Friday, October 28, 2016

Netflixhoax 15: Omitted - Amanda Knox’s Incriminating Lies To The Police, Prosecution And Courts

Posted by The Machine

In 2008 Knox lawyers publicly ask that she stop lying publicly; one resigned earlier over lies.

Netflix’s Amanda Knox is an extreme example of misleading bias by cherrypicking. This post is another in our ongoing series, the mothership for material for this media-friendly page online soon.

Overview Of This Post

The filmmakers Blackhurst, McGinn and Morse allow Amanda Knox to portray herself as a terrified ingenue.

One who lied about Diya Lumumba killing Meredith and placed herself at the cottage only because she was subjected to a coercive police interrogation and was physically assaulted.

They don’t question ANY of the witnesses who were present when she was questioned at the police station to contradict her account of events - witnesses who testified as to exactly what did happen over many days at the trial in 2009.

They allow her account of her questioning to go unchallenged though NOT ONE JUDGE at pre-trial hearings, the trial, first appeal, Supreme Court, second appeal, and Supreme Court appeal considered any of her varying accounts to be the truth.

The filmmakers also don’t address the fact that Amanda Knox lied repeatedly to the police and others both before and after her questioning on 5 November 2007, let alone provide viewers with a plausible innocent explanation for these lies.

In this article, I will detail the lies Amanda Knox told the police and others using the official court reports and court testimonies as well as Amanda Knox’s book Waiting to Be Heard.

Instances Of Knox Lies Refuted

Amanda Knox lied to Filomena about where she was on 2 November 2007.

But the Nencini report, 2014, page 174, said:

“In the first telephone call the defendant made to Filomena Romanelli, she clearly said that she would go back to Raffaele’s place to tell him about the strange things discovered in the apartment, and then return with him to check the situation. This circumstance is clearly false, since when Amanda Knox made the first call to Romanelli at 12:08:44 pm on 2 November 2007 she was at already Raffaele Sollecito’s apartment and not at 7 Via Della Pergola.

This fact is certain because it is gleaned from the telephone records, as has been already been said, and specifically from the fact that the telephone call above connected to the cell that served precisely 130 Via Garibaldi, a cell that is not within reach of anyone who would have been at 7 Via Della Pergola.

Amanda Knox claimed that she and Sollecito called 112 before the arrival of the postal police officers at the cottage.

But the Nencini report, 2014, page 176, said:

“There was one specific circumstance about which, this time, both the defendants lied. This is about the succession of events at the moment when the postal police intervened on the spot.”

And the Nencini report, 2014, page 179, said:

“From the testimony of the witnesses referred to above it thus clearly emerges how both of the defendants (but to be precise it was Raffaele Sollecito to tell the police this) declared to Inspector Battistelli that they were sitting there awaiting the arrival of the Carabinieri whom they had called. However Inspector Battistelli indicated in his service notes that he arrived on the scene at 12:35 pm, and questioned in the court hearings by the Judges of First Instance Court, he explained that he looked at his watch at the moment when he arrived at the cottage.” (The Nencini report, page 179).

Amanda Knox told the postal police on 2 November that Meredith always locked her door.

But the Massei trial report, 2010, page 31, said:

“This last circumstance, downplayed by Amanda, who said that even when she went to the bathroom for a shower Meredith always locked the door to her room (see declarations of Marco Zaroli, page 180, hearing of February 6, 2009 and declarations of Luca Altieri, page 218, hearing of February 6, 2009), had alarmed Ms. Romanelli more. She said she was aware of only once, when she had returned to England and had been away for a few days, that Meredith had locked the door of her room. (This circumstance was confirmed by Laura Mezzetti, page 6, hearing of February 14, 2009).”.

Knox pretended she hadn’t called Meredith when she spoke to Filomena.

But the Massei trial report, 2010, page 387, said:

“Amanda called Romanelli, to whom she started to detail what she had noticed in the house (without, however, telling her a single word about the unanswered call made to Meredith, despite the question expressly put to her by Romanelli)”

Amanda Knox falsely claimed in her e-mail to friends on 4 November 2007 that she had called Filomena first

But she had actually called Meredith a minute earlier.  The Nencini appeal report, 2014, page 169, said:

“A first discrepancy is immediately noticeable between what the defendant states in the memorial and what is ascertained from the telephone records.”

“At the moment when Amanda Marie Knox rang Filomena Romanelli she had already made a call to the English telephone used by Meredith Kercher, not therefore the opposite.”

Amanda Knox claimed that when she called Meredith’s English phone after speaking to Filomena, it “just kept ringing, no answer”.

But the Nencini appeal report, 2014, page 170, said:

“From the telephone records it appears that the telephone call made at 12:11:02 pm to the Italian Vodafone service of the victim lasted 3 seconds”

Amanda Knox claimed she slept until around 10:00am the next morning.

But the Nencini appeal report, 2014, page 158, said:

“What the Court finds proved is that at 6:02:59 am on 2 November 2007 they were not in fact asleep, as the defendants claim, but rather the occupants were well awake. At 5:32 am on 2 November 2007 the computer connected to a site for listening to music, remaining connected for around half an hour. Therefore, at 5:32 am someone in the house occupied by Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito sat in front of the computer and listened to music for around half an hour and then, at 6:02:59 am, switched on Raffaele Sollecito’s mobile phone”¦”

Amanda Knox claimed she was at Sollecito’s apartment when she received Diya Lumumba’s text message.

But the Nencini appeal report, 2014, pages 132-132, said: 

“At 8:18 pm and 12 seconds, Amanda Marie Knox received a text message sent to her by Patrick Lumumba, in which he informed her that it would not be necessary for her to go to the bar to carry out her usual work. At the time of receipt, Amanda Marie Knox’s handset connected via the sector 3 mast at Torre dell’Acquedotto, 5 dell’Aquila, as shown by phone records entered in evidence. This mast cannot be reached from the vicinity of 130 Corso Garibaldi, the home of Raffaele Sollecito. According to the findings of the judicial police entered in evidence, this mast could be reached by anyone in Via Rocchi, Piazza Cavallotti or Piazza 4 Novembre, all locations in Perugia which are intermediate between 130 Corso Garibaldi, the home of Raffaele Sollecito, and Via Alessi, where the “Le Chic” bar is located.

“From this set of facts established in the case, Amanda Marie Knox’s claim, according to which she received Patrick Lumumba’s text message while she was at 130 Corso Garibaldi, appears false. Given the mast connected to and the time, it is reasonable to assume that, when Amanda received the message, she had already left Raffaele Sollecito’s home and was on her way to the “˜Le Chic’ bar. Presumably, she then turned around and went back.”

Amanda Knox initially claimed she was at Sollecito’s apartment on the night of the murder.

But Sollecito categorically stated in his own signed witness statement that Amanda Knox wasn’t at his apartment on the night of the murder: Raffaele Sollecito’s witness statement, 5 November 2007, said:

“At 9pm I went home alone and Amanda said that she was going to Le Chic because she wanted to meet some friends. We said goodbye. I went home, I rolled myself a spliff and made some dinner, but I don’t remember what I ate. At around eleven my father phoned me on the house phone. I remember Amanda wasn’t back yet. I surfed on the Internet for a couple of hours after my father’s phone call, and I stopped only when Amanda came back, about one in the morning, I think.”

And Judge Bruno and Judge Marasca of the Fifth Chambers stated in their 2015 report that Amanda Knox was at the cottage when Meredith was killed.

The Bruno and Marasca report, 2015, said:

“”¦ now we note, regarding Amanda Knox, that her presence in the dwelling, that was the “theatre of the murder”, was proclaimed in the trial process in alignment with her own admissions, including those contained in her signed statement in the part where she states she was in the kitchen, after the young English girl [Meredith] and another person went off to Kercher’s room for sexual intercourse, she heard a harrowing scream from her friend, so piercing and unbearable that she fell down huddled on the floor, holding her hands tightly against her ears so as not to hear more.

We do indeed share the previous judge [Nencini’s] opinion that this part of the accused’s story is reliable, due to the plausible observation that it was she who first put forward a possible sexual motive for the murder and mentioned the victim’s harrowing scream, at a time when the investigators still didn’t have the results of the examination of the corpse or the autopsy, nor the witness information, which was subsequently gathered, about the victim’s scream and the time it was heard.

Amanda Knox told the police she hadn’t replied to Diya Lumumba’s text message.

But Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, 2008, page 36, said:

“the police, who merely asked Ms Knox whether she had replied to the message that he had sent her, that her phone showed she had received, and to the young woman’s negative response it was put to her that [her telephone showed] that a reply was in fact given.”

Amanda Knox claimed the police hit her.

But the witnesses who were present when Knox was questioned, including her interpreter, testified under oath at the trial in 2009 that she wasn’t hit.

These repudiations are from the relevant court transcripts:

Giuliano Mignini: ... violence, of “¦

Monica Napoleoni: But absolutely not!

Mignini:  You remember it”¦ you’ve described it; however, I’ll ask it. Was she threatened? Did she suffer any beatings?

Anna Donnino: Absolutely not.

GM: She suffered maltreatments?

AD:  Absolutely not.

Carlo Pacelli:  In completing and consolidating in cross-examination the questions by the public prosecutor, I refer to the morning of the 6th of November, to the time when Miss Knox had made her summary information. In that circumstance, Miss Knox was struck on the head with punches and slaps?

Anna Donnino:  Absolutely not.

CP:  In particular, was she struck on the head by a police woman?

AD:  Absolutely not!

CP:  Miss Knox was, however, threatened?

AD:  No, I can exclude that categorically!

CP:  With thirty years of prison”¦ ?

AD:  No, no, absolutely not.

CP:  Was she, however, sworn at, in the sense that she was told she was a liar?

AD:  I was in the room the whole night, and I saw nothing of all this.

CP:  So the statements that had been made had been made spontaneously, voluntarily?

AD:  Yes.

Carlo Della Valla:  This”¦

Giancarlo Massei:  Pardon, but let’s ask questions”¦ if you please.

CP:  You were also present then during the summary informations made at 5:45?

AD:  Yes.

CP:  And were they done in the same way and methods as those of 1:45?

AD:  I would say yes. Absolutely yes.

CP:  To remove any shadow of doubt from this whole matter, as far as the summary information provided at 5:45 Miss Knox was struck on the head with punches and slaps?

AD:  No.

CP:  In particular, was she struck on the head by a policewoman?

AD:  No.

Knox told the police she hadn’t smoked marijuana.

But Amanda Knox herself in “Waiting to Be Heard” said:

“When we finished, a detective put me through a second round of questioning, this time in Italian. Did we ever smoke marijuana at No.7 Via della Pergola? ‘No, we don’t smoke,’ I lied. squirming inwardly as I did.”

Amanda Knox was forced to accuse Diya Lumumba of murder.

But Amanda Knox voluntarily told the police and her interpreter that Diya Lumumba had killed Meredith.

Anna Donnino: “It’s a thing that has remained very strongly with me because the first thing that she did is that she immediately puts her hands on her ears, making this gesture rolling her head, curving in her shoulders also and saying “˜It’s him! It’s him! It was him!’”

Rita Ficarra: “She suddenly put her hands to her head, burst out crying and said to us “˜It’s him, it’s him, it was him, he killed her’.

Amanda Knox then claimed Diya Lumumba killed Meredith in two witness statements she insisted on writing.

But the Nencini appeal report, 2014, page 114, said:

“Amanda Marie Knox accused Patrick Lumumba of the murder at 1:45 am on 6 November 2007.”

“Amanda Marie Knox repeated the allegations before the magistrate, allegations which she never retracted in all the following days.”

Also Amanda Knox reiterated her false allegation against Diya Lumumba on 6 November 2007 when under no pressure.

“[Amanda] herself, furthermore, in the statement of 6 November 2007 (admitted into evidence ex. articles 234 and 237 of the Criminal Procedure Code and which was mentioned above) wrote, among other things, the following:

“I stand by my [accusatory] statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrick”¦in these flashbacks that I’m having, I see Patrick as the murderer”¦”

This statement was that specified in the notes of 6 November 2007, at 20:00, by Police Chief Inspector Rita Ficarra, and was drawn up following the notification of the detention measure, by Amanda Knox, who “requested blank papers in order to produce a written statement to hand over” to the same Ficarra. (Massei report, page 389.)

For several weeks Amanda Knox let the police believe Diya Lumumba killed Meredith.

But the Nencini report, pages 115-116, said:

She never retracted her false and malicious allegation the whole time he was in prison. This verdict from the 2013-14 Nencini Appeal Court was THE FINAL WORD from the courts; the Supreme Court did not reverse it: 

“Amanda Marie Knox maintained her false and malicious story for many days, consigning Patrick Lumumba to a prolonged detention. She did not do this casually or naively. In fact, if the young woman’s version of events is to be relied upon, that is to say, if the allegations were a hastily prepared way to remove herself from the psychological and physical pressure used against her that night by the police and the prosecuting magistrate, then over the course of the following days there would have been a change of heart. This would inevitably have led her to tell the truth, that Patrick Lumumba was completely unconnected to the murder. But this did not happen.

“And so it is reasonable to take the view that, once she had taken the decision to divert the attention of the investigators from herself and Raffaele Sollecito, Amanda Marie Knox became fully aware that she could not go back and admit calunnia. A show of remorse would have exposed her to further and more intense questioning from the prosecuting magistrate. Once again, she would bring upon herself the aura of suspicion that she was involved in the murder.

Indeed, if Amanda Marie Knox had admitted in the days following to having accused an innocent man, she would inevitably have exposed herself to more and more pressing questions from the investigators. She had no intention of answering these, because she had no intention of implicating Rudy Hermann Guede in the murder.

“By accusing Patrick Lumumba, who she knew was completely uninvolved, because he had not taken part in the events on the night Meredith was attacked and killed, she would not be exposed to any retaliatory action by him. He had nothing to report against her. In contrast, Rudy Hermann Guede was not to be implicated in the events of that night because he, unlike Patrick Lumumba, was in Via della Pergola, and had participated [100] in the murder. So, he would be likely to retaliate by reporting facts implicating the present defendant in the murder of Meredith Kercher.

“In essence, the Court considers that the only reasonable motive for calunnia against Patrick Lumumba was to deflect suspicion of murder away from herself and from Raffaele Sollecito by blaming someone who she knew was not involved, and was therefore unable to make any accusations in retaliation. Once the accusatory statements were made, there was no going back. Too many explanations would have had to be given to those investigating the calunnia; explanations that the young woman had no interest in giving.”

Knox claimed that Mignini questioned her and made suggestions on 5 November 2007.

But the transcript of Knox’s cross-examination at trial 2009 said:

Amanda Knox: The declarations were taken against my will. And so, everything that I said, was said in confusion and under pressure, and, because they were suggested by the public minister [Giuliano Mignini].

Carlo Pacelli: Excuse me, but at 1:45, the pubblico ministero was not there, there was only the judicial police.


The computer and telephone records as well as the corroborative testimony of multiple eyewitnesses provide irrefutable proof that Amanda Knox lied repeatedly to the police and others. Many of these lies were told before and after her questioning on 5 November 2007, so they can’t be attributed to police coercion.

There isn’t a plausible innocent explanation for these lies. Perhaps that’s the reason why the filmmakers don’t address them - they presumably don’t want to portray Amanda Knox in a negative light. It would be far harder to persuade their audience that Amanda Knox is an innocent victim, which is undeniably their ultimate objective. They were never interested in making an objective and balanced documentary that give viewers the full picture. 

Judge Bruno and Judge Marasca clearly couldn’t brush these numerous lies under the carpet and pretend they didn’t exist because Judge Massei, Judge Nencini and Judge Chieffi had detailed Amanda Knox’s lies in their reports. They acknowledge that Amanda Knox lied and claimed she had lied to cover for Rudy Guede.

The Netflix filmmakers completely hide all of this in their documentary.


So the report may be on the long list for the Oscar for documentaries.  Gimme a break. We will “queer that pitch” be assured.

As documentaries go, realistically, among the world’s worst. What DID the Netflix team do with their time? They had years to get the basics right.

We first hear about them in 2010 when the Knox PR was really getting up to speed after the total wipeout at trial. Their whole time was spent with Knox’s family getting the latest well-practiced pitch.

The WORST possible introduction to the case was to be at the Hellmann appeal, as they were - none of the prosecution’s powerful case, lots of defense innuendo, Hellmann losing control of his court, Prosecutor Comodi quite openly complaining to the Italian press that the judges were showing strong bias against them.

The Umbria region’s head prosecutor at the time, Dr Galati, counseled her that the Supreme Court would reverse any “not guilty” finding - as they did.

There were a number of red flags the Netflix team could have seen if not so blinded by fanaticism about simply getting Knox off.

Machine has picked some very powerful ones, mostly repudiations of Knox right there in court. Had the pre-trial hearings been known about and included in the Netflix report the biased Netflix effort would have hit a wall.

So much for a rush to judgment driven by the UK press…

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/29/16 at 08:18 AM | #

There are other things quite vital to getting it right which the team “missed”.

They are coming up in the series: the real Guede, the real Mignini, the real Nick Pisa (we quoted his great reports a lot).

And the real Knox, or rather Knoxes #1-4.

What we got in 2008-2009 was a highly talkative, flippant and increasingly daffy Knox - the daffiness volume was turned up to full volume at trial.

That was until the Knox under cross-examination emerged as strident, rude, callous, jeering, and evasive (see post above) and shot daffy Knox in the foot.

Disaster struck. So what was next? Lose big at trial in 2009 and in 2011 the funereal “victim” Knox is wheeled out.

The one with new dark clothing and hairdo and expression making her older and sadder which we saw all through the Hellmann appeal.

Launched via a long “spontaneous” speech with plenty of sniffles on Hellmann Day One. The Knox in hundreds of media reports - and now in this.

A well tried ploy - by the mafias and public relations both. It always suckers a few.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/29/16 at 09:01 AM | #

She is certainly having a laugh.

Please don’t forget ‘the real Raffaele Sollecito’.  Pitches himself as the shy boy-bimbo who preferred computer games to partying with girls.  Introduced Knox to her ‘signature perfume’ or perhaps he thought her less than fragrant..?  He is the village idiot who has to have his dad ring him up at all hours to check he hasn’t gone mad with the LSD and the machete.  He is the block of ice post-murder; resolutely looking down, avoiding looking at the camera.  He has scratches across his chin with a big yellow scarf to cover his neck.  Whilst Knox gazes towards the house and the camera men, Sollecito knows to studiously ignore it.  He acts the nonchalant passerby with not a care in the world.  Just a passing witness, here to comfort his girlfriend, who somehow suddenly seems sex mad and so he kisses her and rubs her arm.  Calm down, he appears to be saying.  Act normal.

The pair look dishevelled and as though they haven’t slept for days.

Although Knox was there earlier (she claims) and the pair have now returned almost one hour later, she is without a coat.  Clearly she popped out of doors just for a moment and saw the cops!  She calls out and Sollecito quickly joins her.  Quick ring the police.  Will do as soon as I get Dad off the phone.  He’s been ringing all morning wondering where I was last night.

‘I’ll ask Vanessa for her advice first,’ says Sollecito.  Ring the frigging cops! is her advice.  He rings the Carabinieri, a script ready prepared.  My girlfriend found some strange things.  There’s been a burglary and we don’t know where her roommate is.  Nothing’s been taken.

Knox says in her email home later that she was very alarmed when she tried Meredith’s door and it was locked, banging louder and louder and shouting her name.  Raffaele had to pull me back from trying to look through her window from the balcony.

Sollecito had to try to break down the door, which is why there’s a crack in the door frame.  Now when the police arrive they are sitting on the wall outside, calm, concerned passersby, who were just on their way to a day trip to Gubbio.

They are so worried about Meredith it takes them all of, oh, another twenty minutes whilst they finished their breakfast first and another twenty minutes before calling, dad, Vanessa and then the Carabinieri.  It’s not unusual for the door to be locked Knox reassures the postal police.  Filomena turns up, frantic with worry.  Luca, break the door down now!  Knox hurriedly rings Mom, for the first time since leaving home.  She and Sollecito stand well back, in the kitchen.  They know what lies behind the door.

In the car to the Questura Sollecito prods Luca for clues as to what the police said and what they knew.  Knox heard Filomna shout, a foot!

In the Questura Knox is completely deranged and can barely contain herself.  She climbs over Sollecito’s lap unable to contain her excitement. 

The British friends are devastated.  Sollecito introduces himself.  My girlfriend found the body.  Knox is not as icily cool as Sollecito, she bursts out in profanities and graphically describes Meredith’s wounds.  She brags to people on the phone, I found the body! 

Sollecito remains calm and composed the whole time.  He knows how to play a poker face.  His dad is furious.  This brazen woman has taken his wayward son from his grasp and made him do something unspeakable.  He tries to help by giving his boy an alibi for the copious presence of water and dismantled pipes at his son’s abode.  Dad tell them I told you about this when you rang at 8.42.  I never want to see Amanda again.

Sollecito’s DNA found on the bra clasp?  Whoops!

The murder weapon found at his apartment strongly smelling of bleach, which he never used?  Whoops!  I’ll write to dad and explain how Meredith’s DNA might have got on its blade.

Papa, you have to believe I am innocent.  Look at my innocent face and my affable grin.  I am just your little boy who enjoys computer games.  I don’t know where Amanda was between eight and one.  You have to believe me Dad, because it’s all your fault I’m an orphan and had to go to that orphan’s boarding school.  See, does my face look guilty?  Do I look remorseful?  Am I bothered?

Prosecutor Mignini describes Sollecito as ‘icy cold’ in his closing submissions to the Matteini custody hearing. 

As cold as frozen fish.

Posted by KrissyG on 10/29/16 at 10:53 AM | #

Much amused by ‘shouts of joy’ in certain quarters at news Netflix’s Amanda Knox[/i] has been submitted for Academy Award consideration

Except when you look at the full list at Oscars Org you see quite an impressive collection of documentaries that are a lot better, and,


“Several of the films have not yet had their required Los Angeles and New York qualifying releases. Submitted features must fulfill the theatrical release requirements and comply with all of the category’s other qualifying rules in order to advance in the voting process. A shortlist of 15 films will be announced in December”.

And last I checked, the movie had not been shown in a commercial theater in New York or Los Angeles (UCLA Film School doesn’t count).

Posted by Ergon on 10/29/16 at 02:10 PM | #

Netflix turned a blind eye to Knox’s lies. Netflix hit a truth iceberg and tore a hole in their hull, the truth sank with this documentary. Their documentary is a half-baked attempt to paint a picture of Knox innocence, easy to do when they leave out half the information police learned about Knox.

Thank you, The Machine, for this factual account of Knox’s perjury. Phone records told a different story than she did several times. Why should she mislead about matters large and small? Why? when she said she’d stayed in Italy to “help the police”.

Even from her own book she admits lying about marijuana use. More importantly you quote official reports, court transcription (like when Carlo Pacelli calls her out as a liar as she blamed Mignini for coercing her. Pacelli set her straight, told her Mignini was not even there to coerce her. Yet she loved to blame the Public Minister for forcing her to lie).

Nencini hammers home the point that even if Knox had first accused Patrick as a panicked attempt to stop the police interrogating her, she had many days afterward to amend her false statement but she made a calculated decision NOT to. Now that’s a liar.

This post is a great catalogue of Knox’s various falsehoods. The Machine has drawn not from rumor and newspaper speculation but from court reports and Italian judges. Judges!

Several different Judges ruled that Knox lied, based on the phone records that refuted her.

Two Italian roommates, Laura and Filomena both, said Knox was fibbing about Meredith’s door, which they knew from firsthand experience living with Meredith.

Why in the world would an innocent person lie about her whereabouts to police when her roommate has been killed? Knox would well know the police needed the most accurate information possible to arrest the real killer.

She claimed to be an honors student, yet she couldn’t even tell Filomena the truth on the phone, she implied things that weren’t right, she omitted truths, she forgot she’d rung Meredith’s phone for 3 seconds yet claimed to be so worried about her.

Knox couldn’t tell the police where she was located when she received a call about sudden vacation hours from work. (Knox would never have forgotten that happy call.)

Then the protective Raffaele who was kissing and stroking her arm outside the cottage after the discovery of the body, suddenly refuted her claims of being at his apartment during the critical hours. Was he lying or was she lying?

Was Knox at his apartment or not? Why would he tell police he was home alone with his spliff and his vague supper? Nobody seemed to know where Knox was, as she intended to confuse them all. There was so much deception by Knox, so much flip-flopping by Raffaele, flipping by both of them. So their alibis were a spider’s web they leaned on. No wonder police raised an eyebrow. 

Netflix did not want to look at Chieffi, Massei, Nencini and what they had discovered about Knox not telling the truth on critical matters. I believe the judges, not Amanda Knox.

And biggest H-bomb of all is the conclusion of Marasca and Bruno at the High Court that Knox was actually present at the cottage at time of the murder?! Yet Knox says she was exonerated. Another lie.

I particularly like the quotes from Nencini as to why Knox accused Lumumba.

Lumumba would be unable to rat her out like Guede might do if she accused Guede.

Guede’s odd power over Knox was that he watched her commit the crime with him. She rarely cried out against him until she was back in USA.

If Guede had killed my roomie and drawn me into a manhunt that landed me in prison for years, I would have been cursing him from the housetops from Day One, especially given the forensic evidence against him to back up his guilt.

Guede is a notorious liar, so is Knox, and Raffaele joined their club quite easily, having had a good bit of practice foxing his own dad about his drug use for years. He never told Vanessa the truth, nor dad, nor Uncle Joe. Not to this day. Knox is still lying to Edda and Oma and Deanna, et al. It’s who she is. You do what you are.

Netflix slanted their documentary like the Titanic. It’s almost as dishonest as Knox is.

Lies don’t float too well on The Sea of Truth.

Posted by Hopeful on 10/29/16 at 03:23 PM | #

@ Hopeful:
“....Netflix slanted their documentary like the Titanic…hit a truth iceberg and tore a hole in their hull, ....the truth sank…Lies don’t float too well on The Sea of Truth.”

What a brilliant analogy; thanks.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 10/29/16 at 10:31 PM | #


“Lies don’t float too well on The Sea of Truth.”

But sh*t always comes up to the top (sooner or later); when it sank, Amanda was devastated. There is some irony.

Posted by chami on 10/29/16 at 10:52 PM | #

Hi Hopeful,

Amanda Knox intended to leave Perugia, but the police told her she had to stay.

Amy Frost, a friend of Meredith, reported the following conversation (Massei report, page 37):

“I remember having heard Amanda speaking on the phone. I think that she was talking to a member of her family, and I heard her say, ‘No, they won’t let me go home; I can’t catch that flight.’ ”

Posted by The Machine on 10/30/16 at 06:22 AM | #

This was NetFlix last hurrah. The company, by all accounts, is in trouble anyway and produced this pile of crap in order to try to stay afloat. NetFlix was not even one little bit concerned with the truth but just tried to make money.

Of course this is Knox last attempt at glorification. The only thing left for her to do is admit guilt and that in order to get what she wants more than anything else, that being relevance. I predict that once more she will be alone.

The only person who really believes that she is innocent is Grandmother Huff and when she dies that will be it because Knox family knows damn well she is guilty. That is why there is little connection between them. They keep their distance.

Of course there are the other subhuman parasites such as Steve Moore and his mentally ruined wife, Remember her? ‘Michel Celestial Sings Easterly Moore’ Anybody who tags a name such as that is cause for mental examination. This is the kind of people who like amoeba attach themselves to Knox.

I wonder what drugs Knox is into? certainly coke and amphetamines and having seen a picture of her recently the rot has already set in. One way or the other it’s only a question of time. I suspect she will fake suicide, which of course she will fail at since she is too cowardly to actually go through with it, and just like Jodie Arias she will complain that the cuts on her wrists are like a paper cut.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 10/30/16 at 09:35 AM | #

‘but I don’t remember what I ate’. - talk about extraneous, (points to guilt) detail.

Such good points by The Machine. With such damming evidence it’s a wonder why AK and RS escaped justice.

In RS’s Honor Bound he says his father asks him “whether he was still going to Gubbio”; bull****.

Posted by DavidB on 10/30/16 at 07:03 PM | #

One can also add that Knox lied about the time of the meal that she and Sollecito had on the evening of the 2nd Nov.

AK:  umm, around, umm, we ate around 9.30 or 10, and then AFTER we had eaten, and he was washing the dishes, well, as I said, I don’t look at the clock much, but it was around 10. And…he…umm…well, he was washing the dishes and, umm, the water was coming out and he was very bummed, displeased, he told me he had just had that thing repaired. He was annoyed that it had broken again. So…umm

LG:  Yes, so you talked a bit. Then what did you do?

AK:  Then we smoked a joint together……we made love…..then we fell asleep.

The next day, on the 13th , on cross-examination by Mignini, Knox testified -

GM:  So, I wanted to know something else. At what time did the water leak?

AK:  After dinner, I don’t know what time it was.

GM:  Towards 21, 21.30?

AK:  21, that’s 9? No, it was much later than that.

GM:  A bit later? How much?

AK:  We had dinner around……10.30, so that must have happened a bit later than that. Maybe around 11 [slow voice as if thinking it out]

So we see Knox trying at first to cover their sighting by Curatolo at around 9.30 pm and then trying to do the same with the projected TOD.  In the event Mignini later moved TOD back to 11.30 pm which must have pissed Knox off a bit.

Unfortunately Sollecito’s father himself torpedoed this dodge by telling the court that when he phoned his son at 8.42 pm Sollecito had told him that there had been a water leak while he was washing the dishes. Taking into account Knox’s testimony that they had eaten before the dish washing, this places the meal and dish washing before that call.

Hellmann, predictably, and totally ignoring her evidence, had another take -

“That the two of them dined before the time they indicated does not seem decisive, but in any case it is not proven that at 8:42 pm, when Raffaele Sollecito informed his father on the telephone that he had noticed that the sink was leaking while he was washing the dishes, the two had already dined…..........The fact is that Raffaele Sollecito is not known to have said to his father that they had finished dinner, merely that he was with Amanda.”


In her e-mail Knox claims not to have noticed the blood in the small bathroom prior to taking, allegedly, her shower. This then gets modified in her tape recorded interview with Mignini in Capanne prison when she says she had noticed blood before the shower, be it the blood in the sink and not on the mat, but her account gets a bit confusing. She claims to have had the shower before she takes off her earrings but also that she noticed the blood in the sink before the blood on the mat because she had taken off her earrings before the shower.

She also claims to have undressed in her room, taken her shower and then returned to her room shuffling along on the bathroom mat because there was no towel in the bathroom. She then shuffles back to the bathroom. None of this is credible. Check towel before shower. Dry yourself in your room, so no need to shuffle back.


Posted by James Raper on 11/05/16 at 10:05 AM | #

Make a comment


Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Nine Years Tuesday Since The Pack Attack: The Compelling Aura Of Meredith Lives On

Or to previous entry Netflixhoax 14: Omitted - Any Mention Of Big Red Flag In Forced Closing Of Vecchiotti’s Laboratory