Thursday, January 07, 2010

The False Accusation By Amanda Knox Against Patrick Lumumba

Posted by The Machine

This incisive video by our main poster ViaDellaPergola explores Amanda Knox’s accusations against Patrick Lumumba - made even though she knew very well he had then been at his bar.

These accusations resulted in Patrick’s arrest and imprisonment on the morning after the night that she first voiced them. Knox first made the claims as a WITNESS and so no lawyer was present, and so the statement was not entered into evidence.

But later on 6 November 2007 when she was in her prison cell as a SUSPECT she wrote her claims all out again. This purely voluntary written statement (alibi version 4)  by definition puts her at the scene of the crime. 

This written statement WAS entered into evidence - and not retracted or modified in any way until all believability had flown, and Patrick was already back home with his family.

In fact, it was not until she was on the stand on June 12 and 13 2009 that Amanda Knox came up with Alibi Version 5. This is the one never supported by Sollecito - where she claimed she was at his place all night.  Amanda Knox STILL has no alibi that stands firm.

Knox is being prosecuted by the Republic of Italy, not by Lumumba, on a calunnia charge. 

Explanation of


The charge of calunnia (art. 368) has been commonly translated as “slander” in the English/US media. This translation is incorrect, however, as calunnia is a crime with no direct equivalent in the respective legal systems.

The equivalent of “criminal slander” is diffamazione, which is an attack on someone”Ÿs reputation. Calunnia is the crime of making false criminal accusations against someone whom the accuser knows to be innocent, or to simulate/fabricate false evidence, independently of the credibility/admissibility of the accusation or evidence.

The charges of calunnia and diffamazione are subject to very different jurisprudence. Diffamazione is public and explicit, and is a more minor offence, usually resulting in a fine and only prosecuted if the victim files a complaint, while calunnia can be secret or known only to the authorities. It may consist only of the simulation of clues, and is automatically prosecuted by the judiciary.

The crimes of calunnia and diffamazione are located in different sections of the criminal code: while diffamazione is in the chapter entitled “crimes against honour” in the section of the Code protecting personal liberties, calunnia is discussed in the chapter entitled “crimes against the administration of justice”, in a section that protects public powers.



Machine, thanks. Amanda’s lies prove her guilt.

Posted by Hopeful on 01/08/10 at 03:36 AM | #


Machine, I’m glad you pointed out June 12 and 13, the dates AK testified and cooked her goose. She has tried to mislead, maneuver, and prevaricate.

‘Oh, we’re sad’ act is One Big Lie:

PMF has recent poster who reveals that even the “kissing and comforting” of AK and RS on crime scene video outside the cottage when Meredith’s body was found, was all an act! AK was sneaking looks at the cameras and playing to them. RS was giving her hand signals as in “keep on, you’re doing well.” RS was faking as he strokes her arm. She steals glances at the camera, then renews her troubled expression. They are both devious. I was outraged. I’d always sensed she was conceited by her very mannerisms, but this unveiled deeper depths of deception on RS’s part as well.

Amanda is impulsive, fiendish and clever. I doubt she cares that she has destroyed RS and RG and murdered Meredith. I think she’s cynical and believed she could baffle the police.  Her thin tale of lies could not match the ingenuity of investigators. For someone as insufferably arrogant as Foxy Knoxy, it’s laughable.

Proverbs 12:17 A good man is known by his truthfulness; a false man by deceit and lies.

Posted by Hopeful on 01/08/10 at 06:34 PM | #

An innocent person has no reason to lie.
From the beginning she said that she had nothing to fear but lies. Whose lies? What would make her think someone would lie on her and try to put the blame on her? Maybe because that’s exactly what she was planning. She and Rafaelle had planned to stick together but what about Rudy. She knew there was a possibility he would expose them. So her conniving acts continue as she plants the idea that someone might try to lie and say she is involved. Hopeful you’re correct when you say it’s laughable. I think “stupid liar” is a very fitting name for her. I’ve often heard people say “if the shoe fits, wear it”. To Amanda I would say “if the mask fits, wear it”. The mask of an assasin and the mask of a stupid liar.

Posted by Mama P on 01/08/10 at 11:07 PM | #


I was very interested to read about this kissing and comforting footage because this footage is used a lot and every time I see it, something about it doesn’t seem right. It seems contrived in some way and it doesn’t look like natural behaviour. Specifically, Amanda’s face looking upset and Raf’s stroking her arm seemed to be overdone and therefore to be artificial. It felt to me like they were acting for the cameras. I am glad after so many months of noticing this, that someone else has pointed it out.

When something doesn’t seem right we can’t always explain why exactly because behaviour can be such a subtle thing. But we interact with people enough to know the subtleties even if we can’t always put our finger on them. Granted, some things are culture specific, but some things are universal.

It’s interesting also that when the cameras were present Amanda looked upset but several eye witnesses have claimed that Amanda didn’t seem upset based on her behaviour and speech. I wonder why she couldn’t be consistent in her act? Sociopaths are supposed to be expert in this.

Why run away and look guilty when you can stay in Perugia and (try to)look upset, and therefore innocent?

I also think that is interesting that Edda had the idea to get Amanda out of Italy before her arrest. If she truly thought Amanda was innocent, what would she have to fear? Fear for her safety ie that the killer may return and harm her daughter would be a valid concern for any parent.

But Edda doesn’t seem to couch it in terms of getting Amanda out for her safety but rather in terms of avoiding her arrest. Someone please correct me if this last understanding of Edda’s regret is incorrect.

Posted by Vedantist on 01/10/10 at 07:24 AM | #

You’re welcome for my “borrowed light.” The poster was SomeAlibi on PMF, Jan. 2, 2010. He or she shows the video link, too. It’s worth going there for his analysis of this phony scene.

Thank you for voicing the dissonance in this scene. You explained my every feeling about how it rings false. I had discounted my niggling doubt thinking that the deep stress of the morning accounted for it, and their fear.  SomeAlibi points out that they are both in this together up to their eyeballs. I wish the jury could have his gloss on their subtle gameplan and fraudulent faces during the appeal.

I second your opinion about Edda trying to whisk Amanda back to U.S. to prevent her prosecution. It seems to me a symbol of how the mother and daughter are so close to clicking, yet cannot quite click. A miss is as good as a mile.

Had Edda left one day earlier to fly to Perugia shortly after Meredith was killed, history would have been different. Of course she’s also dealing with a rebellious, recalcitrant daughter. Edda knows best but Amanda’s hardheaded. Her recent story as Marie Pace screams “I have not surrendered, NO SURRENDER!” almost literally. She ends with the word “me” (of course), but also the image of Valentine’s Day. It evokes thoughts of Valentine’s Day Massacre and also Verdict Day. I have a lot more thoughts on her story, but I digress.

Posted by Hopeful on 01/10/10 at 02:59 PM | #

Machine, a brilliant presentation of an evil-doing, lying, unrepentant girl whose own mother and father, the separated parents who spawned this recalcitrant wrong-doer, have totally failed as parents and continue to cover up wrong-doing and conceal the truth.

How many lives have been destroyed or poisoned by the wicked murder of an innocent girl?

How many others have been drawn into the web of lies, deceit, torture and murder which have entangled the innocent as well as the guilty?

Posted by Tiziano on 01/21/10 at 12:22 PM | #

It was said that when crime scene pictures of Meredith’s tortured body were shown in the courtroom that she covered her face and could not look at the pictures.  I would love to be able to force her to look at all the pictures repeatedly and make her see what she has done.  Even if it wouldn’t cause a spontaneous confession, I would like her to feel the pain of the truth that she is trying so hard to avoid and outrun.  Damn her to hell and her lying cohorts, as well.

Posted by Mo-in-Mass.,USA on 01/21/10 at 01:46 PM | #

I was just thinking this: one of the questions we all have is why Guede did not say he was with Sollecito and Amanda right from the start. Instead he had this version of seeing a man who said to him something like the black man would take the blame.

Well, it could actually be what Sollecito said to him that night!!! That if he would talk, the black man would take the blame. RS & AK in fact came later to clean their evidence and leave his. Just in case he would be caught.

We all - or many of us - felt that Rudy has been threatened.

Amanda also said a weird thing after the verdict: she supposedly said to her mother “why did Rudy make my name, I never said anything about him”. If the translation respects what she actually said, she sounds surprised that, having kept her mouth shut about him, he should have done so too….

Posted by Patou on 01/29/10 at 09:54 PM | #

Patou brings up a good point, about Guede possibly being threatened.  In another thread I had wondered why Guede had not spoken up against Knox and Sollecito, and I do remember reading that he had been beaten up while in jail, so I’m thinking that perhaps Sollecito’s family’s connections and wealth, particularly with Sollecito’s sister Vanessa formerly being a carabinieri, that Guede is afraid to talk.  For all we know.

I think his statement “black man found, black man guilty” was his way of pointing out that he was being framed for the murder by the other two,  though he may never have touched the murder weapon.  He is still obviously guilty, as he took part, but I think he told the truth when he said that he did not kill Meredith, that he tried to help her.

Maybe they need to protect him while incarcerated and then perhaps they can get the rest of the story.

Posted by Mo-in-Mass.,USA on 02/05/10 at 01:38 PM | #

Make a comment


Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry A Month Has Passed And Senator Cantwell Still Hasn’t Answered Constituents’ Hard Questions

Or to previous entry American Lawyer Ted Simon Appointed To Help Out Italian Team On Appeal