your room, first you undressed and then you dressed, all this, you did it without any light?
AK: It was the middle of the morning, there was already light.
FM: Did you open your shutters or were they already open?
AK: I don’t remember.
FM: To get to your room, to get to the window, you walked in the dark?
AK: But it wasn’t dark in my room. Often—
FM: I don’t know, I wasn’t there.
AK: All right. Usually I only turned on that little lamp at night. Really at night, or in the evening, when I wanted to…So I didn’t even think of turning it on. It really wasn’t dark in my room when I went in.
GCM: It wasn’t dark, but where was the light coming from? Natural light?
AK: Natural.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] No mention of any of this. The missing lamp is only a red flag, and despite repeated questioning, AK dances around it
72 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
FM: You mentioned to your friends in the Questura that according to you, Meredith died slowly.
AK: They said…
FM: How did you come to say that?
AK: I heard that her throat was cut, and from what I saw in CSI [Crime Scene Investigation] of these things, these things are neither quick nor pleasant. So when they said “We hope she died quickly,” like I don’t know, in some other way, I said “But what are you saying, her throat was cut, good Lord, bleargh.” I had remained at that point, that brutality, this death that was really blechh, that made a horrible impression. That was what really struck me, that fact of having your throat cut. It seemed so gross, and I imagined that it was a very slow and terrifying death. So when they said “We hope it was like this,” I said “No, I think it was really gross, disgusting.”
FM: And do you know if, when Meredith was murdered, she screamed or shrieked?
AK: I don’t know.
FM: Did someone tell you?
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] This also is missing from the book. Aside from being cold, there is no innocent way Knox could actually have known.
73 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
AK: Tell me? No, uh, no. No, I didn’t know if she screamed or not.
FM: Did you talk about it with someone immediately after?
FM: Did you talk about it with someone immediately after, when you were there at the house, about whether she screamed or shrieked?
AK: Not about that, no.
FM: And did the police talk to you about the scream or not, when they interrogated you on the 2nd, the 3rd or the 4th. Did they talk to you about the fact that she screamed?
AK: I don’t remember.
FM: Why did you say yesterday that they did? If I’m not mistaken.
GCM: Not on the 4th.
AK: The 2nd, 3rd and 4th…..On the 5th and 6th, they asked me if I heard the scream.
FM: So on the 5th and the 6th, the police told you that she screamed.
AK: They asked me if I had heard her scream. I said no. They said, but how is it possible that you didn’t hear her scream, if she was killed so near you? I said, “I don’t know, maybe I had my ears covered.”
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] Text missing on this topic
74 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
FM: On November 4, at 3:24 in the morning, you wrote a very long e-mail to 25 people. Okay?
AK: Yes.
FM: All right, but why did you write it at 3 in the morning, after having been in the Questura, where you said you were very tired, nervous, stressed and so forth. I mean, how did you come to write such a long e-mail instead of going to bed. This is the question.
AK: Precisely because I was stressed and felt exhausted because of the police, I had to somehow let off steam, because the whole situation was so heavy that I couldn’t even sleep. So I needed to write. I needed to let off steam by writing, especially to the people who were worrying about me. So I addressed it to all the people whose e-mail addresses I had in my e-mail. I wrote down everything and sent it to them. Then I felt better.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 8, Page 96] As many answers as the police had demanded of me, they weren’t giving up much information. Then I wrote a long e-mail, which I sent to
everyone at home, explaining what had happened since I’d gone back to the villa on Friday morning. I wrote it quickly, without a lot of thought, and sent it at 3:45 A.M.
It was another night of fretful sleep.
[Comments] Knox does admit to sending a long email, but doesn’t include it in her book. Read for yourself
75 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
AK: Yes.
FM: You told your mother that you were very worried.
AK: I didn’t understand why there would be Meredith’s blood on a knife that was found in Raffaele’s house. Because [tense laugh] for me that was impossible.
GCM: Excuse me, but with respect to the knife, which knife did they talk about? I saw that it remained a little general.
FM: Because she—oh, no, sorry, Presidente.
GCM: Yes? Which knife did they talk about?
AK: We were talking about a knife that had Meredith’s blood…on this knife. And for me, I couldn’t understand it because it was impossible.
GCM: So, with reference to that knife. Please go ahead, avvocato.
FM: Why did you say to your mother “I’m worried because there is a knife of Raffaele’s.”
AK: Well, I was worried because to me that was impossible. I didn’t understand how that could be.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comment] This is omitted from the book
76 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
AK: Yes, he came into my bar once, for example, but there was always this fact that I had to work there, he came in, I don’t think I even gave him a drink, because—I don’t remember the situation that well, but I think he came in and then went out. I don’t remember. But really, I didn’t know him at all.
GB: Did you exchange telephone numbers? Did you call each other?
AK: No.
GB: Listen. A witness came here, whose name was Kokomani.
AK: [Tiny snigger]
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH] No mention of Bongiorno at all in the book questioning AK at all
[Comments] Nothing says professionalism like snickering at someone’s name.
77 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
GB: Were you wearing that suit that we saw that the police was wearing? With the shoe covers, the gloves?
AK: No, no, I was still wearing my own clothes. They gave me those—things that you put on your shoes.
GB: The shoe covers. And gloves?
AK: They gave me gloves when I went upstairs to look through the knives.
GB: Yes, but excuse me. The day you went downstairs with the police and entered into the apartment downstairs, you went in together with the police and you didn’t have gloves?
AK: No, I didn’t have gloves.
GB: Did you see, during all these police operations every time you went there—but in the end, how many times did you go to the house? The day of the 2nd, of the finding, and on the 4th?
AK: Mhm.
GB: On those occasions, did you see whether the police all had on these shoe-covers, gloves, suits all the time?
AK: I saw that the people I was with had things on their feet. I don’t know if they all had gloves.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 25, Page 304/305]
When she answered Prosecutor Mignini’s questions, she was clear, straightforward, and self-serving. She was smarter than her fellow officers. She knew the court was looking for police slipups. “We did our jobs perfectly, all the time,” she testified. “We didn’t hit Amanda.” “We’re the good guys.”
When the defense questioned her, Napoleoni’s manner switched from professional””albeit dishonest””to exasperated, incredulous, and condescending. For instance, when Raffaele’s lawyer Giulia Bongiorno asked if the gloves police used at the crime scene were sterilized or one-use gloves, Napoleoni took a snarky tone, saying, “It’s the same thing.”
“By one-use gloves you mean that they are gloves that can be used only once, right?” Bongiorno asked.
“Obviously, yes,” Napoleoni said haughtily.
“Therefore it means that every time you touched an object you changed gloves?”
“No, it means that I put them on when I enter before I touch objects, and that’s what I did.
“But therefore with the same gloves, without changing gloves, you touched the various objects in the room in the course of the search?” Bongiorno asked.
“It’s obvious, yes.”
I knew it was the police’s job to analyze the scene of a crime, gather dues, and determine who did it. But here in Perugia the police and the prosecutor seemed to be coming at Meredith’s murder from the opposite direction. The investigation was sospettocentrico””“suspect-oriented” - they decided almost instantly that Raffaele and I were guilty and then made the clues fit their theory. Instead of impartiality, the prosecution’s forensic experts were relentless in their drive to incriminate us. Their campaign was astonishing for its brashness and its singleness of purpose.
[Comments] While AK doesn’t directly mentioning being questioned in the book, it appears that Bongirono is attempting to lay the groundwork for a contamination claim. Funny… in spite of not meeting any “international standards” when investigating AK/RS, the Italian CSI still did a great job against Guede. Odd…..
78 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
GB: Listen, it has been asked by the lawyer for the civil plaintiff if you had ever before experienced strange episodes with your imagination, or superimposing of memories. So, I wanted to complete that. Has it ever happened in your life before this to be interrogated with the methods that you have described?
AK: Absolutely not.
GB: So you connect this episode of your imagination with those methods?
AK: Certainly.
GB: When you refer to the fact that this famous interpreter told you an episode about her personal life, to solicit a memory from you, I wanted to understand: this interpreter, was she an interpreter that was speaking aloud and everyone was listening, or was it between just the two of you? And in what language did all this happen?
AK: Oh no, it was really just between the two of us. She was right here, and she was really talking right into my ear the whole time, saying “Come on, stop it,” because I was saying the truth because I wanted to go home, “come on, maybe you just don’t remember”, it was like this the whole time. It wasn’t like she was translating what I saw saying to them. Well yes, she also did that, but she was talking in my ear the whole time.
GB: So, it is correct to say that during the interrogation, this interpreter was having a conversation with you that could not be heard by third parties.
AK: Yes.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH] Text missing here
[Comments] Bongiorno is attempting the baseless and dishonest suggestion that Anna Doninno (Knox’s interpreter on November 5/6) was actually deliberately misrepresenting what AK was tell the police, and also what the police were telling AK.
79 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
AK: No. They wrote; they asked me: “Okay, what do you imagine?” And I said “Maybe I imagine this,” and they said “Okay, let’s write this, and then you tell us if it’s all right or not. So they were writing, saying “Okay, you met Patrick at Piazza Grimana, for example, you saw this, you covered your ears.” “Okay, fine, fine.”
GB: Okay. But when they made you sign the statement, you didn’t explicitly ask to reread it or to change anything?
AK: They gave it to me to read, but…well, I did like this and then I just signed.
GB: Did you ever have any judicial experiences when you were in America?
AK: Absolutely not.
GB: From the telephone call we heard about yesterday, you had a friend who was consulting a lawyer. You never thought in those days, seeing that you were constantly called to the Questura, about calling a lawyer?
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH] Text missing here
[Comments] It is still never explained: the police have all this very abundant evidence (according to AK/RS), and it proves guilt against Guede is rocksolid. However, the police have to ask AK to imagine what happened, and they apparently “selectively contaminate” the crime scene.
80 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
GB: When you, on the morning of the finding of the body, when before that you went to take a shower, you said: “I got out of the shower and didn’t have any shoes, so I jumped on the bathmat.”
AK: Yes.
GB: This bathmat that we’re talking about is the bathmat that you saw projected here in court in a video?
AK: Yes.
GB: Do you remember how you slid with the bathmat? When you took it from the bathroom to your room, did you have both bare feet on it or just one foot.
AK: Sometimes I…heh heh…by mistake, I put my foot on the floor like this, but I tried—I slid along trying to kind of make little jumps with the bathmat, but I didn’t quite succeed.
GB: But it can be said that you were pressing on the bathmat with your foot?
AK: Yes.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH] Text missing here
[Comments] Bongirono is lobbing softballs, but AK still doesn’t make sense
81 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
LM: Just a couple of details. Luca Maori, Raffaele Sollecito’s defense. Referring to the moment in which you found yourselves, you and Raffaele, in front of the house in via della Pergola, at the moment in which you discovered that there were some problems, and then Raffaele called his sister. Did you hear Raffaele’s telephone conversation with his sister?
AK: No, they were talking between themselves on the telephone, and I was nearby, but I wasn’t listening.
LM: And do you know what Raffaele’s sister advised him to do?
AK: I didn’t hear her words, but she advised him to call the police or—as I understood it, to call the police.
LM: Then, did you hear Raffaele’s next telephone call, to the police or carabinieri? Did you hear it?
AK: Yes, Raffaele called the police, yes. I was there, nearby.
LM: Okay. What did Raffaele say? Do you remember?
AK: Mm…it was in Italian.
[WTBH] Text missing here
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comment] No mention that Lucas Maori asked AK any questions either
82 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
CP: They, who they? Sorry, but could you give names or titles? You were giving your statement to the PM.
AK: The PM and the policemen who were there. But when I made that declaration, also the PM was one of the people who said to me, “So, you did this, you followed this person, you heard this, but why?” That’s how it was.
CP: So it was the pubblico ministero who put the words “I heard thuds” into your mouth?
AK: He wanted to know how come I hadn’t—
CP: I asked you a question.
[WTBH] Text missing here
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comment] Carlo Pacelli (Lumumba lawyer) asks AK about yet another incriminating comment—that she admitted to hearing “thuds”, but that doesn’t appear in the book
83 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
CP: She won’t answer me, Presidente. Ahh. You said that you had good relations with Patrick.
AK: Yes.
CP: Then why, in your statement of Nov 6 2007 at 5:45, did you say you were very frightened of Patrick.
AK: Because, imagining him as being capable of murdering someone, at that moment I was scared.
CP: Did someone suggest this to you? The PM?
AK: They asked me what Patrick was like? Was he violent? I said no, he’s not violent. But are you scared of him? And I said yes, because thinking that he was the person who killed her, I was scared. Also because in those days I was thinking generally that there was a murderer, and I was frightened.
CP: Why didn’t you say this to the police in the statement of 1:45?
AK: Say what?
CP: That you were afraid of Patrick.
AK: Because they hadn’t asked me yet.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH] Text missing here
[Comments] More B.S. on the witness stand. Perhaps AK means “(If) I imagine PL as the killer (it will get me off the hook)”
84 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
CP: When you gave your declaration to the examining tribunal, you confirmed the memorandum of Nov 6. Why didn’t you exonerate Patrick?
AK: I wrote in the memorandum that I was trying to express my doubts. So I was confirming the fact that I wrote those things to say that what I had said before was an error. Including what I had said about Patrick.
CP: Listen, in your memorandum of November 6, you explicitly say—you were writing in English?
AK: Yes.
CP: And you wrote it freely, yes?
AK: Yes.
CP: You say “I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrick.”
AK: In my memorandum, I recognized the fact that I had made those declarations, but that I had a lot of doubts as to the facts that were in my declaration.
CP: Do you know what the word “confirm” means in Italian?
AK: I wrote in English.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH] Text missing here
[Comment] Pacelli again trying to get a straight answer from AK as to why she didn’t retract the false accusation
85 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
AK: Okay.
CDV: I read on page 6 that you said in that conversation: “Yes, when I was in the room with him, I said something,” between parentheses ‘laughs’, “and then when I went back into the room, I was crying. I was very, very worried about this thing with the knife, because there’s a knife from Raffaele’s…” First question: this was on November 17. What knife were you talking about, and how could you know about this knife at this date?
AK: I heard for the first time about the knife from a police inspector while I was in prison. He showed me an internet article which said that there was blood on a knife that they had found in Raffaele’s house. And I said that for me, I was worried because for me, that was just impossible. I didn’t understand how such a thing could be.
CDV: So, when you’re talking about there being a knife from Raffaele’s, you meant this knife that you had heard about in this way, from Raffaele’s house.
AK: Yes.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] Carlo Dalla Vedova is trying to get Knox to explain away get another incriminating remark: that she knew the knife came from Sollecito’s home
86 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
AK: They’re very—
INT:—very agitated.
AK: Yes. Raffaele also. I am angry. First I was scared. Then I was sad. Then I was confused. Then I was angry, and now I don’t know. I can’t [murmurs in English to interpreter: “I can’t really wrap my mind”. Interpreter helps her.] really wrap my mind around this. I didn’t see her body. I didn’t see her blood. It’s almost as though it hadn’t happened. But it did happen, in the room right next to mine. There was blood in the bathroom where I took a shower today. The door of the house was open to the wind and now I am without a house and forever, without a person who was a part of my life. And I don’t know what to do or think.
CDV: Perfect. I request the acquisition of this document for the dossier.
GCM: All right. Do you have any other questions, avvocato?
CDV: There is another document extracted from the same diary, I’ll call it that. Also this one, if I could ask you to confirm it and to read it? And in between, I’ll ask this question. When you were in the Questura, you were writing this?
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] Again, nothing of this in AK’s book, but here AK is trying to dial back the callous remarks she keeps making
87 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
AK: Yes I said “hit”, which means hit (punched).
CDV: No, you had clearer ideas compared with other times? When you wrote, you felt less confused?
AK: Yes, I felt less confused.
IVTO: (inaudible)
GCM: Please. The defence has asked you, when you wrote, if you found yourself in a calm situation, composed, attentive, alert basically?
AK: I did this precisely to calm myself.
CDV: So, when you say: “I have clearer ideas than before, but I’m still lacking some details and I know this isn’t helpful to me”, what did you mean exactly? That you felt more sure at that moment about what had happened?
AK:
I felt that the truth of the situation wasn’t that which had happened in the questura. So I felt it necessary to write these things because for me that was the truth.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] F my life. Are we going to start with the “best truths” again?
88 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
GCM: You have said that you meant to go to Gubbio the day after, at what time had you planned to leave?
AK: Only for a day, we’d thought of “¦
GCM: Yes, but in the morning, after lunch? [156]
AK: When we woke up, we’d go there and usually “¦
GCM: Go where?
AK: To Gubbio.
GCM: As soon as you woke up you would have gone to Gubbio.
AK: Yes, it was very relaxed this “¦
GCM: How would you have gone there?
AK: He has a car.
GCM: And so you would have left for Gubbio as soon as you had woken up, is that right?
AK: Yes, get ready, then leave “¦
GCM: However, you have said that as soon as you woke up you went to the house in via della Pergola.
AK: Yes.
GCM: You didn’t leave immediately for Gubbio why this change of plan?
AK: It wasn’t really a change of plan, he was still asleep, so I thought I’d take a shower before leaving because I also wanted to change my clothes
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] In the book—at least in parts of it—AK claims she wasn’t alarmed by what she saw. So why not just: (a) flush; (b) wipe up the blood; (c) close and lock the door; and (d) head out to Gubbio?
89 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
GCM: Were you at Raffaele’s house?
AK: Yes, I think I was “¦
IVTO: (inaudible)
GCM: What?
AK: Yes, I had returned to Raffaele’s house, I asked him what I should do and he said ring my flatmates. So I called her when I was in Raffaele’s apartment. But then I think she called me again while we were walking to the house, my house.
GCM: So, you called Romanelli when you were at Raffaele’s house?
AK: Yes.
GCM: That’s how it was?
AK: Yes. [163]
GCM: The first call was mde from Raffele’s house.
AK: From Raffaele’s, yes.
GCM: I put it to you that, at least from Romanelli’s statements, it happened differently.
AK: Okay.
GCM: “She told me that she had taken a shower, that it seemed to her that there was blood, and that she was going to Raffaele’s”.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] Judge Massei picks up on a serious discrepancy. AK claims in court to have made the call from Sollecito’s house. Yet, Filomena told the Court that AK told her she was heading to Sollecito’s house. Very observant of the Judge.
90 Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009
AK: What happened is that we were “¦ he had called the police. While he was talking to them we were there and then we went out of the house and immediately the police arrived, the two of them together.
GCM: Now, I’d also like to ask you, it has emerged that, when they searched Raffaele Sollecito’s house, perhaps on November 6, but I don’t want to err, there was strong smell of bleach. We also have the testimony of the lady who cleaned the apartment of Raffaele Sollecito, who says that bleach was never used.
AK: I never used bleach in Raffaele’s house.
GCM: Did you ever see Raffaele use it?
AK: No.
GCM: How do you explain the presence of the smell, which is a smell “¦
AK: I have never smelled bleach in Raffaele’s house
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] Again, missing from the book, but AK is asked about the smell of bleach.
Posted on 11/01/17 at 12:00 AM by Chimera • Click here for my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Knox Provides Proofs, Examples 70-90
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Comments here (7)
Archived in Knox Provides Proofs, Examples 70-90
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Comments here (7)