Amanda Knox promotes her new memoir with a PR blitz: do you believe her?

Amanda Knox has been on PR blitz this week which I have been ignoring for the most part. I have a passing interest in her situation, but as I’ve said before, I haven’t been following all of the ins and outs of the criminal case. And it’s not over for Knox – an Italian court overturned her acquittal in March, and Italian prosecutors will apparently retry her for murder at some point. But for now, I think Amanda is trying to make some money (probably to pay her legal fees, which I imagine are quite extensive), so she’s written a book and she’s been doing interviews.

I decided to cover this when I read Jezebel’s story/coverage of Amanda’s book and how… average she seems. Average in a good way. Average in that she is just like a million other girls of her generation – she’s relatable, she’s nerdy and she was thrust into the international spotlight when she was still in the middle of figuring out who she was and is. I would recommend reading the Jezebel article – it got me interested in Knox’s book, Waiting To Be Heard.

As for the interviews… she gave a big one to Diane Sawyer for 20/20. Here’s part 1 of it – around the 6:30 minute mark, Sawyer asks her direct questions about whether or not Knox was involved with any part of Meredith’s murder. Her reaction seems… weird. I know I’m being nit-picky, but who nods in the affirmative when saying “No…no”?

Here’s Part 2 (the beginning part is the same, but there’s new information halfway through):

What strikes me now that I’ve sat through this interview is that Amanda Knox doesn’t seem guilty of murder, but that she is guilty of being an extremely self-absorbed young woman. Still. To this day. To this day, HOW she tells her story seems narcissistic. There really isn’t that much concern for Meredith or Meredith’s family. I mean, she doesn’t have to beat her breast and wail about it, but it’s like she has to be reminded over and over that she’s not the biggest victim in this whole situation.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

243 Responses to “Amanda Knox promotes her new memoir with a PR blitz: do you believe her?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lb says:

    I just never know where I stand with this whole debacle. I don’t know if she’s guilty or innocent. I don’t know what’s really up with the Italian justice system. I don’t know much.

    All I really know is some young woman was murdered and that somehow got lost in all this drama. I feel badly for her family. I’m an outsider who thought the stories were obnoxious. I can only imagine how it feels to them.

    • Itsjustblanche. says:

      I’m with you. I lean more towards not guilty though. Thought the comment about visiting Meredith’s grace was really tacky and self serving.

      • clutch says:

        I am genuinely surprised that anybody would lean towards innocent. This is a girl who fingered someone else, claiming that he had even physically restrained her to keep her from screaming. This guy spent time behind bars before he was cleared. His life will never be the same, his name is forever linked with this. And wouldnt you know that she picked a black guy. Probably to exploit the racial biases that would kick in where theres a dead white girl with signs of recent intercourse.

        Couple that with the CCTV footage with her shopping for lingerie while canoodling with her boyfriend the day after the body was found. The changing stories. The knife. Honestly, this girl is really good if people are beginning to forget how icky her tale is.

      • L says:

        She ‘fingered’ someone else because the police in their interview told her-we know this guy did it. Didn’t he? She also served time for that already. And if you read up on reports, she wasn’t shopping for lingerie-she was getting underwear because she couldn’t get back into her apartment. Just like the whole ‘cartwheel’ thing, that was pretty much made up by the tabs.

        She’s innocent because there is already a guy in jail for raping and murdering Meredith. Whose DNA was found in her and on her. Whose prints were on the knife, whose prints were on the window at the break in.

      • Isabella says:

        “Not guilty enough”? Geez, what a weird thing to say. Heartless and super judgmental.
        This gal was in Italian custody for months at a time. Her experience is also traumatic. I am sorry for the victim and her family. However, if Knox is innocent, as there is no reason for me to doubt, I also feel sorry for her. I wouldn’t wish her experience on my meanest rivals. It’s so Count of Monte Cristo-esque.

      • clutch says:

        L you appear to be relying heavily on her account. Its your business if yo consider it credible. Me, i adopt a critical approach to this things.

        For instance if someone claims harassment, I ask if theres evidence to support that claim (nope). At what point did you reveal the harassment to a judge, your lawyer or consulate staff (it would be the first thing I did, you?). How susceptible is this person to threats so weak ie how naive (please!) . Is this person a nervous/anxious personality naturally (she describes herself as confident and against the grain).

        And finally did she appear to be a broken spirit after this (witnesses at the station said she didnt. She herself admits to the “I would kill for a pizza..” jokes.

        As for the undies shop, the clerk and several shoppers said her demeanor seemed wierd to them. The CCTV cameras confirm the canoodling. Blaming that tabloid reporters is nonsense. The question here is was that a coping mechanism or just a sociopath getting on with her day?
        The retrial FYI is partly based on the dna on the knife.

        The most damning aspect for me is that fingering Lumumba required her to “lie” and put herself at the scene when she already had an alibi. What kind of self preservation is that? She could implicate him without being at the scene, create a disturbing history. Its only defensive if you WERE at the scene and need to explain away potential evidence.

      • L says:

        I go by the fact that someone else confessed to the crime, someone else’s DNA was in/on the victim, and she’s served time for the trumped up perjury charge by the police (and lost the civil case as well). All the rest of it is noise from the Italian’s who can’t get their way.

        The underwear/stretching thing came from reliable sources-NOT her-so I’m not sure what you’re getting at.

      • clutch says:

        Lol. That little statement about Italians is very revealing. I think we know you are coming from now. SMDH!

        Anywaaaay. The reports of her demeanor at the shop came from people who were there and footage! The station reports were worse. The explainations are from her camp. Speaking of which, gotta love a girl who pops a split for her “torturor” while her murdered roomie lies in a fridge downstairs. Now thats a stretch.

        Amanda was tried as a co-perpetrator by the way. The grifter had a hand. Her DNA was on the murder weapon. It is the basis of the retrial.

        And 4 years for trying to lock away an innocent man who had been a pal is a joke. A racially tinged one.
        As he said releasing that little sociopath was a miscarriage of justice. Now shes going about whipping up nationalistic sentiment to mess with the potential extradition. How dare those torture-loving judicially-incompetent Italians, right L?

      • clutch says:

        Lol. That little statement about Italians is very revealing. I think we know you are coming from now. SMDH!

        Anywaaaay. The reports of her demeanor at the shop came from people who were there and footage! The station reports were worse. The explainations are from her camp. Speaking of which, gotta love a girl who pops a split for her “torturor” while her murdered roomie lies in a fridge downstairs. Now thats a stretch.

        Amanda was tried as a co-perpetrator by the way. The grifter had a hand. Her DNA was on the murder weapon. It is the basis of the retrial.

        And 4 years for trying to lock away an innocent man who had been a pal is a joke. A racially tinged one.
        As he said releasing that little sociopath was a miscarriage of justice. Now shes going about whipping up nationalistic sentiment to mess with the potential extradition. How dare those torture-loving judicially-incompetent Italians, right L?

      • Lissanne says:

        Responding to “L”s post above: Rudy Guede’s prints were not found on any knife identified as a possible murder weapon, and no trace of him– neither DNA, footprints, nor finger prints – were found in the room where the alleged break-in took place.

        The court that convicted him of murder stipulated that he could not have committed the murder alone. The court based this on many things, including the types of wounds on Meredith’s body. Sorry-not something I want to describe, but the court report is on the web.

      • irishserra says:

        @L: I’m in agreement with you. The limited evidence they had pointed to the man who is currently serving time for the murder. Additionally, I find it very suspicious that the video camera at the bank across the street from the apartment which would have recorded the culprit going into the home was coincidentally not working that night, whereas it had been every night before.

        This case was so botched from the beginning that the authorities had to hide any evidence they could find so as to save face and not look incompetent.

        Now I do not believe that the U.S. justice system is any less corrupt than the Italian justice system, but with regard to this particular case, Italy screwed up and took advantage of the fact that Amanda Knox was a silly, air-headed American girl.

      • irishserra says:

        @ Lissanne: Rudy’s DNA was indeed on the knife; and on Meredith’s body; and IN Meredith’s body.

      • MrsB says:

        @Clutch and @Lisanne there was plenty of evidence against Rudy Guede.

        This is actual EVIDENCE which is what should be used to convict somebody. You just can’t convict somebody because they act differently than how you expect them to act in a stressful situation.

      • Lissanne says:

        No, Rudy’s DNA was NOT found on the knife. Yes, Rudy’s DNA was found on and in Meredith. No one is arguing that he is innocent by any means, just that he didn’t do it alone. BTW, the DNA information comes from court documents; it’s not something I picked up from tabloids or gossip sites!

      • L says:

        *eyeroll* By ‘the italians’ I clearly meant the justice system in perguia, but if you want to get up in arms about it go ahead.

        The DNA/knife/bloody footprint stuff was solidly proved with solid untainted evidence, but I have a feeling nothing will convince you and I frankly don’t care that much. You think she’s guilty. I think she’s not. The guy who murdered Meredith is in prison and was correctly convicted.

      • MrsB says:

        @Lissanne Do you have a link to the court documents? I’m genuinely interested in reading them

      • AlKags says:

        Yeah it was a joint criminal enterprise! Amanda and the new boyfriend set it up for sexual kicks.

        Too many redflags in this case. One or two can be reasoned away but this is extreme. DNA evidence is what put her at the scene. Evidence that she worked hard to destroy and appears to have partially damaged. Shes the white OJ only colder.

      • Organic says:

        Lawd! Maybe just apologise for offending Italians, L. I cringed when I read your post. In case she doesnt apologise, I hope people realise that most of us are not xenophobic.

      • jaye says:

        Based on hour long program that I saw on Discover ID, there was NO physical evidence that she had any hand in the crime. She was shopping because she couldn’t enter her flat and she had no clothes. So, because her roommate was murdered, she can’t hug and kiss her boyfriend? I DO believe law enforcement coerced first her pointing the finger at her boss and then confessing to the murder. That seems to happen a lot.

      • rashers says:

        There was physical evidence in the form of DNA. She fought to exclude it from consideration in the case but it did exist,

      • Cate says:

        I think Amanda is an asshole. She is self absorbed, obnoxious and socially awkward but I don’t think she is a killer. Hard to deny her DNA being nowhere at the crime scene and Rudy Guede’s being all over the place.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “No, Rudy’s DNA was NOT found on the knife.”

        Correct. But Meredith’s DNA wasn’t found on “the knife” either. Clearly the prosecution didn’t have the correct murder weapon. It was rye bread, not blood, on the knife. Two expert witnesses testified to this:

        “One of the key pieces of evidence for the prosecution during the initial murder trial was a knife found in a kitchen drawer at Sollecito’s apartment that investigators claim was the weapon used to kill Kercher. They claimed that DNA from Knox was on the handle and DNA from Kercher was on the blade.

        Two forensic experts appointed by the court during the appeal, however, have said there was not enough DNA to prove it belonged to Kercher. The experts also said they believed the DNA came from rye bread.”

      • Jenny says:

        @MrsB, I am sorry to say that very little of what you posted as links contained any evidence or proof of those statements’ veracity. I am sorry I wasted the time to go to both of those sources.

      • Jenny says:

        No one said it WAS rye bread, they said the DNA MAY have come from rye bread and that the sample was too small to correctly identify anything.

        I don’t know where my opinion is on this, but it is amazing to me how much misinformation is out there and how far people go to defend their positions on either side. Sheesh.

    • Jen says:

      She has the same vacant look in her eyes that Jodi Arais has in hers.

  2. two_seconds_ago says:

    Nope. I still believe she had a hand in the whole incident, even if she didn’t stab Meredith herself.

    • Cool Phosphorescent Shimmer says:

      She doesn’t look average at all to me, unless your average 20-something had a hand in a grisly murder and is now trying to profit from it.

    • Loulou says:

      I agree that she’s guilty.

    • Pont Neuf says:

      She is guilty as she can be, in my opinion. Her “alibis” have changed several times, and all of them have been discredited even by Raffaele Sollecito himself – who, by the way, had a well known knife obsession and was almost kicked out of of the University of Perugia for using network stations available to students to watch zoophile porn.

      Also, there’s evidence that both their mobile phones and Rudy Gedes’ phone were in the vicinity of the house were the crime took place all night long, and that they never spent the night in Sollecito’s apartment (in fact, his father, who was in another city at the time, lied saying that he had been there with him that night).

      The staged break in, when it was proven that the murderer entered and left through the main entrance, the fact that she took a shower in a bathroom dripping with blood and thought that it was full of blood because she had pierced her ears the day before (seriously?!?!?!!), the fact that her bedside table was found in Meredith Kercher’s room, and parts of the room had been cleaned before the police arrived (in fact, they found a bucket and a mop drying outside when they reached the property)… There are so many irregularities in this case, that it’s outrageous.

      The prosecutor and the police should be ashamed of themselves: their stupidity and incompetence allowed two brutal, cold-hearted psychopaths who manipulated an unstable drug addict and thug into committing a horrible murder, to walk free.

    • Liv says:

      I think she’s guilty too.

      There was an interview on german TV yesterday and everything she said didn’t make sense. Watching her you can see that she’s lying. Don’t know if it was just her, but she was part of the murder, that’s for sure.

  3. Suze says:

    Meredith Kercher just gets lost in this whole circus, doesn’t she? I think that fuels her family to continue looking for more justice.

    After watching Knox’s interview with Sawyer, I agree 100 percent with your assessment. I believe Knox when she says she not guilty but boy oh boy does she come off as completely self- involved.

    She’s not a sympathetic personality at all.

    • marie says:

      and that right there is the rub. you would think after going through all that, she would change, evolve somehow. but no, she still worries more about herself.

      the only people I feel sorry for in all this mess is Meredith Kercher’s family. I hope they find their justice.

      • Ange says:

        How is she supposed to “change” when you have a justice system that has already made their minds up about you and a country taking a simple sports nickname and splashing it around the media to depict a sex crazed girl?

        She was told she had HIV, interrogated for hours probably tortoured since the italian police conveniently “forgot” to record her interrogation; which led her to sign a false confusing letter of admittance.

        I think i would be pretty cold myself after dealing with that justice system.

        She is used to majority of a country thinking she is lying; i can appreciate the direct sometimes boarder line cold responses.

        Meridith was the true victim undoubtedly, but Amanda has also become a victim.

      • Marie Antoinette Jr. says:

        In my experience, tragedy exaggerates personality traits. So if someone is self-centered, immature, a little “off” to begin with, a tragedy is going to exacerbate that trait, not diminish it.

        She seems like a weirdo–maybe people are reading that as guilt?

    • FLORC says:

      Her behavior seems more like there’s a disconnect from a traumatic event. She was treated horribly for years believing she might never see her family or friends again. All with her room mate being murdered, lies being spread, and losing all sense of control over your entire life. She might be a completely different person when not discussing this, but this topic may be too much for her to handle so she’s built an emotion wall to protect herself.

      And the victim in this isn’t forgotten or not getting justice because of Knox. It’s the sloppy prosecution that ruined that for her and her family.

      And really now. If Knox was to talk about finding her real killer and seeking the truth we;d all have flash backs to O.J. stating he’ll never stop looking for the real killer.

    • L says:

      I just don’t know what she’s supposed to say about Meredith other than she’s sorry she’s gone. That’s not her story to tell. That’s for her family/the media to tell. She knew her for 6 weeks 4 years ago. Anything she says will be taken poorly by Meredith’s family.

  4. Kristen says:

    I never noticed how much she resembles Shania Twain.

  5. Belle Epoch says:

    I don’t believe ANYTHING she says. Her parents spent a MILLION DOLLARS on public relations. The PR firm says she can become a “television personality” now that they have persuaded everyone in the US she is innocent.

    This girl is NOT innocent. Her current stories do not match her diaries or letters from the time. Moreover Alan Dershkowitz says it is EXTREMELY rare for an innocent person to accuse another innocent person (which she did – why?).

    RIP Meredith Kercher – whose mother is poor, from Pakistan, and on dialysis. She didn’t have a million bucks to spend defending her dead daughter.

    • FLORC says:

      EAsy Belle. Breath in through the nose and out through the mouth.. Yes her parents spent millions on PR. They went into serious debt over it. That’s because the story was being tried in the public, not the courts. It was without solid, untampered evidence and a prosecutors crazy satanic agenda.

      And I am american, but i’ve lived in Ansbach, Germany for a year as an exchange student and still keep in touch with friends there. They also believe Knox was outright railroded and this trial was a joke. The real killer was caught and in jail. Facts are facts. There isn’t 1 flimsy piece of evidence that says she did it.

      And that’s terrible about Meredith’s mother, but Knox didn’t give her her health problems. The prosecution is at fault for filling their heads with lies and telling them Knox did it and he will bring her down.

      • Jenny says:

        @FLORC, why don’t you try to be easy and “Breath in through the nose and out through the mouth.” Just because someone doesn’t agree with your assessment of the scenario does not mean they are having some kind of psychotic break.

        Everyone is equally entitled to their own opinion and yours is equally as skewed towards one side as the original poster.

      • Riff says:

        Why you think someone in Germany can have a better perception of something going on in Italy? Do you think Germans have a full knowledge of Italian laws and system? Do they know something that we are not aware of only because of their nationality? Are you sure they can have a full knowledge of a very complex procedure in another country so that you blindly trust them when they say that it’s a joke?

      • Cats says:

        I was going to say the same thing as Riff – what does having spent time in Germany have to do with a case in Italy? Germany and Italy are two very different countries with very different cultures and very different legal systems.
        How does what some people in Germany think have any relevance?

      • Belle Epoch says:

        @jenny Thank you, sistah!

        I’ve actually read a lot about this whole awful business, and if you are logical you cannot believe Knox is totally innocent.

        I’d be surprised if Mr. Knox is suffering financially. He handles the finances for Macy’s! (He’s also a white US male which means he gets paid more, but that’s another story.)

        I was surprised that the PR firm has hopes for her being a “TV personality.” A show with Casey Anthony maybe?

      • Xera says:

        Meredith was stabbed with two different knives, she didn’t have defensive wounds, this means that someone was restraining her while someone else was stabbing her. The crime scene has also been cleaned up, leaving Guede’s traces in evidence and cleaning up other footsteps revealed with luminol. Meredith’s bedroom door had been locked from outside but Guede’s footsteps go straigt from Meredith’s bedroom to outside the house…so someone else locked Meredith door. Amanda Knox DNA is mixed with Meredith blood in an other roommate’s bedroom where a break-in was staged (the glass from a broken window was on top of the clothes and laptop thrown on the floor so the window was broken after the clothes had been thrown). There is mixed blood from Meredith and Knox in the bathroom (on the q-tips box), on the sink, there is Raffaelle DNA on Meredith bra, the knife was found at Raffaelle’s place, Raffaelle told that he pricked Meredith with the knife in his jail diary (it has been proven that Meredith never went to his place), the computer activity analysis doesn’t match Knox and Raffaelle alibi, their phones (turned on at 5 am) don’t match their story – they said they slept till 10 (their lawyer said it was the cat who turned the phones on!), Rafaelle said to the police that he had lied to them at Amanda’s request…then refused to say anything more, etc
        In short, they cannot be innocent.

      • littlestar says:

        Xera – I didn’t know about most of that info before today (I knew about his DNA being on her bra, but that was it). Very very interesting. Thanks for posting that.

    • ari says:

      The problem with this case is that so much of the scientific evidence and accounts presented are erroneous. Relying on it and telling other people that they are illogical for their own opinion is, well…illogical.

    • jaye says:

      @Xera, a lot of that so called evidence was found to be false. There was no evidence of Rafaelle’s dna on the bra, the only dna found on the knife was Amanda’s. The Italian authorities totally botched the investigation and then painted Knox as this hyper-sexual,satanic monster who seduced three men into a murderous orgy when there was no evidence to show that the characterization was true. If the murderer was going to clean up evidence of the crime, why wouldn’t they clean up Meredith’s blood too? That just doesn’t make sense. There’s a lot about this case that doesn’t make a lick of sense, but I do believe that Knox is innocent.

      • Lissanne says:

        The prosecution never made reference to “satanic” anything in this case. This is one of the many inventions made by her PR firm and supporters. Patrick Lumumba’s attorney, in a statement to the jury, did ask whether Amanda was an angelic, innocent figure, or a manipulative “she-devil.” But he wasn’t prosecuting the case; just representing Patrick.

    • Sarah says:

      @ Belle
      So Alan Dershowitz says it’s extremely rare for an innocent person to accuse another innocent person? Gee, I’m a criminal defence lawyer and I see it all the time. Innocent people accuse innocent people/ guilty people/ and anyone they can think of if the police push them hard enough. Being able to float a theory doesn’t make you guilty of anything. And people may lie to the police because they are scared. Most people I talk to aren’t aware that you don’t have to talk to the police or go with them unless they are arresting you. I get that the police sometimes have to put pressure on people and that’s their job. But when the pressure is put on, anyone would be intimidated.

      • Jenny says:

        Not to be rude, but how can you be so sure the people you represent that accuse innocent people are innocent themselves? Doesn’t seem logical to me to admit any connection to or knowledge of a crime you were not involved in. Why float theories when you can proclaim your innocence, prove your whereabouts or what have you, and leave it at that?

      • Marie Antoinette Jr. says:

        Jenny I think that unless you’ve been professionally interrogated it’s hard to know what you’d do or say.

  6. Me says:

    I don’t believe this child is completely innocent. Sorry. I watched that interview when it aired and I was surprised at how disturbed I was at her attitude at times. And, yes, Meredith is totally lost/almost forgotten in this whole tragic mess. I feel so horrible for her family and for her. Meanwhile, Amanda pimps her book.

    • Suze says:

      Meredith Kercher and her family are the ones who lost the most. And they are often lost in this story.

      That said, I can see why Knox wrote a book, after all she does have legal fees to pay and she and her family went through a lot, too.

      Like I said above, though, she doesn’t come off as sympathetic at all, she is very self-absorbed. She’s not particularly good at the media circuit – you could almost see Diane Sawyer straining to get a decent interview out of her. There were times during her interview that I wanted to reach into the television and slap Knox, she’s so self-centered.

      If she had written the book and made a few brief media appearances, along the lines of Jaycee Dugar (who is much more sympathetic character) it might have worked better.

    • Xera says:

      @ me

      If you look at key moments of her interview in slow motion you’ll understand why it is so disturbing, the involuntary moves when she lies say the opposite of what she says. When asked if she killed Meredith she says no but her head move says yes, there is also an involuntary rictus, it was picked up on blogs that specialize in decoding lies like this one

    • juststeph says:

      Her emotions are off. She seems like a sociopath or like she has aspergers. I thought she wasnt guilty, but now I feel like I do not know enough to say one way or the other.

  7. Faye says:

    I don’t really know what happened. It seems hard to imagine she wasn’t involved or aware in some way. Who knows? What is certain is the Italian justice system completely messed this one up -fabricated evidence, let other evidence become compromised by being handled by the wrong people — just to name a few things. There is no way they could every have a fair trial for her now, and if I understand correctly, they don’t have any new testimony to justify overturning the acquittal. Hope the U.S. doesn’t extradite her.

    I agree with everyone that the poor murdered girl is the real victim. I feel for her family, who may never know what really happened to her and won’t have even the small consolation of seeing her killers brought to justice.

    • Sarah says:

      Hard to imagine she wasn’t there? I don’t get that at all. I find it impossible to imagine she was there. What college kid with no history of violence would all of a sudden one night meet up with a stranger she had only briefly encountered once before and along with her new guy of a week participate in some crazed murder? How does that make any sense at all? Then there’s the fact that every single piece of physical evidence left in the room where the murder occurred pointed to one guy, a guy with a history of breaking into places and carrying knives. If anyone else had been in the room at the time of that very bloody crime, that person would have left a footprint or fingerprint or hair or DNA somewhere. And it would be physically impossible for that person to have magically cleaned up all traces of herself while leaving only traces of the other guy.

      Honestly, the media, tabloids, and gossip sites bear total responsibility for the circus-ification of this crime and they ultimately need to be the ones to make it right by admitting their complicity in making the world believe this rather ordinary girl is some manipulative sociopath. (Of course, if she’s such a clever, manipulative sociopath, why the incoherent statement to police implicating a guy who wasn’t there? Cracking under an interrogation like that isn’t very sociopathic and a clever, manipulative person ought to have come up with a better story, right?)

      Now the complaint is that Amanda is self-absorbed. Sheesh. How many websites exist solely to trash her in every way possible? At least 3. How many books and articles and blog posts have been written about her? Dozens and thousands. So she’s got a lot of ugly stuff being said about her and when she sits down to try to respond to all of it, now we who made the beast have the audacity to say she’s self-absorbed.

      The whole thing makes me ill.

  8. gillie says:

    the eyes for lies blog take on this interview is very interesting.

  9. Lila says:

    I don’t really blame her for feeling like a victim. Meredith Kercher died and that is awful and tragic but she’s gone. Amanda is in the middle of a tragedy that is ungoing. It’s not that one is better or worse than another, it’s just that Amanda’s is more immediate so I think it feels bigger somehow. If it feels that way to me I’m sure it definitely does to her.

    I feel like her perspective is skewed more than anything. I really don’t know if she’s guilty or not. I don’t think she stabbed Meredith. Was she involved? I don’t know. From what I’ve read of her it’s hard to believe she planned something like that particularly since she’d only been there a week but I don’t really know.

    It’s hard to get at true read on her and I think a big part of that is because she’s a 20 something year old who went to prison in another country where she barely spoke the language. Her story is sensational in a way that it’s hard to get a good grasp on.

  10. Samtha says:

    I don’t know. Don’t you think maybe going through the entire ordeal that she did would lessen the impact of what happened to Meredith for her?

    I can imagine being young and dumb and overseas, alone and in jail for MURDER…and being so scared and just lost that what happened to Meredith would stop being my primary concern. I don’t know if I’m explaining that well.

  11. Logan says:

    She’s never going to be retried by Italy. The US has constitutional guarantees against double jeopardy so good luck to Italy trying to talk our government into extraditing her. It’s never going to happen.

    • Kolby says:

      Italy can try her whether or not she’s physically there.

    • Riff says:

      Look, Italian taxpayers are not particularly eager to pay for her maintenance in jail. She’ s back home, good for her and her country.
      She lied, for sure she knows something she didn’t tell, she did not give any contribution in solving the case, which is strange since she was there. She accused an innocent, she accused Italian Police of violent and improper behaviour, which is ridiculous because even an idiot knows you never touch a US citizen. I think she’s guilty, but this is only my personal opinion.
      Unfortunately Italian police made some mistakes, maybe because everything happened in a small town where these kind of events are very rare. They were not experienced enough. And her lawyers (some of the best in Italy) and pr team made an excellent job. I think similar cases happens everyday in many countries. How many innocent are imprisoned or sentenced to death and how many murderers are declared innocent and released in your country?
      I feel for the victim.

    • Lissanne says:

      She is not being “retried.” The appeal verdict was annulled by the Italian supreme court, which cited issues with the way the appeal was run. They will now run a new appeal trial. This is not defined as double jeopardy in US law.

      “Double jeopardy” refers to the situation where a person is tried, convicted, and serves their sentence for a crime, and then another court attempts to try them on the same charge.

      It’s likely that the US would honor Italy’s extradition request, if it comes to that. The US embassy and the State Department have monitored this case from the beginning, and have not issued any complaints to the Italian government about the handling of this case.

      • Seen says:

        You don’t have to be convicted of a crime for Double Jeopardy to kick-in…You only have to be tried. Even a not guilty verdict triggers the preclusion against double jeopardy by US law. She can be tried inabsentia, even if the US fought extradition.

  12. frivolity says:

    It saddens me to think that Amanda resembles an “average” young woman her age. She’s so self-involved, so dispassionate, and so entirely versed to perform on television. I can’t say that I trust anything that comes out of her mouth.

  13. Nemesis says:

    I just took an interview class with the FBI. One of the points he brought up was saying no with your mouth while shaking yes with your head.

    I don’t think she’s as innocent ad what she’ll have us believe.

  14. Down and Out says:

    Oh come on. If self-absorbed were a crime, I’d be serving a lot more than four years…

    I don’t think the fact that Amanda is speaking out about the disgusting miscarriage of justice she went through in any way detracts from the gravity of what happened to Meredith. The facts are that despite what anyone thinks or armchair criminal profiles from her behavior, there were severe problems with how the case was handled from the start and there wasn’t enough evidence to convict Amanda.

    In terms of how she ought to behave–by all means, anyone who has been falsely accused & stood trial publicly for murder at 20 in a foreign country, come forward and let us know what the proper etiquette is.

  15. Talie says:

    Before the interview, I would’ve said no, but after it? I don’t know, her behavior during the whole process was too odd. She may just have some mental issues, but who walks into their house with a wide open door without being freaked out? And then blood in the bathroom and thinks nothing?

    Still, you can’t ignore evidence and she was not anywhere in that room where Meredith was murdered. That Guede guy’s DNA was all over the place, including his foot print in blood. Sadly, he’s been ignored and will probably be released from prison soon.

    • Merritt says:

      If I had walked into a bathroom and saw the blood, especially on the bathmat the way the picture showed, I’m not sure murder would have come to mind. My first thought would have been that someone had their period or was shaving and didn’t clean the bathroom after they finished.

    • Sarah says:

      The door sometimes didn’t latch properly, so that’s why finding it open didn’t alarm Amanda. I, too, have a door that doesn’t always latch. When I came home and found it wide open, I, too, didn’t rush to call police because I knew a gust of wind had just blown the door open. When the door was busted open, it was quite obvious and I did call police. In Amanda’s case, there was no damage to the door frame, so given the latch problem, there was no reason to think break-in.

  16. Fancy says:

    She reminds me of a female Charles Manson. I absolutely think she played a part in the murder.

  17. Merritt says:

    I don’t think she committed murder. Sawyer mentioned in the interview that Knox’s DNA was not found in the room that Meredith was killed in. It was in the house, but she lived in the house so that makes sense. The only DNA in the room (other than Meredith’s) was Guede’s.

    And the fact that Raffaele Sollecito refused to turn on Knox is important. He would have gotten a lighter sentence if he had done so. It is not like her knew Knox well enough to have a loyalty to her.

    I do wish Sawyer had asked Knox about her privilege. Reality is that if she was not a pretty, young white woman, the media and the public would never have paid her this much attention.

    I do question whether is is Knox’s place to tell Meredith’s story. People keep complaining about that but how would she? Knox knew Meredith for what 5-6 weeks.

    People keep talking about Meredith’s family wanting justice. But the the murderer is already in prison. And as a result of the corrupt Italian system, not serving as many years as he should have, because the prosecution were determined to go after Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. This despite all the evidence pointing at Guede.

    Justice won’t be served by anyone continuing to go after Knox.

    • Kiddo says:

      Excellent. I was about to post something else, but why bother when you have said it so eloquently?

    • mel says:

      I’m sure she felt privileged after spending four years in jail for a crime she probably did not commit.

    • jaye says:

      That’s an interesting point about Sollecito’s not turning on Knox. If it were me and someone was accusing me and my boyfriend of 1 week of murder I would roll over on them before the deal was on the table. That’s just self preservation. The fact that he refused to do so is telling.

    • Jenn says:

      “People keep talking about Meredith’s family wanting justice. But the the murderer is already in prison.”

      At least *two people* murdered Meredith Kercher. This fact is not even in dispute by the defense, never has been. So it is frustrating when people assert “the killer is in prison”. Yes, one of them is. But the case is far from solved. It’s not over until one or even two more people are found and answer for murdering Ms. Kercher.

      • Merritt says:

        It is not the defense’s job to dispute whether or not someone could have participated with Guede. The defense’s job was to dispute that Knox or Sollecito participated.

      • Jenn says:

        Merritt, you said “*The murderer* is already in prison”. Again, it has never been in dispute that there was more than one. So do not try to rewrite history like “why-ever are people still talking about this? *THE MURDERER* is in prison.” If this were even somewhat easy to throw into question, the defense, at some point, would have worked the angle that it COULD have been just ONE murderer. They never even tried.

        It is an abuse to the Kercher family and crime victims families to act like people shoudl stop seeking others involved in their loved murders. For the Kercher family, this will not be over until the others whoever they may be, are found and charged.

  18. Chrissie says:

    She’s such a weirdo – and guilty in my book. I don’t think she meant to kill Meredith but I think this girl was into some weird stuff and was involved.

    • Merritt says:

      If that was the case, her DNA would have been in the bedroom where Meredith was murdered. But it wasn’t.

      • Jenny says:

        Why would it necessarily? There are plenty of murders with no DNA evidence, so the fact that people keep saying this is puzzling to me, especially if she did not commit the murder, but was involved in some way.

      • Merritt says:


        If there is none of Knox’s DNA in the room, then she couldn’t have killed Meredith or physically participated in killing her. There is plenty of DNA in the room, but it is all Guede’s and Meredith’s. There is no way that Knox could have removed her own DNA without removing his. She would have had to have scrubbed the room. And even a cleaned crime scene can have physical evidence left behind.

        To say that she was involved in some way would require a motive and some actual proof. But there isn’t any.

        Being a cold or unemotional person doesn’t mean someone are guilty in some way.

      • Isa says:

        Deleted bc Someone answered my question on another post.

    • Xera says:

      @ Meritt

      As you say the DNA is not visible so it has to be found, her DNA is mixed with Meredidth blood not only in the bathroom but in Filomena’s bedroom. As there are plenty of crime where the murderer’s DNA is not found in the room it is not disculpatory for Knox. It is also proven that there was more than one murderer (someone restrained Meredith- her two arms – while she was stabbed) and the other DNA that was found was Raffaelle on Meredith’s bra

      • Merritt says:


        The bra clasp wasn’t even collected as evidence until several weeks later. Anything that has been sitting around for weeks, is contaminated.

        Not to mention Knox and Sollecito didn’t even know Guede. Why would they help someone they didn’t know kill Meredith. Completely nonsensical.

      • Lissanne says:


        Guede visited the young men that lived in the apartment below Meredith and Knox’s a number of times. During questioning, all four of those young men stated that Guede had been in the apartment more than once when both Knox and Meredith were present.

      • Merritt says:


        He may have briefly met Knox, but even he admitted that he never communicated with her. This fails to establish why either Knox or Sollecito would help him murder someone.

  19. Ellie66 says:

    Well I just don’t know if she is innocent or guilty but she does seem kinda snobby and cold. Something is just a bit off with the this girl. As for the real victim Meredith may she RIP and her family finds some kind of piece.

  20. Paola says:

    I invite everyone to read what BBC had to say about all the lies in the Knox’s book, how it differs from everything she had said during all these years. Am I saying that she is guilty? No, I can’t know, but I can’t even forget that she has accused an innocent person.

    • FLORC says:

      You’ve stated she’s guilty in your other posts on these threads. You’ve refused to listen to the other side because the Italian news is sticking to its story. You even stated she was doing cartwheels while being interrogated in the police station. That was debunked that she was doing back stretches after sitting for 12 hours straight. You read and absorb only what you agree with.

      She may be an unlikable person who got the facts wrong because her memory is so jumbled together. This does not put her DNA in the room where Meredith was killed. This does not make the sloppy police work and evidence handling justifiable.

      This is done. The killer is behind bars. If you don’t like what Knox has to say, don’t watch the interview and don’t buy the book. And she’s not getting rich off of this. She’s barely going to break even.

      • Jenny says:

        Thank goodness we have an expert to tell us all what to believe!

      • FLORC says:

        Oh Jenny. You flatter me, but you should really educate yourself and make up your own mind.

        People’s minds are made up here. Those who think she’s guilty will not listen to the contrary thoughts and evidence and vice versa I guess. At least Knox is back. The really killer behind bars and no one else will go to jail because no one else has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that they had a hand in the murder.

        It’s too easy to listen to the news and hear 1 side so many times it becomes fact. She was found innocent. Many victims of the prosecutor are now being freed from false imprisonment, the killer is serving his sentence. Again. This is over. If you don’t like her, don’t buy the book.
        It’s everyone’s right to believe what they want, but don’t forget about real evidence and the lack of just because you want to believe she’s guilty.

      • Paola says:

        This is my very first post about Amanda Knox. That Paola wasn’t me.

      • Xera says:

        -There was more than one killer, it’s not a point of discussion, even Knox and Raffaelle defense don’t dispute it.

        -the killer’s DNA doesn”t have to be found in the victim’s bedroom, it’s a PR spin to make people forget that Knox DNA is found mixed with Meredith blood in three places in the appartment (and that all murderers don’t shed some DNA on the crime scene)

        -The odd behaviour displayed by Knox after the murder alerted the inspectorsbut that is not what motivated the judgement (in Italy the judges have to motivate their decision in writing. In this case it’s been translated in English by volunteers, look it up) Part of the PR machine spin consist in giving importance to trivial anecdotes to make Americans believe that Knox has been convicted on the grounds of trivial gossip while in fact the circumstantial evidence against her is very strong and woujld have her convicted in the US without a doubt

      • Xera says:

        @ FLORC
        She wasn’t found innocent, the court of cassation has just annulled the previous appeal and a new appeal will be judged in Florence in a few month’s time

      • George of the Jungle says:

        FLORc, you are really quite rude. I don’t understand why you are freaking out and saying incredibly rude things to people like “go educate yourself’ when someone else has an opinion that is different from yours. we all come here to gossip but it doesn’t mean you have to get nasty about it. Stop with the self-righteous attitude already. posters like you make it not fun to gossip with others on here. I like listening to different opinions but when you have to be rude to defend yourself, mabe your point isn’t that strong to begin with. you do this on every single topic you post on, it’s not just here

    • DGO says:

      I agree with you, Paola. There is lots of evidence that Americans were censored from hearing. If they would look beyond US press they would see some pretty damning evidence. I think she did it, and I think she will do it again.

  21. truthful says:

    No, I do not beleive her.

  22. KB says:

    All of the evidence points to the guy still in jail. Still, Knox comes across as incredibly self-absorbed and odd.

  23. Ok says:

    I followed this case really closely as it was happening. I was reading a ton in the web.

    I was so sure about her guilt because of her odd reactions and phraseology.

    Then (and don’t make fun of me about this) I was chatting with a friend who is psychic. (Please don’t laugh, she has been dead-on accurate about several years of my life)

    She said absolutely positively 100% Amanda had nothing to do with Merideths murder.

    I was stunned. I brought up a bunch of points about the case.

    My psychic friend insisted that Amanda is such a gentle, benign creature. She would never ever hurt a living soul because of her innate gentleness.

    She went on to further say it was all Rudy Guede. He is evil. He is a predator. He acted alone. And if Amanda had been in the apartment that night she would be the dead one and not Merideth.

    I was flabbergasted. I still don’t know how to think of the situation because every time Amanda talks, she does not seem innocent.

    Oh and my friend said that the Prosecutor in Italy…..nuts nuts nuts nuts nuts and needs to be out of that job and that power.

  24. AustinMJ says:

    Eh. She doesn’t seem guilty to me. She was in Italy for 5 weeks people. Look at her behavior and record before all this happened. High achiever, hard worker – in Italy as a college kid. Has a new guy – High on all of it. Being young, in Italy, good pot, sexy new italian boyfriend – living the dream. In the after videos and photos she appears to me to be in shock. Italian media created this fiasco.

  25. Nymeria says:

    She’s a snake, and I’m convinced she was involved in Meredith’s murder in some way.

    • Mian says:

      I think she was involved in some way in Meredith’s murder, although I don’t think she actually committed the murder with her own hands. But our opinion won’t be popular here in the USA, where Amanda is considered a “saint”, for no other reason than being a pretty American girl.

      She actually had a very sordid past before she went to Italy – drugs, sex, wild parties. She also got in trouble for vandalism at one of the parties, where she participated in throwing bricks or rocks at some houses. Not sure if she was arrested or just received a citation.

      • Sarah says:

        Main, nothing in your second paragraph is true. She was a pretty tame teenager who smoked pot occasionally. She did not have any vandalism citation for throwing rocks. No clue where that story comes from, but it’s pure fabrication. She did have a citation once for a fairly tame party. But it wasn’t for throwing things or vandalizing and it was something that thousands of other teenagers across this nation have been cited for. Certainly not sordid and not something identifying her as a sociopathic killer.

  26. Dani V says:

    Kaiser, I think you put your finger on it. She didn’t murder Meredith but she seems so unfeeling when speaking of her. There is a real coldness there. Where is the empathy for Meredith.

  27. DGO says:

    I think she did it. There’s a lot of evidence that the US press didn’t cover.

    • FLORC says:

      True. There was a lot of stuff the US news did not cover because it was made up and was a stretch to call it evidence.

      • Lissanne says:

        Can you give some examples of this made-up evidence?

      • DGO says:

        How can you call it made up? Do you know Italian? Were you in the court room? Did you see the evidence?

      • Sarah says:

        How about the knife that wasn’t the murder weapon and had a bit of bread on the tip that is somehow supposed to have Meredith’s DNA on the blade? That was pure fabrication. Then there’s the bra clasp that wasn’t collected until 6 weeks after and was clearly contaminated with about 7 DNA samples, but is the smoking gun that Raffaele was part of it? That was pure desperation on the part of the prosecution because they had no evidence.

      • DGO says:

        You are repeating the propaganda the US media spoonfed you. Amanda’s footprint, comprised of Meredith’s blood, was found beneath Meredith’s body. I suppose some black guy just happened to plant that there too, huh?

      • Sarah says:

        DGO, that’s just not true.

      • Xera says:


        The bra has Raffaeele DNA on it (a very rare kind of DNA)the bra hook was collected later but the room was sealed and there was no risk of contamination as no one can explain how Rafaelle DNA’s got there if not by the fact that he touched it

        The cleaned up knife had a small trace of Meredith DNA, too small to replicate the analysis (but there are now new technical possibilities) but even without it the crime scene clean up evidence, Knox DNA mixed with Meredith blood, Sollecito’s DNA, his footprint on the bath towel and their lies are enough to convict them

      • DGO says:

        Sarah – Oh indeed, you don’t know how much evidence there is out there. You just give your automatic “That-isn’t-true”. You should read some reports from impartial people who were actually in court covering the case. I have no doubt Knox was involved in some way.

      • Sarah says:

        Why do people keep trotting out all this tired old evidence that has been debunked? I have read every sentencing report in this case, every book that has been written, I have checked out each of the major websites dedicated to this case, and I have read witness testimony and statements. I am as well-versed in this case as it is possible to be. And it is not a matter of my opinion but a matter of basic fact that Amanda and Raffaele had nothing to do with this crime.

        The bra clasp was so contaminated and so mishandled, that it had at least 8 DNA profiles on it. So much DNA junk, in fact, that it is impossible to separate out which alleles go with which profiles, a point one independent expert made by noting that a match could probably be made to the Judge’s DNA. That bra clasp has no credibility at all.

        As for the knife. A) it wasn’t the murder weapon. Didn’t fit the wounds or the bloody imprint left when the killer (aka Rudy Guede) set the knife down on the bed. B) Stefanoni’s type of DNA testing on that tiny particle she found isn’t recognized in any court in the US because it’s so difficult. Worse than that, she admitted in open court she does not do any of the control testing that would be necessary to rule out contamination and that the amplification process she had to use to extract a profile wasn’t just amplifying the DNA equivalent of white noise. Again, independent experts looked at that DNA claim and laughed because the particle wasn’t human DNA at all. It was a starch. Most likely rye bread,

      • Jenny says:

        But Sarah, you cannot prove a negative so it doesn’t work to say that a lack of or contaminated evidence proves that it is fact that these two had nothing at all to do with the murder. We are ALL just giving our opinions based on the facts (which there seem to be great disagreement about). We can all look at the same facts and still have a different opinion.

    • DGO says:

      @ Sarah – “Angel Face: Sex, Murder and the Inside Story of Amanda Knox” was written by an American reporter who knows Italian. She was a journalist covering the case and is convinced Knox is guilty. The bloody shoe print is only one piece of evidence no one wants to talk about.

  28. Axis2ClusterB says:

    I got really interested in this case in particular – and the Italian legal system in general – and, while I don’t think that Amanda actually killed Meredith, I do think that she has more knowledge and involvement than she admits to.

    On the subject of the Italian legal system, it DOES seem to be pretty jacked up. If you’re interested, the book The Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi is really good. It’s about an infamous Italian serial killer, a Jack the Ripper figure who has never been caught. Numerous people, however, have been arrested for the crimes he committed. It’s a lotta book, but it reads like a novel and is well worth the time.

    • Riff says:

      This is because you didn’t read anything about the cases in which prosecutors did or are doing an excellent job. They do exist, you know.
      That’s why when i read about similar cases in US (OJ Simpson, recently Strauss Kahn – in which, guilty or not, a presidential career has been murdered without succeeding in even starting a trial, not to mention the innocents sentenced to death ) I don’t jump to the conclusion that the entire system is a joke.

  29. Tig says:

    I understand that her options to raise a good bit of cash are limited. However, some of her comments coming out of her during this press tour/junket /what have you are pretty insensitive. Agree with the other posters that she is pretty self-absorbed. Most of these appearances are helping to dispel theses impressions.

    If she is re-tried in Italy, and convicted, she should never leave the USA!

  30. Abby says:

    I went to go read what Eyes for Lies says – and she picked up on the guilty cues, too.

  31. Diana says:

    I find it hard. To see her speaking so freely about such a traumatic event.
    I would think she would find it difficult to retell this terrible scene over and over again.
    God knows the truth and several other people who may have been involved.

  32. Kcarp says:

    The only thing I know she is 100% guilty of is shaggy eyebrows. Go get yourself a wax before you do another interview.

    That being said I watched the interview and thought she was totally weird and I have no clue what she knows or what she did.

  33. Zorbitor says:

    Incarceration is torture … and tortured people, whether guilty or innocent, are forever changed

  34. Dawn says:

    I really have a hard time with this story because I feel like the most important person here should be the one who was murdered and it has not been. In fact I was looking through the article to find Meredith’s name, that’ how lost she is in this whole thing. I don’t know what to believe about Amanda so I won’t make a judgement but honestly this should all be about Meredith and justice for her. I feel so bad for her family.

  35. floretta50 says:

    Her attorney’s used the OJ method they went after and tore down everyone who was needed to prosecute her, the police, the Italaian justice system, it was like all these people are taking advantage of our poor little Armanda. Of course she killed that girl her eyes is as cold as ice. After reading the case it seem to have been a drugged up wilding scenerio.

  36. Misscolleen1 says:

    I haven’t watched the video but if she was truly nodding yes while saying “no” when asked if she had any part in the murder then that is a classic tell. Your body is subconsciously telling the real truth while you are providing lip service.

  37. Amy Lynne says:

    I think she is innocent, but I firmly believed Lance didn’t dope either so I am aware that I can be wrong. The facts seem to support her, but the analysis of Kaiser is really helpful in understanding the issue.

  38. Emily says:

    That is not at all true about double jeopardy. If you are tried and found either guilty or not guilty, you cannot then later be retried for the same crime.. even if they have new evidence. You cannot be tried twice for murdering one person. That is why they need to get it right the first time. There is no way in hell the USA will extradite someone for this farce

  39. Tiffany :) says:

    When I hear people talk about how they “feel” she is guilty because she seems “odd” and “weird” it reminds me of the West Memphis Three and how they were convicted based on their long hair and love of Metallica t-shirts.

    The facts do NOT suggest that she was involved with the murder, much less PROVE she was involved.

    Meredith is a victim, of course, but so is Amanda. She seems traumatized to me, like a soldier with PTSD. I don’t fault her for seeming distant at times, her mind has had to cope with survival in ways most of us will thankfully never know.

    • Lisa says:

      But how much do you hear about Meredith? That’s what’s most unfair about all of this. Same with the Casey Anthony case, how many people talked about Kayli? (Nancy Grace did, but I mean overall coverage) It was never about the victims.

    • Millie says:

      I so agree with Tiffany, and the dangers of speculation based on one’s personal perception of whether or not a person is “warm” (or cuddly, or emotional, etc).

      All this talk about “she just SEEMS”, COLD, WEIRD, whatever. Reminds me of the hive mind piling on because the host of this site implies something just doesn’t “feel” right. What a buncha woo-woo.

      I certainly don’t KNOW whether she is guilty or innocent, but I got the opposite impression of many posting here about her demeanor on Diane Sawyer. I thought she showed a quiet gravitas as was proper in the situation. AND, she appeared sober and mature, not cold. She has a poise that I admire and do not interpret it as self-obsessed.

      Just WHO is the victim is not the point….we all know the victim was the murdered woman. But it is quite possible that this LIVING woman is also a victim.

  40. GeeMoney says:

    I think if you are charged with a major crime and then are eventually found not guilty, there are always going to be people out there who will think that you did it, even if you actually didn’t do it. And that’s a shame.

    I honestly think that she’s innocent and that the right person is behind bars for the murder. I feel sorry for her. She was only 20 years old when all of this happened, she spent 4 years in jail just because the prosecutor wanted to punish someone… how terrible. I can’t imagine what it must have been like for her.

    For all of you who think that she did it… the evidence was NOT there. Her DNA was no where to be found on Meredith’s body, or even in her room for that matter. It’s not rocket science to put 2 and 2 together that she didn’t do it.

    If she’s guilty of anything, it’s switching her story around too many times. That wasn’t a good idea. But then again, none of us have been in the situation that she was in… so who knows what any of us would have done if we were her?

    • Lissanne says:

      I don’t know precisely how I would behave in that kind of situation, but, I do know that: 1) If I found the front door to my flat open, with blood on the bathroom faucet and my roommate’s door locked, I would not stay and take a shower but would get out of there and call the police immediately!; 2) I would have no trouble remembering where I was and with whom the night of the murder, which would be foremost in my thoughts knowing that Meredith was being killed at that time ; 3) If the police had really badgered me into fingering someone else, I would withdraw the statement the next day, rather than let that man sit in prison for two weeks accused of rape and murder until his alibi was corroborated; 4) I would understand that in a murder investigation, changing your story multiple times is going to arouse suspicion on the part of the police!

      • Sarah says:

        She did retract her statement that very day. She couldn’t make the police release Lumumba, though. And she didn’t change her story or have any difficulty remembering where she was except for the overnight interrogation when police so thoroughly confused her and lied to her, swearing they had witnesses who said she was at her house that night, that she got muddled. Her real sin is being weak and vulnerable enough to be manipulated by the police, which the rest of us want to believe can’t really happen (even though we have proof that it does).

      • Lissanne says:

        Knox never retracted her statement in regards to Patrick; in fact she wrote it down in English the next morning. Later, Knox did say that she was no longer sure whether her statement about being at the cottage that night with Patrick was true, that it wasn’t clear to her. It’s not a retraction when you say it wasn’t “clear.”

        BTW, are you are saying she did eventually remember where she was that night? And where was that?

  41. minxx says:

    To me she’s a cold psychopath and I agree with Alan Dershowitz that she was somehow involved in this crime even if she didn’t stab Meredith herself. There was just too much circumstantial evidence against her, too many changed stories, odd behavior upon coming home and, most importantly, she tried to pin it on someone else, her black boss. But two things happen: police didn’t handle the evidence properly and Amanda got REALLY expensive lawyers. But the truth will come out eventually. BTW, it’s not double jeopardy, her case in Italy was not finished by the time she was released, it was on appeal.
    here is a quote from Dershowitz:
    ” Dershowitz said purity has also eluded many members of the U.S. news media who have covered the case closely.

    “One issue is why the American media portrayed her in such positive terms,” he said. “At best, she was a terrible person who tried to blame it on some innocent person and she was clearly a liar, and at worst she participated in a horrible murder, and the American media focused much more on Amanda Knox than on the victim of the case because Amanda Knox was prettier and an American and an American sweetheart.”

    Had she been ugly, he argued, the case would have attracted little attention.”

    • Sarah says:

      I wouldn’t put much stock in Alan Dershowitz’s opinion. From other things he has said, it is quite clear he is not at all familiar with the facts of the case.

      As for the “changed her story too many times” thing, this is taken as gospel truth, but no one can really point to what all these claimed changes are. Truth is, she has always been consistent that she was at Raffaele’s apartment, hanging out, making dinner, watching a movie. The only change came during an overnight interrogation that began at 11 pm and only ended at 5:45 am when she signed a statement she didn’t even write and that wasn’t in English. I know it’s hard for people to believe that police really can extract confessions from innocent people and can get innocent people to falsely accuse other innocent people, but it’s true. It’s exactly what happened in the West Memphis Three case, too. People are a lot easier to break than we realize. They told her they had witnesses so they knew she was at her house that night. They told her Raf said that, too. They got her so confused and exhausted, her own memory got so muddled, she wasnt sure of anything anymore. And there is corroboration that her interrogation was harsh as at least one police officer acknowledges hearing her scream. And then as soon as she got away from the police, she wrote that she really didn’t think what they’d gotten her to envision happening was real.

      • Xera says:

        Knox and Raffaelle changed their alibi a few times saying she stayed in, then said she went out, that they couldn’t remember if she went out or not because they had smoken marijuana (but in her last interviews these days she says that smoking din’t alter her memory, that it just made events seem less real…while she told in her prison diary that she was trying hard to remember what happened that night). In the end Raffaelle didn’t give any alibi any more and the computer activity analysis proved it was not used when they said it was (and now in his book Raffaelle says he was writing emails to his teacher that night!)
        She accused her boss of committing the murder after two hours interrogation (at 1.45 am) when the police told her that Raffaelle didn’t support her alibi anymore, she then admitted that she was at her house that night and plugged her ears when she heard Meredith scream. The declaration she signed that night wasn’t admissible in court because she should have had a lawyer when she stopped being a witness and incriminated herself (at 1.45 am)
        But as she did decide to write a letter -unprompted- as a “gift” to the police to clarify her declaration the next day, that letter has heen admissible in court (and it was in english) and she renewed her accusation of Patrick, so much so that it is on the sole accusation contained in that spontaneous letter that she has been convicted of calumny. Her family and Mariott’s PR agency have been working over time to distort that story

      • Lissanne says:


        I doubt that Alan Dershowitz, who is probably the best-known criminal defense attorney in the US, would comment if he weren’t well acquainted with the case. Perhaps you just don’t like what he has to say. Dershowitz, of course, has obtained acquittals in some very high profile murder cases. Oh, plus he’s the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard University, having been a full professor there since 1967.

      • Sarah says:

        Lisanne, believe it or not, most of the talking head legal pundits on t.v. regularly talk about cases without being terribly well-versed in the facts or the specific law relating to it. Dershowitz is most definitely egotistical enough to think he doesn’t need to do much research to form an opinion, unfortunately. He has proven he doesnt know enough to talk about that knife, for example. And any criminal defense attorney who talks that way about false confessions that also include innocent third parties probably ought to find a different profession.

  42. minime says:

    Wow…is it really necessary to cover someone that was accused of murder in a celebrity website?! This is disgusting.

    • Lissanne says:

      Actually, it’s quite fitting that this is being talked about on a celebrity website. Knox’s family hired a PR firm to influence Americans’ perception of the case, and they are trying to sell her as the all-American girl, the innocent abroad. She has been packaged like a product, really. I think she is guilty, but I also think she has been given bad advice and used by people trying to make a buck off of her, including her PR firm, her publisher, and her American lawyers. If she had confessed to her part in the murder and expressed some remorse in court, as did Rudy Guede, like him, she would have received a shorter sentence and would be getting out in a couple more years. But there’s no money to be made in that.

      • minime says:

        Yes Lissanne, it is a shame that this case was conducted as pure PR strategy. Whether she is innocent or not, the all circus that she and her legal team made about herself, are really not helpful.

        Still, I have never seen a person that is only known from being accused of murder being covered on this website before (yes, other people who are accused of crimes were talked here, but only because they were indeed celebrities before). If this girl is guilty this is just supporting all of her behavior, if she’s innocent it’s deleting the memory of someone who actually was the victim of a brutal crime. I do love celebitchy and its great bloggers, but to cover this girl here is simply unexplainable and indeed disgusting.

      • Seen says:

        @minime- disgusting? She’s a celebrity… Her innocence or guilt is being discussed, there’s nothing disgusting about that. Whether or not she was a celebrity “before” her ordeal is completely irrelevant. You go down that “who qualifies as a celebrity” road, you’re going to dead end. And As I say to fans of censorship, change the dial/station/page.

      • minime says:

        @ Seen
        Yes, obviously disgusting. There is no single case of someone else who is only known from a crime being covered in this website. You jump from finding inadequate to talk about a person as a celebrity, when she is only know from a possible murder, to censorship…what a leap in there to defend whatever you want to defend. I continue reading Celebitchy dear and still I will continue thinking that this website is not a place to talk about her since she is no celebrity, but probably you and others will really make her one. Good for you. And your “censorship” doesn’t work on me. If you don’t like others’ opinions use your own wisdom words and go somewhere else.

      • akua says:

        So, someone else who has no problem reading this should go away, but you, who do have a problem reading this should stay and complain? Doesn’t really make sense. No one is forcing you to stay and read and make multiple comments. If you don’t like it, the choice seems clear, unless you are setting out to make yourself miserable!

      • minime says:

        Oh please..

        This is a comment blog, I made a comment stating my opinion. If someone disagrees they can comment on it too. But talking about dictatorship while sending someone away because they have a different opinion is rather misfitting. Stay and share your opinion in a eloquent way. I never stated that someone should go away (I said that Seen could take her/his own advice), but if you come and complain then makes more sense that you address what part of what I wrote you disagree. Right now you (Seen and Akua) brought nothing to the discussion, apart that I should not give my opinion because you don’t like it.

        I have a lot of respect for this case and I think it is a very sad story for many parts involved no matter what.

        Regardless that, don’t worry, my level of attachment to a gossip blog doesn’t make me feel miserable, but it can be good fun sometimes ;)

      • akua says:

        I really don’t give a crap whether you post or not, was just pointing out that you’re really not making any sense. If you don’t think I’m adding to the discussion, frankly don’t care much about that either, I have more important things to worry about than some stranger’s opinion. Ta ta.

  43. Maggie says:

    I watched the video and found her to be believable. Also angry.

  44. Lisa says:

    Dude. She’s eating this shit up with a silver spoon. If the media started the circus, she didn’t have to go along for the ride. I’m tired of her banging on about wanting a normal life while writing books and taking every interview that comes her way so she can cry about it on TV. I hate to use Casey Anthony as an example for anything, but at least she faded into rightful obscurity.

    If you’re innocent, stay out of the limelight. If you’re guilty, stay out of the limelight. Basta!

    • Sarah says:

      Her family is in debt to the tune of hundreds of thousands, or maybe millions, of dollars, from paying her lawyers to defend against this baseless charge as well as the travel costs they accumulated in visiting her. If selling books is the best way she can earn money to get her parents and grandmother out of debt, I can’t blame her one bit for doing it.

  45. BravoCueen says:

    I’m in the midst of her book but I followed what I could of the trial from here. I am 1000% convinced she is innocent. I don’t believe she had a thing to do with the murder of this poor child.

  46. galena says:

    This whole story is just disgusting to me. I don’t know how guilty or innocent this girl is, but…

    Can Americans please get their head out of their ass and stop it with the whole boo hoo of their citizen being treated unfairly. As an American citizen she had more resources at her disposal then a citizens from other countries.

    The fact that anyone can be outraged at the Italian treatment of this girl while Gitmo is still open and citizens of other countries are being held (and trotured) by the US government despite being cleared as innocent by out very own intelligence agencies just makes me sick to my stomach.

    The reason people in other countries don’t like Americans is because we go around the world causing shit in different degrees and then expect to be treated differently because we are american citizens. This whole country is up in arms about this girl making her out to be some sort of saint.

    I grew up in Europe and went to college in Europe and nothing A.Know talks about as normal experimentation was part of my college experience. Does that make her guilty on its own? Off course not, but it does make you wonder… she wasn’t some little bobble head, if nothing else she is at least guilty of making some VERY poor decisions. Sweeping all of her actions under the rug is doing a disservice to A.Knox, many other girls who are witnessing this, as well as Meredith K. (the REAL victim of this tragedy)…ugh…

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I am sorry, I completely disagree.

      Are you saying that American’s can’t be outraged about injustice simply because other injustice exists in the world? You think that all of a country’s wrongs must be resolved before any of its citizens can be concerned about injustice?

      To begin with, it is hard to make such generalizations about such a large and diverse citizenry. From my experience, Americans aren’t just concerned about American citizens. There was a lot of outrage when the men who gang r*ped a woman on the bus in India didn’t get arrested immediately after the fact. I am hearing a lot of outrage about the collapse of the clothing factory in Bangladesh, etc. I do think that the media in the US tends to be very bandwagon-ish, and so very few stories make it into the main headlines, however, I do think that Americans stand for justice for all when injustice is brought to their attention.

    • frivolity says:

      I completely agree.

      Knox’s sense of entitlement may only be surpassed by America’s sense of entitlement as a whole

  47. littlestar says:

    I haven’t read anyone else’s comments, but I completely agree with Kaiser. I watched part one of the interview that she posted, and Amanda Knox seems completely self-absorbed. I’ve never heard her speak before, but she seems completely unaware of how stuck-up/entitled (can’t think of the perfect word to describe her) she seems. If you’re going to give an interview to plead your side, don’t come across as if you are ACTING. That’s it! She seems like she’s putting on an act to me. So overly dramatic in the words and phrases she uses, and her mannerisms seem fake. Maybe that’s just the way she is… I don’t know. That said, I do not think she is guilty though.

    Also, this makes me sounds crazy, but she kept making so many gross swallowing mouth sounds. Gross mouth sunds

  48. TheTruthHurts says:

    YES!!! It is tragic what the Italian prosecutor did to her. We should be boycotting Italy because of the treatment she received. I pray that she does not ever get extradited back to that evil place.

  49. Jayna says:

    I always thought she was guilty until I began watching interviews and news shows that were showing all the facts and timeline and the corrupt way she was tried. I admit I was wrong. She was innocent.

  50. KellyinSeattle says:

    This story gets way too much press, IMO

  51. Marybel says:

    Lil beyotch is guilty and a great liar.

  52. Aud says:

    There’s something about her that is totally off and no, I would never buy a book to finance her lifestyle.
    There are questions that remain unanswered and I can’t shake off the fact that she bloody went lingerie shopping with her lover straight after her flatmate was found dead.

  53. megs says:

    Obviously there were errors made by the police and prosecutors in Italy. I feel like her whole persona has been crafted, because this is such a high profile case. Those two combinations get people to side with her, but like a lot of you, I think she guilty to some extent.

    It feels like our media here in the US is really trying to sell the idea that Italy is some hellish dump and this is our poor little American angel.

  54. s says:

    she’s guilty and now she’s making money off having murdered someone.

  55. Palermo says:

    Guilty as SIN. Standing outside the crime scene, kissing her boyfriend. Who in their right mind is that cold

  56. Palermo says:

    Guilty as sin. Remember her standing outside the crime scene, kissing her boyfriend. Name one normal person who would react that way.

  57. KayKay says:

    Amanda had a slutty reputation and she was a drug user. It did not help her at her trial, at all.

  58. nika says:

    where there’s smoke there’s fire. She is a narcisist & she commited the murder. If you go over the case presented by the Italians — there’s ton’s of incriminating evidence. She just had some hard core lawyers on her side and the Italian lawyers were kinda wacky and distrated.

  59. Caroline says:

    I feel sorry for her.
    Anyone accused of murder experiences the ordeals of the legal system; what’s astroscious here is that after Amanda has already been acquitted, she will now be tried a second time for the SAME crime.
    It’s sad that Meredith died, but it’s reasonable for Amanda to be more concerned with herself at this point, as any person would.

    Any bystanders should not jump to judgement too quickly at her (seemingly) lack of sympathy towards Meredith’s family at this moment in time.

  60. nika says:

    listen to how she lists the things they found in the room — a foot, a blanket, a body, a dresser.

    she gives NO pause for the word BODY, it’s just one of the objects to her. you can bet this is not how the others really described what they were seeing. but it’s how she sees it — with her total emotional numbness towards Meridith.

  61. Amanda says:

    I just don’t see the motive for her. Rudy Guede was already found to have killed her — with his DNA inside Meredith’s body (gross). Is the prevailing opinion on those who think she’s guilty that Amanda was there while some guy she barely knew raped and murdered her roommate? Just seems implausible to me.

    • Lissanne says:

      The court judgement against her named Knox as a participant in the attack, not a bystander. They don’t know who actually killed Meredith. Since all 3 left the scene and let her die, that makes them all culpable.

      As to the sense of it, none of the 3 had a record of violence.

  62. Patrice says:

    Yes!! Thank you for also noticing how she nodded repeatedly while answering “No”. Even the least knowledgable person in body language cues instantly knows what that one means. I mean, come on!

    As for her being an “average” young woman of her age, that’s something else we can also agree on. She is very typical of her generation in the sense that everything is about HER all the time. Nevermind the girl who was brutally murdered in their apartment.

    One last thing that really surprised me in the interview was to find out that she had only known/been “dating” the Italian dude for SEVEN DAYS at the time of Meredith’s murder but the media constantly referred to him as her boyfriend. Wtf??

    This whole case, including all the people in it has all just been so bizarre from start to finish. Idk. I just can’t even. Poor Meredith :(

    • Brittney says:

      Ugh, why do vocal, vapid celebrities get to determine every generalization about my generation? I’m so sick of hearing about how selfish and vain 20-somethings are. It goes the other way too — I’m sick of being told that anyone (myself included) who *isn’t* completely narcissistic must be a “refreshing exception.” I’ve interacted with people of ALL ages my entire life, through family, work, school, etc… and I’ve known some very dedicated, selfless, compassionate human beings, just as I’ve known some idiotic, self-obsessed brats. There is no age pattern. It’s not about what year you were born, it’s about your priorities and the way you were raised.

      No generation is any more or less self-centered than the next.

      The only accurate stereotype would be that every single generation accuses the ones below them of the very same things they were once accused of.

  63. Brittney says:

    You should all check out the posts about Amanda on Eyes for Lies… the head shake really is disturbing. The BBC article’s pretty telling too.

    I have no idea whether she was involved and I have no way of finding out conclusively, but she’s definitely lying about a lot of things. All I can say is I wouldn’t be going on some media blitz unless I were 100% innocent, and then it would only be to declare that yes, I am innocent, and I will always feel awful about what happened to another innocent young woman.

  64. Squeakie says:

    What I am most curious is will she be extradited to Italy if found guilty?

  65. Lisa says:

    This girl is a compulsive liar and a murderess.

  66. chalkdustgirl says:

    Don’t believe her at all. Cold hearted bitc*.

  67. TOPgirl says:

    I think Amanda is innocent. There is absolutely no reason during her short stay in Italy that she would even think of murdering someone. She’s young and undeveloped mentally as a young adult and people want to pick at her every move during that time because people over there would LOVE to jail an American. Anyway, Amanda may have not been the most sympathetic person after discovering her friends murder but I think she went through enough crap knowing that it wasn’t her. How do you think you’ll feel if you went through hell for someone else’s murder and wasn’t even there? Don’t you think you’d harden up a bit? She barely knew that girl and she didn’t kill her.

    • teri says:

      The prosecutors and the police sent so many lies to the press and they ran with it. I read Amanda Knoxs memoir and this young woman is innocent. They were and still are on a witch hunt trying to frame her. It’s easy to read gossip mags and other entertainment outlets but the press is out of control.

  68. Palermo says:

    I saw her interview with Diane Sawyer last night. Pretend sadness and never shed a single tear, not one

    • TOPgirl says:

      She doesn’t need to “act guilty” for something she never did. And she doesn’t need to keep crying for someone she barely knew. Of course, she was as sympathetic as she could be during that time but her and that girl barely knew each other. She was more terrified that it could’ve been her but it wasn’t! If you were in her shoes, you’d respond just the same. Just imagine having to go to court in a different country with a different justice system and people wanting you hung for something you NEVER did. They didn’t even TRY to prove she was innocent! I believe her innocence and naivity.

  69. Just Celebz says:

    Its a very strange story and its had an even stranger finish. I say finish but she could still be retried. She better hope she don’t get found guilty as shes been pleading innocence so long on TV and stuff.

  70. xxx says:

    I’ve read a fair bit about this case and I still do not have any idea if she was involved or not. There are so many weird things, it’s all in the interpretation. That said, I do think that there have been many cases where an unlikeable person is seen as guilty, not because of the evidence, but because they are unlikeable. There was a case in Australia in recent years of a woman being found guilty of killing her husband. No body, almost no evidence, but she is an unpleasant person so it was easy to believe that she was guilty. It was extremely unfair. When it come to Knox, I think some of this came into play – people who met her thought she was odd and didn’t like her, so assumed she was involved. I think her behavior was extremely odd, but the evidence is weird and doesn’t add up. She may be guilty of some involvement, I honestly don’t know,but I do know that she seems to have been judged on her odd responses and behavior more so than solid evidence, when that could well be due to being an odd, narcissistic person.

  71. mollie says:

    Yes I believe her. 100%. What on earth is “acting guilty enough?” If she is completely and totally innocent, why on earth should she spend the rest of her life paying for someone else’s crime by constantly having to make sure she is acting “guilty enough”??
    Craziness. The prosecutor is a known liar. Read Salon’s latest on this. I hope she makes enough money on her book to never have to work after what she was put through.

  72. Thora says:

    “She was thrust into the international spotlight when she was still in the middle of figuring out who she was and is”

    People actually figure that out?

  73. Kate says:

    GUILTY! Who hugs and cuddles and gets romantic after someone was slaughtered??? A guilty person, that’s who. No remorse and not a care in the world but sex instead of a young life taken, they are practically on top of each other.

    The Tsarnaev brothers did the same thing. They bombed Boston then went about their lives like normal people without a care in the world. But she and her boyfriend did it in front of people. They also say her blood was found at the crime scene. So how did her blood get mixed in with the dead girl. Mmm hmm

    I also dont like that she pointed the finger at an innocent person.

  74. Therese says:

    I think the time line is significant – not in her favor. Someone posted that she had only been in Perugia for five weeks. I feel that she was having a wild time: young, in a foreign country and relishing her freedom. I think the fact that that the newness had not worn off yet played into what happened. If one is bent on trouble, one doesn’t even need five weeks to get it going.

    Also, what is significant to me, are the number of posters who think she is guilty. I have read every post about Amanda Knox when she is written about, and I think it was pretty much 50/50, with some leaning more toward innocent. Now that she has come out of the woodwork, and people can see her in person and hear her, I am reading MANY more guilty opinions. I think that is pretty interesting.

    I wasn’t going to opine, just read, but I can’t resist. I hate to see anyone get away with murder. She’s not just an oddball. She’s odd for a reason. The eyes have it.

    Really turned off by the header on the news story which went something like Amanda Knox, an American girl. She’s not an all-American girl. She went abroad and grossly threw a bad reflection on her family, on our Country, deprived a lovely, loving family of their daughter. Don’t all-American this woman to me.

    I am very upset with Diane Sawyer and ABC news. They soft-soaped it. That is NOT hard reporting. She said that Amanda Knox knows that every word she says is scrutinized and that what she says could cause her more legal woes. I felt that she was trying to direct the audience’s reaction to her at how obviously schooled and coached her responses are. I don’t need Diane Sawyer to direct me as to how I should perceive something. I firmly believe that Amanda’s team demanded and got the questions beforehand, and that Amanda was coached on her answers and how she answered them. This was rehearsed, thank you very much Ms. Sawyer. She was careful what she said, alright.

  75. SydneySpy says:

    None of us was there at the scene, and I doubt any posters were at the trial, either. As an Italian, I can guarantee that had I been in that courtroom, I’d have had trouble understanding and following all the legalese. My point is that so much info has come from so many sources, translated, paraphrased, twisted, misunderstood etc., that it’s difficult to know for sure, given that we are also not privy to so much that was presented in court.

    Just because a person strikes us as sociopathic, self-absorbed, mean, silly, selfish, mercenary, does not mean that person is guilty of murder. Just because the person does not react or behave in the way we think is appropriate, does not make that person guilty. I point to the case of Lindy Chamberlain. She was publicly maligned for her composure, lack of emotion and stoicism when she was accused of her infant daughter’s murder, and during the protracted legal case. Almost every man and his dog concluded she was surely guilty. After all, what mother could be so emotionless after her daughter was taken and killed? She HAD to be guilty. Forensic evidence and experts from and for the prosecution almost did her in. She was found guilty and sent to jail, where she remained until the matinee jacket, which she described accurately and insisted the baby had worn that night, was found in a dingo cave. This matinee jacket was a crucial part of her defense. The prosecution’s forensic evidence was proved to be unreliable, faulty, tainted and suspect. After many years of legal wrangling, she was finally exonerated. I urge you to research this very interesting case.

    It would do us all well to remember that experts, lawyers, police, scientists, those we consider honourable and beyond reproach, as well as Joe Bloggs, sometimes get things wrong. And sometimes they also lie.

    I think we do ourselves a disservice by jumping to conclusions when we are not in possession of all the facts.

  76. binturong says:

    Check out this opinion piece in the NYTimes about Knox–I think the issue of sexism isn’t getting nearly the attention it should:

    “there’s a cornucopia of synonyms for whore and slut and no comparably pejorative vocabulary for promiscuous or sexually rapacious men”

  77. Deebo says:

    Guilty going by that performance.

  78. Mel says:

    I don’t like how this debate (not here, I mean in general) seems to be polarised in terms of nationality.

    She was not arrested or found guilty, originally, because she was American; and if the police messed up, it was not because they were Italian. (If you want to see a major mess up, look no further than the JonBenet Ramsay initial investigation).

    Obviously, I don’t know if she is guilty or not. I do have a suspicion that she was involved more than she is letting know.
    And her pointing the finger to Lumumba WAS a disgrace, no matter what.

  79. Andy Loewy says:

    Amanda is totally innocent. Our society is guilty of putting her in jail for 4 years. Oh my god! Leave this poor woman alone! She had nothing to do with this murder! She will end up being a saint if we keep going the way we are. Think about the scarlet letter!? This is a modern-day witch-hunt.