Amanda Knox convicted (for a second time) of murdering Meredith Kercher in Italy


I have a question: are Meredith Kercher’s family members the people pushing the Amanda Knox-Raffaele Sollecito stuff at this point? And by that I mean, is the Kercher family going to the Italian authorities over and over, begging them to retry Knox and Sollecito? I know that several Kercher family members believe that Knox and Sollecito still haven’t told the truth about what went down the night Meredith Kercher was murdered, but my question is: who was pushing for this retrial? Was it the Italian prosecutors, the Italian people or the Kercher family? Or a combination of all the above?

So, yes, Amanda Knox was convicted AGAIN of murdering Meredith Kercher. Raffaele Sollecito was convicted again as well. Italy has no “double jeopardy” like we have in America, which seems to mean that Knox and Sollecito are going to keep being retried, found guilty, appeal, exonerated, retried, found guilty, appeal, you get the picture. This might go on for the next ten years. Or more.

Amanda Knox has been convicted of murdering her British roommate in a second appeals trial that concluded in Florence on Thursday. Knox’s former Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, has also been found guilty once again for the 2007 slaying of Meredith Kercher.

Knox has been sentenced to 28 ½ years in prison, according to CNN. Sollecito’s sentence is 25 years. Knox, who is now 26 and a student at the University of Washington in Seattle, is not likely to return to Italy to serve her new sentence, since U.S. law prevents a person from being tried twice on the same charge, a legal expert told CNN.

Italy’s highest court had ordered a new trial for Knox and Sollecito after the pair were acquitted in 2011. The Court of Cassation said the acquittal was full of “deficiencies, contradictions and illogical” conclusions. Knox did not return to Italy for the trial, nor was she compelled by law to do so.

Knox served four years of her original 26-year sentence, including three years on a slander conviction for falsely accusing a bar owner in the Umbrian university town of Perugia. The bar owner, Patrick Lumumba, again testified against Knox during the second appeals trial.

“I say the same thing I said six years ago. I think she is guilty, and that is why she slandered me,” Lumumba told reporters.

Knox and Sollecito have maintained their innocence in the stabbing of 21-year-old Kercher, who was found with more than 40 wounds and a deep gash in the throat in the Perugia apartment she shared with Knox. A third person, Rudy Guede of the Ivory Coast, was convicted of Kercher’s murder as well, and is serving 16 years after being found guilty in a separate trial. Prosecutors say he could not have killed her alone.

Knox released a statement to media about her conviction shortly after the news broke.

“First and foremost it must be recognized that there is no consolation for the Kercher family,” Knox says. “Their grief over Meredith’s terrible murder will follow them forever. They deserve respect and support.”

“I am frightened and saddened by this unjust verdict,” the statement continues. “Having been found innocent before, I expected better from the Italian justice system. The evidence and accusatory theory do not justify a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather, nothing has changed. There has always been a marked lack of evidence. My family and I have suffered greatly from this wrongful persecution.”

“This has gotten out of hand. Most troubling is that it was entirely preventable,” says Knox. “I beseech those with the knowledge and authority to address and remediate the problems that worked to pervert the course of justice and waste the valuable resources of the system: overzealous and intransigent prosecution, prejudiced and narrow-minded investigation, unwillingness to admit mistake, reliance on unreliable testimony and evidence, character assassination, inconsistent and unfounded accusatory theory, and counterproductive and coercive interrogation techniques that produce false confessions and inaccurate statements.”

“Clearly a wrongful conviction is horrific for the wrongfully accused, but it is also terribly bad for the victim, their surviving family, and society.”

[From People]

In the wake of this re-conviction, Sollecito was “found” at the Italian border and taken into custody by police. Some people say he was trying to flee Italy, but I saw his lawyer on the Today show and it sounded like Sollecito was just trying to get somewhere quiet to wait out the verdict. The Today Show’s legal experts said that there’s a possibility that the Dept. of Justice will extradite Knox to Italy, but it probably won’t happen. I tend to believe that Amanda will spend the rest of her life in America, never traveling abroad again.

Meredith Kercher’s sister Stephanie released a statement after the verdict yesterday. She said: “I think we are still on the journey of the truth and it may be the fact that we don’t ever really know what happened that night, which will be something we have to come to terms with.” I kind of believe that. After watching some of the interviews Knox gave to promote her book last year, I do still wonder if Knox knew more than she’s ever said. I don’t believe she killed Kercher, but… I don’t know, her interviews last year weren’t the most convincing things ever.



Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

449 Responses to “Amanda Knox convicted (for a second time) of murdering Meredith Kercher in Italy”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lark says:

    I believe Rudy Guede acted alone, and that she was high out of her mind when she dealt with the cops which accounts for the weird behavior. From what I understand, they were waiving around in her face and screaming that they found the hair from an African male and that it had to be her boss and she must know something about it, which is what lead to the false accusation of him before they got Rudy. The only real DNA was the bra-strap which was supposedly tainted. I think she was a dumb, moronic 20 year old but I don’t think she’s a killer.

    • Kiddo says:

      +1. I think this is largely a push by the prosecutor.

      • Kay says:

        My husband said the exact same thing earlier. He said they had a verdict decided before this trial even started and it was all about saving face for the prosecution. I completely agree. And it seemed even weirder this time. I read somewhere that they changed to motive this time from sex game gone wrong to Amanda being so upset she killed over the unflushed toilet….really?

      • Xera says:

        Italian judges have to write sentencing reports where they detail each fact taken into consideration and the reasoning that led to the given sentence. It’s extremely detailed, it has to be published 90 days after the sentencing (the first sentencing report written by Massei has been translated in English). You should read it, there’s no room for prejudice

      • msw says:

        Kay, yes, I agree. They embarrassed themselves thoroughly and were in big time CYA mode, I think. There were six motives I counted. My favorite part was the claim Meredith’s neck had different DNA from the rest of her body. It’s like a terrible crime novel come to life.

      • J.Mo says:

        The un flushed toilet came up but not as any motive, Vanity Fair has an old but good account that mentions it I think. Also, I believe they mentioned an African perpetrator & when interrogated she could only think of one she knew, her boss. She was immature, probably high, and socially awkward, even “off.” I don’t trust her but it sure doesn’t make her a killer. I feel way more sympathy for the Italian ex going to jail though. Oh, I have read that your name is very important in Italy when it comes to education, employment, position, etc; an American in the judicial system? I don’t like the kind of person she seems to be but I don’t think she had a fair chance.

    • Stef Leppard says:

      I also think she’s innocent.
      Apparently it’s amateur hour in the Italian courts. This seems so embarrassing for them and horrible for Meredith’s family. I get the sense the court is just trying to cover their asses at the expense of Amanda and Raffaele (sp?).

      • Seattlemomma says:

        Seriously. The Italians are the lunatics who convicted scientists for inaccurate prediction (or failure to accurately predict) an earthquake. The Italian court system has long been a worldwide joke.

      • Vera says:

        It’ll hurt American tourism to Italy as well, already has. Many people are fearful of traveling to a country that has such amateur, revenge-driven justice.

    • smee says:

      I think you are 100% correct.

      • Diana says:

        I’ve been documenting myself on this and I think the both of them are inocent. The Italian police just doesn’t want to lose and it is embarrasing what they are doing.

    • Xera says:

      I’ve followed the case since the beginning, the errors circulating in the English speaking press are unbelievable, this is a case study of what happens when crime reporting becomes infotainment and the criminals use professional PR to rewrite the story to make sure the facts get lost in translation (like the fact that Knox blood mixed with Meredith’s was found in three different places in the cottage, that Meredith’s DNA was found on the knife at her boyfriend’s place, that her boyfriend made up a bogus story in his jail diary to explain the DNA on the knife -pretended that he accidentally pricked Meredith with it-, that Knox didn’t retract her accusations of her boss in a spontaneous letter she wrote from her jail cell to the police, that there are small footsteps in blood in the hallway that can’t belong to a man, that the defence has never found a single scenario to explain how the boyfriend DNA could have contaminated the bra clasp if Sollecito didn’t touch it, that the court that condemned Guede ruled that he didn’t act alone because Meredith didn’t have defensive wounds on her hands – meaning her hands were held while she was stabbed numerous times and Guede is not an octopus, etc, etc…

      On the legal aspect it was not a retrial, it was still the appeal from the first trial -that is granted to every defendant in Italy- the previous appeal had been nullified by the supreme court because of it’s faulty reasoning.
      The extradition question isn’t what the infotainment press pretend it to be either, the treaties are crystal clear and the US only refuses to extradite his military personnel

      • tifzlan says:

        I’m only asking because i honestly don’t know much about this case (not as much as you do) but, from what you’ve read, what would the motive be if Amanda did kill Meredith? I know motive isn’t as important in real life as the crime shows make it out to be and are sometimes even irrelevant, but i’d still like to know if you wouldn’t mind telling?

      • Div says:

        @Xera The US press, and legitimate sources, has a completely different account. They say the footprint was from a contaminated crime scene and that Knox’s DNA did not match. This is like the NY Times too, and they all believe she is innocent. Two countries have two very different accounts.

      • paola says:


        i’m italian and you said it perfectly. Many of the details were lost in translation and Amanda was rushed on her plane after the first trial because everyobdy knew she was involved somehow and if she was still in italian territory she’d have to face court again and maybe never go back to the US. She had and still has a great PR team and they’re trying to make Amanda the innocent american sweetheart but she was released only because there wasn’t enough evidence to pin her down. In Italy you’re innocent unless you prove the contrary unlike in the US, where you’re guilty until you prove your innocence.
        Following this case on the news, where people were able to see footages of her interview in court, Amanda played dumb on many occasions claming that everything was misinterpreted because of the language barrier.
        This case has been a mess since the very beninning, many things are still a mystery and we’ll probably never know the truth but i’m sure Sollecito and Amanda are in some way involved in this and Guede is the one paying for everyone.

      • minime says:

        @ Div
        “Two countries have two very different accounts.”

        Not really. More that her country and the others have two very different accounts.
        Most of the European press and other legitimate sources, put it in the way that there is proof she is guilty but she got away with it because she is an USA citizen, with an angelical look. True or false, this story is too entangled in this moment for any “outsider” to know the truth and probably it will never be known. I tend to believe, from what I read, that she is guilty, but maybe that’s unfair.

      • Bridge13 says:


        In the U.S., an accused person is innocent until proven guilty (beyond a reasonable doubt). I’m not sure if your statement to the contrary is your opinion of the U.S. justice system or if you are misinformed about the burden of the prosecution. Just wanted to clarify.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Um, no, Paola, in the US you are innocent until you are proven guilty just the same. The difference is that if there were cops traipsing through a crime scene contaminating evidence and a deranged prosecutor who used the same exact ritual sex killing story to convict people at every one of her trials, people in other countries would be up in arms. You have to meet a burden of evidence to get a conviction and that evidence has to be properly collected by professionals who are actually qualified to be let into a crime scene. You can try to make this all about the alleged feelings of superiority and cuteness of American women, but it’s fundamentally about a botched case conducted by a circus of incompetents and lunatics who would not only have their case thrown out of any court in the US or UK, but who would be mandatorily barred from practicing in their fields for life.

      • Jessiebes says:

        With Xera on this one.

      • KB says:

        All of that DNA evidence was contaminated by the investigators, just as the crime scene was. Thank God they recorded themselves investigating the crime scene like a bunch of amateurs. Too bad the police didn’t do the same when they interrogated Knox.

        And if Guede didn’t act alone, why did he wait until his appeal trial to claim Knox and Sollecito were involved?

        You claim we’re getting incorrect information, but you’re using all the initial claims by the police that have since been disproven.

      • Bridget says:

        Part of the issue was that the crime scene wasCOMPLETELY contaminated, so that evidence was shaky at best, and the crime scene photos were shown AFTER they’d been treated for evidence, where even the investigators admitted it wouldnt hVe actually looked lile that gory mess at the time. And they coerced Knox’s ‘confession’ implicating her boss, as held Knox for hours interrogating her with no legal representa tion. With a prosecutor who has a history of coming up with far-fetched theories – this isn’t even his first disputed trial involving completely unsupported claims of a satanic ritual.

        The most likely scenario is that Rudy Guede acted alone, and implicated Knox to try to save his own skin. It certainly makes a lot more sense than Knox and her brand new boyfriend picked up a drifter to take part in a satanic ritual killing.

      • paola says:

        Sorry, I thought in some of the states in the Us there was a different system from the one we have.

      • Nerd Alert says:

        Let’s be honest though, they are really presumed guilty until proven innocent despite what the law says. That’s probably why paola was “misinformed,” because no matter what we are supposed to presume, we presume guilt.

        OJ Simpson
        Casey Anthony
        Jodi Arias
        George Zimmerman

        I’m not going to say whether they were really guilty or not, but you best believe the American public thought so LONG before they were even in court.

      • msw says:

        To be honest, i dont think following this case from the beginning or living in Europe helps anybody make a valid argument for being informed on this case. You folks were inundated with bullshit from the very start, all of which has been shown to be far from the smoking gun it seemed at first. I also thought she was guilty at first. Looking at the actual evidence and not the propoganda the Italians came up with, she is obviously innocent.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “that Meredith’s DNA was found on the knife at her boyfriend’s place, ”

        This is 100% incorrect. The knife was presented at the first trial. Before the 2nd trial, court appointed independent experts tested the knife and found that not only was Meredith’s DNA on the knife…it was rye bread. Not human blood.

        It is comments like yours that make me doubt those that think she is guilty.

      • Ok says:

        Xera — before you set your mind about how the English speaking press missed big chunks of evidence due to translation,
        Please please please please do a google search on Giuliano Mignini who is the Italian Prosecutor in Perugia. Continue with the author Douglas Preston.

        Douglas Preston is a true crime author that wore a book about murders in Perugia in the 1980’s. Murders have never been solved.

        Mignini accused Preston of the murders and actively tried to prosecute him.

        One tiny detail: PRESTON WAS NOT ANYWHERE ON THE EUROPEAN CONTINENT AT THE TIME WHEN THE MURDERS TOOK PLACE!!!! Not living there. Not vacationing there. Nothing.

        And Mignini is the genius at the helm of the Kercher investigation !!!!!

        Mignini has racked up complaints and reprimands because of prosecutorial misconduct. He is gonna ride this mess until he dies trying to save face. He is arrogant, mentally ill and delusional, he abuses his power position in the community. And he is desperately trying to save face on this international trial.

        That lunatic is gunning for those two young people. And he is an old fool, because they already got the right guy – Guede

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        Bridget, you are wrong, because Guede has proclaimed that Knox is innocent. He has proclaimed that all three of them are innocent.

      • Xera says:

        @ tifzl – It’s probably a case of escalating violence under drug influence, Knox could have wanted to humiliate Meredith and planned a prank (she admitted recently on her blog that she had previously staged a fake robbery to scare her roommates in Seattle and the story told by another source was that there were male friends involved that pretended to kidnap her roommates) – she had come to dislike Meredith as evidenced by the explanatory mail she wrote to all her relations two days after the murder (read it it’s quite damning in itself) where she said she saw Meredith’s blood in the bathroom and “thought it was menstrual blood (Eww)”
        Implying Meredith was dirty and expressing her disgust two days after her death is quite telling

      • Xera says:

        @ KB
        On contamination: if the evidence was contaminated the defence would just have to hypothesise a possible path of contamination to have the evidence thrown out. They didn’t find one plausible path. They are left with the embarrassing evidence and court lawyers theatrics, it’s their job to try to raise doubt but if they don’t have a plausible argument the evidence stays. Jf it wasn’t the case all DNA evidence would be disregarded at every trial with the magic formula “it was contaminated ”
        It’s obvious when you follow the trial you follow the accusation AND THE DEFENCE ARGUMENTS. When you argue contamination you have to answer “How”. How did Sollecito DNA that was nowhere in the cottage en up on the bra that the murderer cut from Meredith’s body. How did Knox blood got mixed with Meredith blood in Filomena’s bedroom. How did Meredith’s DNA end up on the knife found at Sollecito’s appartment? In a real trial lawyers have to come up with a plausible theory. Of course an obfuscating PR campaign doesn’t have the same constraints

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Q: “How did Sollecito DNA that was nowhere in the cottage en up on the bra that the murderer cut from Meredith’s body.”
        A: There is video of the police passing around the bra clasp. The video showed forensic police picking up Meredith Kercher’s bra clasp, handing it to one another, placing it back on the floor, photographing it and then picking it up again.

        Q: “How did Meredith’s DNA end up on the knife found at Sollecito’s appartment?”
        A: Meredith’s DNA was NOT found on the knife. After the 1st trial, the court appointed 2 independent experts to test the knife. They did not find any of Meredith’s blood. What was thought to be blood at the first trial ended up being RYE BREAD.

      • Juliette says:

        The US press did not immediately proclaim Amanda’s innocence. Having followed this case in US media, the immediate reaction in the US media was of bystander interest, which turned into confusion. Why were they confused? Because from the moment of the discovery of the murder, the Italian police, prosecution and media obsessively promoted an image that Amanda was sex-mad, depraved and guilty of killing her room-mate without ANY evidence to back their story up. When pressed for evidence, they fabricated murder weapons, invented a sexually charged motive and manipulated the crime scene to suit their dramatic fiction. It was a poorly run investigation from the very start.

        Meredith’s murderer is Rudy Guede. His DNA was all over Meredith’s body. He had no reason to be at the house with Meredith. Yet, he will serve only 16 years. And the Italians now want to put Amanda away for 28? It’s absolute insanity. I feel sorry for the Italian people, that this is what passes for criminal justice.

      • shady says:

        Knox DNA was mixed in the sink with Kercher blood, NOT Knox *blood*. BIG difference, of course her DNA was in the sink that she used everyday.

        Kercher DNA was NOT on the knife found at Sollecito’s home, and this fact came out in this new trial.

        The crime scene was so contaminated and there was video proof, so the tiny bit of Sollecito DNA on the bra clasp was thrown out.

        Single murderer in prison already. This is ridiculous.

      • Frenzy says:

        The bra was retrieved 46 days AFTER the crime ….yes 46 days! Embarrassing evidence? What’s embarrassing was that bumbling prosecutor did not want to check Meredith’s body temperature which will indicate the time of death( for fear of contamination he said). It was only taken 2 days after! Yup a critical info like that esp Rafaelle’s last computer activity was 9:10 and he and Amanda were seen at his apartment at 8:45. Meredith was said to have died before 9:30. Checking that would have provided an alibi for them! And not only that it was the postal police who came first and let Amanda, Rafaelle and 2 others walk all over the crime scene. I am not claiming to know everything about this case but I also don’t believe everything that Mignini was saying .

      • Stef Leppard says:

        @nerd alert
        Three of those people were found to be not guilty, so that doesn’t really support your case. And I don’t think all criminals are automatically presumed guilty. In the cases you mentioned there was a lot of evidence to suggest guilt.

      • respect says:

        thank you. i live in italy and cannot believe the discrepencies in reporrting the facts of this case in america. guilty e basta.

      • Mel says:

        XERA – so true. I find it unbelievable how amateurish the US media are in reporting on the Italian judicial system (which is far from perfect – as any other judicial system known to man – but it’s not arbitrary, as they make it sound) – or how blindly people believe those reports without informing themselves from less biased sources.

        So, no, people – as I , too, have said before, she has not been tried more than once for the same crime. It is still the same original process. And no, it is not going to drag on forever after all the legal avenues are exhausted.

        But it has been my experience that many people simply do not have a real interest in the truth, therefore do not listen.

      • Bwarf says:

        Agree @xera. I’m also surprised at the fact that the Knox family hird a pr firm. A pr firms job is persuade and manipulate a message. I’m only sorry that Italy allowed her to leave, she belongs in jail and its sad that she was not only involved but now makes so much money off of the crime.

    • Ok says:

      Italy already has the right guy in prison, and it is that psychopath Guede. Worst part was that evil piece of crap got 30 years at the beginning, then got the time knocked down to 16 years.

      The prosecutor is severely mentally ill and on a power trip. Read up on him. Very dangerous combination of mental illness and power-tripping.

      I don’t understand why Solicito’s family did not move him out of Italy last year when they had time. Now he is screwed.

      • Liberty says:

        I agree with Ok — you can read about the prosecutor. Plus articles factually discussing the contamination of the scene. And the truth behind the scraps that seem incriminating when dispensed into press as others used these info scraps. None of us can know what happened, and I do think they have the right man in jail already, but I do feel that the prosecutor and incredibly sloppy evidence handled and questioning plus emotions and nationality led to this trial mess.

    • FLORC says:

      We’re also getting different sides of the story. I know i’m not alone in thinking their police totally fudged this investigation and put a terrible prosecutor with his own agenda at the helm.

      Girl is innocent as far as the evidence gathered is concerned. To say otherwise is to ignore heavy amounts of logic and put more weight in suspicion. Not to mention to outright ignore so much evidence that was ignored and not collected because it didn’t lead to Knox.

      This investigation was handled wrong from the jump and I think we can all agree on that.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Well said, FLORC.

      • John Wayne Lives says:

        This. What a sad destruction of promising lives all around. I feel so deeply for all their mothers. What heartbreak

      • Bwarf says:

        Not true. There is evidence that points to her involvement, blood in the bathroom’ luminal traces, the staged robbery’ PLUS the numerous slips of the tongue in her attempt to confuse police and prosecutors, her many lies, etc. so many people claim DNA contamination but don’t actually know what is involved in that and how many differences there are between contamination and transfer.

        There is absolutely evidence that Knox and sollecito were involved, not just guede. They have rightfully been found guilty again and it only saddens me that this pathological liar will go free in America.

        I don’t see how people can still think she’s not guilty. She, herself, placed herself at the crime scene them tried to confuse everyone after she realized what she had said. Plus trying to implicate an innocent party?!

    • Annieb says:

      Guede never accused Amanda and Sollecito of killing Meredith, bu he never admitted to killing her either.

      He probably didn’t act alone because there were two sets of bloody footprints found inside the house, visible bloody shoe prints leading from Meredith’s room to the exit and prints of feet with no shoe on them that were only found with a lamp (somebody cleaned them up before the police came).

      Amanda and Meredith’s mixed blood traces were found at several points in the house, including the bathroom (it didn’t come from their menstrual blood).

      Amanda and Sollecito had been dating for 6 (or 9?) days so while it may be reasonable for her DNA to be on a knife in his kitchen, it makes one wonder how Meredith’s DNA ended up at the tip of that same knife.

      Plus, all those witnesses who saw Amanda around the house in the morning after the murder when she was supposedly still sleeping at Sollecito’s.

      Her story sounds suspicious o me.

    • Shazz says:

      A 26 year FBI agent looked at the evidence and said it was impossible for her to have committed the crime – the knife her DNA was “found” on was too large to have made the wounds, no DNA, footprints, or hand prints of Amanda or her boyfriend were found at the scene – this is not possible, he said. She had never shown any violent behavior in her life – if she were this violent, something would have surfaced in 20 years. Quite compelling – based on her demeanor and odd behavior, I had felt she seemed suspicious. That’s why we shouldn’t judge people without evidence. Acting odd doesn’t make you a killer.

      • Lissanne says:

        I don’t understand how the opinions of a “26 year FBI agent” have any bearing here. The FBI had no involvement in the investigation. Certainly the Italian police did not share information with this person. Although I am intrigued by your/the FBI agent’s assertion that “the knife her DNA was found on” was too large to have made the wounds.” So you admit that “her” DNA was found on a knife in Sollecito’s kitchen. “Her” name, by the way, was Meredith. May she rest in peace.

    • CHH says:

      I agree that Rudy Guede is the sole killer of Meredith Kercher. Sadly her family and the Italian court system refuse to grasp the scienc but embrace the gossip.

    • Delilah says:

      I’ll never forget the morning this story was on my TV screen at the onset and my impression. The spin was it being a 3 some between a couple and a ‘guest’ gone wrong. I remember the speculation drugs were a big factor and possibly an element of jealousy on the part of the girlfriend as it can sometimes occur when she regrets submitting to pressure to appease her man by engaging in sex acts which she objects. When it was highlighted the accused was an American Caucasian in Italy I quickly concluded America would be outraged and would not condone her imprisonment, let alone conviction. A summation made in 3 minutes. 6+ years later and my snap judgement call applies. I’m numb.

    • Lex says:

      UPDATE: The judge may be charged as she broke the law by speaking about the case…

      This whole process just screams injustice..

    • vicktrola says:

      Wrong, Lark. She’s a killer and the sooner they extradite her out of my city the better.

  2. Karolina says:

    I think she is guilty, Maybe she did not directly kill the girl, but she was watching or something. Italian prosecution just messed it up big time the way they approached the crime scene so we will never know for sure what has happened.

    • eliza says:

      I will always believe she played a part in that girl’s death in some way too. I have no sympathy for her whatsoever. She is a skilled liar and manipulator. Just because she was young, attractive and American does not mean she is not guilty of some part in her roomates murder.

      I agree, the Italians messed up.royally but there is no way this girl is without some part in that murder.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I am so tired of hearing people accuse those that think she is innocent of thinking so because she is a “young attractive American”. In case you didn’t know, Americans routinely find young hot women guilty of crimes, especially in the court of public approval. To try and dismiss people’s support for believing in her innocence with such a weak excuse is to ignore the legitimate points about the lack of concrete evidence and the unprofessional way in which the police handled the case.

      • msw says:

        It’s insulting, really, to imply anyone who thinks she is innocent is just to stupid to see her as guilty because she’s American. I personally think its stupid to think someone is guilty because you don’t like how they look or act in situations most of us will never understand, especially when the evidence clears them of the crime.

      • gg says:

        Au contraire, she was vilified even MORE because she was attractive, in America. She was painted as a whorey sexy girl that would kill to satisfy her sexual urges, even referred to as Foxy Knoxy, up until recently.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Good point, gg.

      • Penguin says:

        I don’t get the hype about her looks. She’s pretty plain compared to most Italian girls.

    • Maureen says:

      I am always immediately suspicious when an individual who claims innocence fails to show remorse for the victim and/or fails to show shock and revulsion at the crime they’re being accused of. It’s not a deciding factor for whether or not I think someone is lying, but it’s just a huge red flag for me.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Really? Were you there the whole time through when she stood outside the house with her boyfriend and they hugged and looked absolutely horrified at what had taken place? How about in the interrogation room? How many times do you think you could possibly sit on trial, in an interview, in front of your lawyers and coaches, in front of press cameras and interview cameras and PR people hired by your distraught family and continue to fake the correct amount of shock and surprise? What is she, Taylor Swift? She sat in jail for four years and suffered for quite awhile before they even put her on trial. I think any and all shock value generated by the situation has more than worn off by now.

      • HadleyB says:

        Oh please. If a co worker or some other people I knew died, or were killed I wouldn’t be crying and carrying on. Does that mean I am a killer? No.

        I am not cold or unfeeling but some people carry on to put on a show and she could be the type to keep her feelings inside. The Kardashians have cried more tears and so have the real housewives of _____ and they are all FAKE. But it’s better to be PC in this world I guess.

      • Maureen says:

        Were YOU in those places, @Stars? Were you in interrogation with her? In the courtroom with her? I’m not even going to engage in a debate with you about how many killers have put on skillful and nuanced crying acts at the scene of a crime or in the days following. In any case, I’ve been clear in other comments that I don’t have an opinion re: Amanda Knox’s guilt or innocence. I only commented about one important thing that raises a red flag for me. And I have experience to back up my opinions.

      • YoungHeartOldSoulNewView says:

        For the record Maureen I agree with you. An innocent person doesn’t have to be dramatic with the emotion they show in a case as gruesome as this in which they are a prime suspect, but most people, especially young people in a foreign country, would not just keep it Pink Panther-cool. Your ROOMMATE (not co-worker or distant associate…you lived with this girl who was your age and studying abroad with you) was found in YOUR HOME brutally murdered and to top it all off YOU are the prime suspect. And even if you are innocent, that would mean THERE IS A KILLER OUT THERE AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN YOU THEY FOUND AND STABBED. To the people who so quickly scoffed at Maureen, are you really saying you wouldn’t show ANY kind of emotion, before, during, or after the trials? Just look at interviews and documentaries of killers who have united with and become friends with their victim’s families. The remorse was there before and is still there now even after the family has forgiven them. But I guess the difference is, those people actually knew they did something wrong, while Amanda feigns complete innocence. No one knows for sure if she did it or not but she was nearby and whether she did the actual killings or watched or left the room or…”wasn’t there” at all, her “innocence” lacks a lot of tact and empathy for her former roommate’s family.

        She sure was ready to cry and feign emotion when she was safe in the States promoting her book though.

      • laura says:

        I completely agree with you plus the US press did not talked about all the details of the crime scene and how Amanda’s blood (DNA)was discovered with the victim’s blood ….at the crime scene. She is 100/100 guilty and should be punished for that.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Laura, the blood that was found was in the bathroom, not in the bedroom where the crime occurred. It was Meredith’s blood, but had parts of Amanda’s DNA in it….which makes sense if she had been using that bathroom for quite some time. It isn’t that Amanda’s BLOOD was mixed with Meredith’s. Amanda’s DNA was found in Meredith’s blood, something very different. There was a drop of Amanda’s blood in the bathroom, but it was purely hers and on the faucet.

        The video of the DNA collection in the bathroom shows Brocci using 1 swab on multiple areas, thereby mixing samples from different sources. It is completely illogical to think that because Amanda’s DNA was in her own bathroom, that it makes her a murder. As it has been pointed out before, there was no DNA from Amanda at the crime scene in the bedroom.

      • shady says:

        Thank you Tiffany, amazing how complete bullshit gets put out there like amanda’s BLOOD in the bathroom. NO, it was DNA. Do you think maybe some of YOUR DNA is in YOUR bathroom?

      • Mairead says:

        I wasn’t there either, but her prison diary was incredibly illuminating.

      • Annieb says:

        And fail to check up on a person they refer to as a friend after having seen blood spots inside the house.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Annieb, have you seen the crime scene photos with the “blood spots”? You can’t even really see them in the photos. They were TINY itty bitty spots of blood. The photos are out there. Let me know if you need a link. On their own, they certainly didn’t suggest that a murder had taken place.

      • msw says:

        She didn’t even know she was a suspect! The police were not exactly forthcoming about what they were investigating.

      • HoustonGrl says:

        Bingo! That was the clincher for me as well. I have never seen her look, sound, or appear sad or ’emotional’ in her discussions of the victim, not ever. In her mind, SHE is the victim. The prosecutors, more than anything else, likely sensed this and that’s probably why they pushed so hard to convict her. I’m sure prosecutors have a sixth sense about these things. Nonetheless, it just doesn’t seem like there was enough evidence.

      • Ceebee says:

        We’re not talking about expecting Knox to lose it or break down in tears at the crime scene. She and her boyfriend were FILMED kissing AND laughing outside of Meridith’s murder scene. No stunned shock, no fear that she could be next. She was later performing cartwheels at the police station. Maybe she was high out of her mind , but this is BIZARRE behavior.

    • GeeMoney says:

      It’s so interesting how people think that she’s guilty when there is no evidence to back it up. Guilty by proximity? Guilty b/c she lived with the girl? Guilty for not showing remorse? Wow.

      • Xera says:

        look up my post above

      • Dani says:

        Agreed, g. I’m not sure how one is supposed to show remorse for something they didn’t know. She may have known the people involved, may know something that could help but I don’t think she’s a killer.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Your post above is completely ridiculous, Xera. YOU are the one circulating lies and falsities about this case. Kercher was murdered by her thug boyfriend who acted by himself, the end. As the evidence shows, he broke into her place, killed her, took a dump in the toilet and didn’t flush to incriminate himself because he is that stupid, and that’s all there is to it. There was and is no DNA evidence on a kitchen knife, nor any DNA evidence that incriminates either Knox or Sollecito for this crime. Even if there were a shred of physical evidence linking them to the murder, which there is not, the police would have destroyed it by trampling all over the crime scene in their bloody shoes and with their reused crime scene tools. Unbelievable. The Italians and their Satanic sex ritua-obsessed l prosecutor have made complete donkeys out of themselves and they don’t seem to want to stop anytime soon.

      • Kelly says:

        I think most people believe she was there and was a witness but didn’t do a goddamn thing because she couldn’t be bothered or was too effed up on drugs.

      • Irishserra says:

        @Kelly: That was something I had not thought of. But it makes sense.

      • Grant says:

        Totally agree, Stars. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

      • Ok says:

        We are all made of stars — one minor correction. Ruede Guede WAS ABSOLUTELY NOT Merideth’s boyfriend.

        She knew him from groups of twenty somethings that socialized in the college town of Perugia.

        He fancied her, but she had no interest in dating him at all.

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        “I think any and all shock value generated by the situation has more than worn off by now.”

        Really? @We are all made of stars– the shock value of a horrific murder of someone who was supposed to be her friend, should have worn off by now?

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        Do you really think the Italian judicial system is so brainless as to convict her twice on no evidence?

      • msw says:

        Yes. Because they did. And it’s not the first time an absolutely crazy coviction has occurred. Look at the evidence. It not only implicates Guede, it clears them. quite brainless.

      • Sassy says:

        I am very familiar with all aspects of the case. Sollecito and Knox were stoned and that explains her bizarre behavior with the police, fake confession and implication of her boss. Their “relationship” could not have been terribly “deep” after dating less than two weeks. She may not have been close with her room mates, having only been in Italy a short time. People are projecting their own social mores on the situation. Sollecito’s father is prominent in his hometown, so should be able to go through the usual channels (greasing palms) in order to protect his son. Just hope he keeps his mouth shut about it! He was a little cavalier in the past.
        I live in the Seattle burbs, so have the coverage here from the family point of view. The publicity hungry atty, Ann Bremner, will be on every TV. She is a joke.

    • Mairead says:

      Do I believe that she murdered Meredith with her own hands? Not really, no.
      Do I believe that she was present or otherwise complicit? Yes, but not really sure how.
      Do I believe that she is as dodgy as hell? Oh yes. At the time of the murder I don’t think the girl was right in the head. It could be down to stress or grief, but more likely drugs or just plain old-fashioned narcissism or sociopathy.

  3. Badirene says:

    My own theory based on nothing really is that she appears “off” not because she is the murderer but because she brought Rudy Geude into the home, he was her drug dealer, and she is not telling all as she did not want to implicate herself in any type of criminal activity. The truth will never come out in this case, sadly for the family of Meredith Kercher.

    • bettyrose says:

      This makes sense…although it still doesn’t explain that no one had any g-d motive to do something so horrible to a beautiful young woman, with zero chance of getting away with it. The “why” must really haunt Kercher’s poor family.

      • Kelly says:

        That’s the really scary thing about psychopaths – they don’t need a “why” and a “what if”. They just do because they feel like it.

      • Ok says:

        Kelly. — exactly. Guede is a predetor and simply evil. Even the family that adopted him as a young child has washed their hands of him.

        Merideth was in the wrong place at the wrong time and was an easy target.

        If Amanda had been home that evening, she would have been the dead one.

        I have a feeling this was not old Guede’s first rape and murder. And it won’t be his last. He will be about 40 when he gets out of prison. When he gets out, look out everyone

    • OrangeBlohan says:

      I don’t know if she was involved or not, but the more she talks, the less I believe her. And she hasn’t ever seemed to show the slightest bit of sympathy for her murdered roommate or her family.

      • msw says:

        Yes, she has, on multiple occasions. Why do people keep saying this?! It is completely, factually WRONG.

        Amanda has had her own s**t to deal with as she tried to get the case iver with, and throughout it all she has talked about grieving for her friend and expressing sympathy for the family, even though they have been trying to nail her to the wall. You bought the bs the media sold you, sorry.

      • OrangeBlohan says:

        @msw I haven’t bought anything. My feelings come from my own observations from Amanda’s interviews. She tries to conjure up some sympathy during interviews, but never quite makes it. Again, I don’t know if she was involved or not, but there is something off about her.

      • bluhare says:

        I’m with OrangeBlohan. Sorry, but this woman’s changed her story a lot, and I agree that there’s something very off about her.

      • msw says:

        You are obfuscating the facts. She changed her story once after being tricked into it. As for your observations, I don’t see how you can argue this point when she expresses sympathy for the Kerchers in THIS ARTICLE. I agree she is awkward, but apparently she is never allowed to talk about having four years of her life stolen by a crooked court and a murderer tag hung on her forever because it somehow detracts sympathy from the Kerchers.

      • TG says:

        I don’t blame her it must be hard to muster up sympathy for someone when that person’s family and the prosecutors are trying to take your life away from you. She probably did feel bad for her but once she had to fight for her own life I imagine her emotions are reserved for herself and rightfully so. If a victim’s family is wrongly accusing me I am not going to waste my sympathies on them. So when she gives interviews she knows she is expected to show sympathy so it probably doesn’t come out as genuine even if it is.

      • caz says:

        Totally – there is only one truth – what actually happened to Meredith and who was involved. It’s shocking how many times the stories have changed to try and protect the guilty. Knox was either a witness or somehow involved and she has to stick with her altered version of events or be called out as a liar.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      Rudy Geude wasn’t a stranger to the victim and he didn’t know Meredith through Amanda. Rudy was Meredith’s boyfriend’s friend. He played basketball with Meredith’s boyfriend and his 3 Italian roommates who lived downstairs from Meredith/Amanda in the other flat.

      • Badirene says:

        Where in my comment did I say that Knox introduced them? That he was a stranger to Meredith Kercher? I said Knox brought him into the home, imho to buy drugs off him that night, and thats what she is being shifty about.

    • J.Mo says:

      Genius! The murderer was Amanda’s dealer & she won’t say so, it’s far too late to admit it now.

  4. blue marie says:

    Did she do it, I dunno as I wasn’t there but I think she knows more than she’s saying.

    • RobN says:

      That’s where I stand, as well. She may not have killed her, but she clearly knows more than she’s telling; I don’t buy the innocent as the driven snow routine at all. She has a weird detachment that I find disturbing and only cries in situations where she thinks it will help her.

      • msw says:

        Sweet baby Jesus. Where did you get that from? She never portrayed herself as the “driven snow” type. She talked about smoking pot, having sex and being awkward and embarrassing in public. This was easily accessible information in her own words, if you choose to look at the case and not four paragraph overviews of the case.

  5. Lauren says:

    Read the book The Monster of Florence. It’s a really interesting book about how messed up the Italian justice system is. At the end (of my copy at least) they added a big section about Amanda Knox and point out a lot of the problems with her case. It’s fascinating.

    • genevieve says:

      I read that too, and it was eye-opening.

      As for who is pushing for all this, there’s a whole internet community out there that seems to feed on the belief that Amanda Knox is guilty. Douglas Preston (same author) wrote a short Kindle piece called Trial by Fury that gets into that. It was very interesting.

    • Jedi says:

      I was coming to comment the same thing – read the book, made me really doubt the detective in her case and the police. They used the same weird “satanic cult killing” arguement against the author (and accused him of being the Monster, which is actually impossible because he was 5 years old or somthing when the florence killings started) as they did with Knox’s case. the police and prosecuter come off as unhinged loons that have been investigated for corruption and harrassment in the past, and yet were still allowed to work on Meredith Kercher’s murder while under investigation.

    • Xera says:

      The book is a fictious story, the author had a personal grudge against the prosecutor and did all he could to slander him. He’ll be on trial for slander soon

      • Suzy from Ontario says:

        The author is very well respected as both a writer and a journalist in North America and was simply researching a well known real-life case about a serial killer in Italy during the 70’s/80s and Mignini started accusing him and his co-author (an Italian writer) of all kinds of things and even threw them in jail. He actually accused Douglas Preston of being the Italian serial killer at one point! It was outrageous. You make it sound like Preston went to Italy determined to slander this guy, but he was shocked by the actions of Mignini who seems delusional and thinks everyone he meets is part of a conspiracy theory and secret crimes. People like that are scary because the facts and the truth don’t matter to them. They convince themselves of wild stories and reality doesn’t change their minds. When you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

      • Jedi says:

        What exactly about the book do you think is fictious? its Preston’s account of his time in Florence and his research.

      • KB says:

        @Xera, why didn’t Guede implicate Knox until years after the crime if she was involved?

      • BettyBlue says:

        Xera, the author was prosecuted by this over zealous, unscrupulous prosecutor. You could say he had a ‘personal grudge’ but no one in their right mind would argue the grudge was unfounded.

      • Frenzy says:

        Xera so how come its fictitious? You sound like even respectable papers here made errors in translation?

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        KB, good point, because in fact Guede did not implicate Knox and proclaims that all three of them are innocent.

    • Nerd Alert says:

      Really? That’s interesting. I remember the story about how the government put a bunch of scientists on trial for manslaughter for failing to predict an earthquake that killed people. The worst part is that they were convicted, and the victims’ families sued as well and won.

      Just the suing would be one thing, but convicting them of manslaughter? Totally effed up. I’ve wondered about their justice system since then.

      • laura says:

        Well i am not too sure about the US justice too!!!…. so many case who send people on death row while they were innocents! Get your facts straight! it angers me when i see comments from clueless people….

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I wouldn’t say Nerd Alert is “clueless” at all. Just because there is injustice in one system (the US) does not mean that people can’t legitimately point out injustice in another judicial system (Italy). This isn’t a situation where it has to be one or the other. It can apply equally to both and it can also apply to both but in varying levels.

      • Nerd Alert says:

        My facts are straight. I wasn’t championing the U.S. justice system by any means. I was simply pointing out a case of Italian injustice. You didn’t invent the system, you don’t have to defend it. What’s best is to recognize the weaknesses and address them.

        Thank you Tiffany 🙂

    • J.Mo says:

      Thanks! Will find it.

  6. Frenzy says:

    Rudy Guede is eligible for parole in 2016 and that is the real injustice in this case. He said he acted alone and forensics proved it! I feel sorry for the Kerchers before but this has become a witch hunt! Sorry we did not like verdict 1, 2 or 3 so let’s try her again! It’s just unbelievable reading comments on other sites when it became Brits vs Americans and our justice system but not the Italians when the prosecutors bungled this case from the start!

    • TG says:


    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      This times a million.

      Even if you’re of the mindset that you *think* she may have done it, at the very least people need to understand that *thinking* someone committed a crime should not be enough to convict someone. The fact that she was found guilty, appealed, then exonerated, then appealed and found guilty again speaks VOLUMES about how inconclusive any evidence that would implicate her is. In the USA, it has to be proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT-it should be a slam-dunk.

      I think Knox is guilty of being an introvert and a bit matter-of-fact about things-she comes across cold at times. So yeah, maybe not the most likable personality but that does NOT mean that she’s a murderer.

      • Frenzy says:

        IKR. Guede had a fast track trial and had his sentence reduced to 1/3 after implicating Amanda and Rafaelle. I just don’t buy that she did cartwheels so she’s guilty thing. I would love to see Casey Anthony who is the perfect definition of a psychopath in prison because I think she did it but it doesn’t work that way!

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I agree. There needs to be factual information and evidence in order to convict someone…not just “feelings”.

        Much of the “evidence” presented at the 1st trial is complete garbage. The knife that was the supposed murder weapon, for example. It was presented at the first trial, but before the 2nd it was tested by court appointed 2 independent experts to test it. They found that not only was the victim’s blood not on the knife, what the prosecution had said was blood was actually rye bread. Two separate experts came to this same conclusion.

      • Diana says:

        OKitt, I said the same thing down below. She may seem cold but that is not enough reason to put her in jail!

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        I agree the evidence is inconclusive, but I don’t believe that in itself proves that she is innocent.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        @Zwella Ingris-The burden of proof is on the PROSECUTION. The defense doesn’t have to prove that she’s innocent, because she’s presumed innocent until proven guilty.
        Do you see why inconclusive evidence favors the defense and not the prosecutor?

      • Kiddo says:

        @TOK, Keystone cops. Plus, some of the prosecutor’s case involved nothing but pure character assassination because, OMG, she was a young woman interested in sex. The twisted version of events during the murder has more to do with the perversions in the minds of the prosecutor’s office than anything that remotely resembles reality or any prior documented history of Amanda. The speculation of their case requires remarkable suspension of disbelief.

    • Xera says:

      – Guede has never admitted it (he pretends he was Meredith’s boyfriend – in the bathroom with his headphone when the crime happened and saw people in the dark running away)
      -Forensics proved he didn’t act alone – Meredith hands were held while she was stabbed numerous times, her body had been moved hours after her murder by someone who was certain no one would come back to the house
      -His sentence was similar to Sollecoto’s but the law gives a third of the sentence rebate for using the fast track trial

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Facts: Rudy Guede has changed his story many times as suited his own needs. Irrefutable DNA evidence was found linking him to the crime scene, including a bloody fingerprint and his footprints in her blood, as well as his DNA found inside and on her body. He admits to being there at the time of the murder, but says that he went to the toilet after having sex with her, at which point some other people broke in and killed Meredith. Um, okay. The manner of break in into the cottage was similar to the way in which other break ins had been committed by Guede. He then fled to Germany before being captured and extradited back to Perugia by the Italians.

        The only people who believe he couldn’t have acted alone are you and the Satanic sex ritual killing-obsessed Italian prosecutors. Sorry.

      • Frenzy says:

        Xera..seems that you know a lot about this case but how come there was no forensic trace of Amanda at the scene at all. And what is the motive?

      • BettyBlue says:

        Xera, the forensic team made a complete hash of the evidence. They didn’t really ‘prove’ anything in that most if the trial turned on circumstantial evidence vs actual evidence because so much if the actual evidence could no longer be relied on once they were done cross-contaminating everything. Please be specific when you make these statements, your sweeping generalisations are not helping the case you are trying to put forward.

      • Frenzy says:

        Xera can you provide a link to the forensics proving what you just said? The prosecutors case was based on circumstantial evidence. This was checked by independent experts. That’s why she was exonerated before. So don’t tell me that there was a translation mistake with that one too. You sound like everything we read or know or even the books about the case are all false!

      • Nerd Alert says:

        Is it not plausible she was stabbed while sleeping, if there were no struggle marks and somebody moved her body after the crime?

        I’m just asking, I truly don’t know much about it.

      • Merritt says:

        @ Nerd Alert

        Or she could have been frozen in fear or lost consciousness.

      • Eva says:

        We are all made of stars- you make reference to “irrefutable DNA evidence” linking Guede to the crime; why do you consider the DNA evidence implicating him to be irrefutable yet the DNA evidence implicating Amanda (her blood being mixed with Kercher’s at the scene) can not be trusted because of the “contamination” of the crime scene?

      • shady says:

        Eva, her DNA was mixed with Meredith’s blood in the bathroom sink! Amanda’a BLOOD wasn’t found anywhere.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “why do you consider the DNA evidence implicating him to be irrefutable yet the DNA evidence implicating Amanda (her blood being mixed with Kercher’s at the scene) can not be trusted because of the “contamination” of the crime scene?”

        1. Because Randy’s DNA was inside of her body. His bloody handprint was found under her body. His hand print was also inside of her purse.

        2. Because there is video of how Amanda’s DNA was collected from the scene. A.) Her DNA was not in the bedroom, the scene of the murder. It was only found in common areas like the bathroom. B.) Amanda’s DNA was found in the bathroom. The video shows the person who is collecting the samples using the SAME applicator to grab samples all around the bathroom, thus mixing samples from different areas of the bathroom. C.) The supposed murder weapon, the knife, did not have Meredith’s DNA on it as was claimed in the first trial. Following the 1st trial, the court ordered independent experts to test the knife. They found that what was thought to be blood was simply rye bread. Meredith’s blood and DNA were no where on the knife.

    • Zwella Ingrid says:

      Guede has never said that he was guilty. “Rudy admitted that he had been in the cottage the night Meredith died, and that they had had consensual sex that night. But he maintained that he didn’t kill her. Rudy insisted that that someone broke in and killed Meredith while he was in the bathroom…”

      • Eva says:

        Her DNA/ blood depending on what you read was found mixed with Meredith’s in multiple places, not just the bathroom. I wasnt exclusively referring to that evidence, there are many examples (bra clasp etc). The point is, any forensic evidence that implements her and sollecito is dismissed because of “contamination” yet any forensic evidence against Guede is supposedly irrefutable. Just pointing out the double standards.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        The only blood of Amanda’s that was found was her’s alone and it was found in the bathroom. It was a very tiny sample. It was mixed with Meredith’s when the person collecting the samples uses the SAME swab to gather samples from multiple places. There is video of this happening.

        There is also video of the bra clasp being passed around by several police officers, placed back in the crime scene, then being picked up again. How is it that his DNA was found on the clasp of her bra but not ANYWHERE else in the bedroom where the murder took place or on the body?

      • Nate says:

        Eva, Xena, blah blah blah: you guys aren’t getting it. As multiple people have stated all over this thread, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. Amanda is innocent until proven guilty. As of yet, nothing is conclusive enough to prove her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Whether you think she did it or not DOES NOT MATTER. The way this case was handled, from the very beginning…it should have been thrown out. They messed everything up, and there is VIDEO PROOF, IE IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE, to back up the fact that they were total amateurs and cross-contaminated the scene on many levels. OF COURSE THEY FOUND AMANDA’S DNA IN HER BATHROOM. SHE LIVED IN HER BATHROOM. ?!?!?…not sure how you can’t understand that. On the flip side, people are making a point about Guede’s DNA because THE MAN DID NOT LIVE THERE, and WASN’T her boyfriend. His DNA being present IN and AROUND her body is telling. Did they have consensual sex? Perhaps. Most rapists claim this in the beginning when the heat’s on to explain why the victim either disagrees or ENDS UP BEING MURDERED IN THE SAME TIME FRAME. His story of sitting on the toilet while other people broke in and murdered her after their consensual sex? REALLY? No investigator in the world would believe that. Correction: no rational, regular folk would believe it. Whether Amanda knew something more, or knew Guede, or was getting drugs from him…whatever. There’s not enough evidence to convict her of this crime. Period.

      • Eva says:

        Nate, don’t patronise me and preach about burden of proof to me; I am a solicitor in the UK so, funnily enough, I am familar with the concept. I didn’t say she should have been convicted based on the evidence I was referring too. I don’t really have strong feelings either way about her guilt to be honest, and the collection of evidence was without a doubt botched. I am also in absolutely no way suggesting Guede is not guilty. However, there is a difference between the evidence being inadmissible in court and actually dismissing it completely in general. There is a possibility it was contaminated and a possibility it wasn’t. Not being able to prove beyond reasonable doubt in the eyes of the law doesn’t necessarily mean the person is innocent, just means there’s not enough evidence to prove they are guilty. For what it’s worth, I think she probably knows more than she’s letting on rather than having actually been involved in the murder. But hey, what do I know? In fact, what do you know? Fact is, none of us know.

      • msw says:

        I can’t believe this.

        I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you have not watched the video, and don’t know what it contains. the investigators used dirty gloves and reused swabs. They picked up pieces of evidence left on the floor for weeks, passed it around to each other using dirty gloves, and then placed it back on the floor. Common sense as well as science clearly show us that the evidence was contaminated. How in the world could it not be contaminated? I know you’re not arguing the point that it should have been admissible, it’s crazy that anybody considers this “Evidence tossed out on a technicality,” what is almost certainly the reason the DNA is there in the first place.

        Further, common sense tells us that since Guede’s genetic material and shoeprints and handprints were all over the damn place and nobody else’s were, he acted alone, and that causes the contamination theory to pretty much be a slam dunk. It really does not take a rocket scientist to figure this out.

    • Ok says:

      I know. I was stunned when Guede got his time cut in half, then became eligible for parole so early.

      • Lissanne says:

        Knox and Sollecito could have elected a “fast track” trial, just as Guede did. They chose not to.

    • Lissanne says:

      Rudy Guede never said he “acted alone.” Where do you get this from? He blamed Knox and Sollecito for the murder. (I believe that all three of them were involved, just to be clear .) Also, you are implying that the Kercher’s are somehow responsible for there having been several trials. They have no control over what the Italian legal system does/does not do. They do have opinions, of course, to which they are entitled.

  7. Maureen says:

    I’ve mentioned before that I work in law enforcement (although I’m not a police officer), so I often follow true crime stories. The Amanda Knox case is one of the most perplexing true crime cases I have ever seen. I honestly don’t know what to think. I mean short of collecting clippings and pasting them to all my walls along with maps and red pins like Anderson in Sherlock. No, I don’t go that far. This is one case that I do hope will break open one day and all the truths will spill out. I don’t know what it would take to make that happen but I hope I’m alive to read about it. I think because it occurred in another country (and another language and legal system is involved) it’s harder to get to the bottom of it.

    • Kelly says:

      This really is a case for Sherlock Holmes, what the hell are they waiting for, call him!
      (Or get the writers to the crime scene and familiarize them with the evidence, I do wonder how their brains would interpret this whole story)

    • TG says:

      Another fascinating case is the Swann Street murder that took place her in DC in DuPont Circle. It is still I solved even though everyone knows the 3 guys living in a polyamorous relationship known as the Trouple had something to do with it. They were a 3 home at the time that one or all of them killed a friend, a Robert Wone, who was staying for the night. There is an active website which I can’t think of the name but if you are interested and Google the words “Swann Street Murder” and or Robert Wone you will find the site and there is a wealth of info on it. They have every legal document ever submitted regarding the investigation and the trial on thwarting an investigation plus the civil suit by the victim’s widow. No one has ever been tried for the murder yet even though there isn’t a doubt in anyone’s mind that they had something to do with it. I think the prevailing theory is that Dylan Ward is the one who did it since he was quite the freak with sex play and based on other evidence and the other 2 agreed to cover it up. There was also the missing knife in Dylan’s knife set that matched the knife wounds that his mom later just happened to have in Seattle or something bizzarre like that. Many parents will do anything to protect their murderous children just like Casey Anthony’s mom perjured herself on the stand. If course the cops f-ed up too as they arm to do on occasion. Anyway if you haven’t studied it I think you would find it interesting.

      • Maureen says:

        @ TG

        That’s another case I followed! Truly bizarre. (the DuPont Circle murder)

        There is another well-known case that fascinates me to this day but at the moment I have blanked on it. I was thinking about it earlier when I was posting.

        EDIT: The website @TG mentioned is Who Murdered Robert Wone

      • Sassy says:

        Maureen – are you following the Autumn Klein murder in Pittsburgh? Husband accused of killing neurologist wife with poison that he ordered through his office at UPMC medical center. Things are just starting to break as trial is coming up soon

      • Maureen says:


        No, haven’t heard about it. I will check it out, thanks! It’s heart-breaking, so much crime. One would lose one’s mind trying to keep up with it all. More shocking is how much of it involves family members, friends, lovers, or acquaintances. Generally I’m interested in the motives and back stories of the people involved more so than the actual crime and events surrounding the trial.

    • Xera says:

      It’s much clearer without the PR obfuscation created by the defendants. One thing to look for is the Massei sentencing report – Italian judges must write a sentencing report detailing the elements and the reasoning that have led to the sentencing. There will be a new sentencing report for this appeal that will be published in the next 90 days

      • jane16 says:

        That would prove nothing. Obviously, the judge’s sentencing report would be biased since the judge is in charge of the court case, and his/her rulings influence the outcome of the case.

    • Jessiebes says:

      Police detective here. Totally agree this case is really confusing, it hurts my head. Thing is though, there is probably a lot of stuff that is not in the press or in any books.

  8. Secret Squirrel says:

    I didn’t think you could be convicted of the same crime twice. Is that different in Italy??

    • eliza says:

      Yes it is.

    • V4Real says:

      Yea it is different in Italy. Italy doesn’t have the double jeapordy law like America.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Squirrel is an Aussie.

        My guess there are several countries where a person can’t be tried more than once for the same crime. The US isn’t alone in that (besides we copied a lot of the English legal system when setting up our own).

    • nebi says:

      No, it’s isn’t. The double jeopardy rule is the same in Italy, only the proceeding is not over until the local Supreme Court says so. The Court is the only one entitled to judge if laws and procedures have been properly enforced during a trial. In case it evaluates that something was off, it can ask to redo the trial.
      so, technically, no double jeopardy in this case, only her pr team insisted on the not-guilty partial verdict to convince the public opinion that it was the final one.

      • Xera says:


      • LadySlippers says:

        Good to know. Thanks for that information.

      • Kelly says:

        SO actually the trial wasn’t over as it was due to go to a higher level court after the prosecution’s appeal, but they let her go after the initial verdict??
        How did they let her leave the country when the whole procedure wasn’t legally done and the supreme court hadn’t made a ruling?!

      • Kate says:

        No there technically isn’t a double jeopardy issue in the Knox case, but the system is quite different than the US system and that is a big part of the “lost in translation” problem happening in the US. The two biggest issues are 1) in the US, appellate courts don’t “retry” cases and juries are not involved; appellate courts review evidence and determine whether reversible errors were made, and 2) in the US, prosecutors cannot appeal acquittals. I understand that the original ruling at the trial court level was guilty. The appellate court then acquitted Knox and the boyfriend. The prosecutors appealed that ruling (something that would not happen in the US) and the Italian Supreme Court ordered a new trial. That new trial occurred at the appellate court level (something that would never happen in the US) and they found Knox guilty. The appeal now goes to the Supreme Court.

        I have not paid sufficient attention to the facts of this case to have an opinion on guilt or innocence, but I am firmly convinced that the US State Department will not agree to extradite Amanda Knox if the final judgment from the Italian courts is guilty.

      • Marx says:

        @Kate: Sorry if I’m just stating what you said in a different way, but my understanding of the Italian justice system was that every person is given a trial and two automatic appeals (no need for a prosecutor to do anything, these appeals are required by Italian law). So while Knox was found guilty in her first trial, her first appeal trial (which I believe you are right when you say retrial, but I don’t think new evidence is allowed) discounted DNA evidence due to contamination and found them not guilty, her second appeal trial overturned this finding and found her guilty again. Italian law is supposedly skewed in favor of the defendants, which is why everyone is allowed these three trials.

  9. Aims says:

    I think the gathering of evidence was very flawed in this case. I really think that it was sloppy and because of that some of the dna evidence should had been thrown out.

    Aside from the technical aspects of the case. My impression of Amanda is she is very immature. I think she knows more then she’s letting on. I was sicken by her lack of empathy towards the victim and her family. Her lying to implicate an innocent man to save her behind. Too the poor me I’m a victim. She is the definition of narcissist.

    • Leonie says:

      Aims – saying she lied to implicate an innocent man is a bit strong. If you read the details of what went on at that interrogation, it’s nowhere near as black and white as that.

      I wouldn’t much like to see myself in a situation where I was interrogated for over 10 hours in a language I had only a basic comprehension of, without access to a lawyer, while being told I had simply lost my memory of what was presented as the truth, while not getting any food or drink or breaks, being shouted at by various police officers… I’m pretty sure I’d say something stupid eventually. I believe the words she actually spoke were along the lines of “I guess that must have happened, then.” Not exactly the words of someone who sat down with the intention to convict an innocent man.

      • blue marie says:

        Knox was fluent in Italian, let’s not make her helpless.

      • Aims says:

        Amanda implicated her former boss at the bar she worked at. The Italian police took him and treated him as a murderer when he had nothing to do with it. She lied on an innocent man.

      • Merritt says:

        @ Aims

        That is not entirely true. The police suggested her boss and kept pressuring her to say he was involved. This went on for a long time. She didn’t bring him up , they did. And originally she said she had not seen him that night, It wasn’t until much later after they pressured her that she said maybe he was there.

      • nebi says:

        Look, no police officer in Italy would treat an American citizen the way Amanda suggests. They’re not that stupid.

      • Merritt says:


        Considering the number of trials, the changes in the motive from the prosecution, the fact that the prosecutor was under investigation for other reasons, etc. I would disagree on that. There have been a lot of wasted resources on this case considering the financial state of Italy. That alone suggests some stupidity.

      • paola says:

        @blue marie

        Amanda Knox is not fluent in italian at all.
        She has basic understanding of the language but was nowhere near capable of pulling off a 10 hours interrogatory.

      • msw says:

        She was absolutely NOT fluent in Italian at the time. Those of you who say you would never do what she did, you don’t know. This is a real, documented phenomenon. She was exhausted, starving, treated maluciously, and they planted a version of events in her head. I blame the police, not her. What happened to Patrick is terrible and she did her time for it. It does not mean she is a killer–it was given under duress at a time of extreme stress.

      • blue marie says:

        I just figured since she chastised the prosecution in Italian, she was fairly fluent. Sorry If I’m incorrect paola.

      • nebi says:

        I didn’t Say they have been brilliant, I said they’re not that stupid. There have been a number of cases in the past regarding US citizens involved in crimes and US Authorities always stand by their side- guilty or not – in every possibile way. Every possibile way. This means a lot of pressure on the involved officers.
        I don’t know what the financial state of Italy has to do with all this. Anyway the financial state of US is not much better, I remind you that Wall Street is the place where all this mess did begin. The difference is that you had Helycopter Ben who was allowed to print money limitless,thus exporting your issues to the weaker countries.
        Having said that, as an Italian taxpayer I am more than happy that you keep at home your criminals.

      • shady says:

        blue marie, she became pretty fluent after 4 years in Prison. She had a basic understanding of the language during her interrogation.

      • Merritt says:


        That was completely incoherent. I’m not sure where you got the idea that US authorities stand by the side of criminals. That is not true.

    • Xera says:

      She was interrogated for about 2hrs when she accused Patrick. It happened when she was told that her boyfriend, interrogated in an other room, didn’t support her alibi any more. That evidence wasn’t admitted in court because she was interrogated as a witness at the time (she had a translator but no lawyer). The admissible evidence is the explanatory letter she wrote – unprompted – from her jail cell later that day as a “gift” to the police where she didn’t retract her accusations

      • Diana says:

        @Xera: She was interrogated for 43 hours in one week and the last sesion was form 10:30 pm to 6:00 am! how can you tergiverse facts like that! the police even enter that information as evidence, they did not deny it, so don’t do it yourself.

  10. tifzlan says:

    Why are her eyes so vacant?

    • Leonie says:

      Are you even kidding? Are we really going to judge people guilty of murder based on the perceived look in their eyes in still photos taken at random times? Burn the witch!

      • tifzlan says:

        Jeez, calm the hell down. I never said she was UNDENIABLY GUILTY of the crime just because. Even in still photos, some people have some semblance of life in their eyes. But she doesn’t. No one’s calling for her to be burned at the stake for it.

    • Seagulls says:

      That’s been a couple of monumentally rough years for her. And I think I read somewhere that there’s a theory that if something really tragic happens to someone when they’re young, that that person’s development halts in some ways, never to really develop normally. Assuming she’s innocent, I can see being on trial and convicted of murder as really tragic.

      • tifzlan says:

        Oh, i’ve never heard of that theory before but that sounds really interesting and i could see that. I don’t know if she’s totally guilty or innocent, but i feel like she knows more than she lets on. Guess we’ll never know.

    • msw says:

      Omg. I am so sick of this absurdity. I gave the same shade of blue eyes as Amanda and i know from my own experience it makes people uncomfortable. I have been accused of being stoic and unemotional plenty of times (to the point where it has caused me personal or professional problems) and you don’t even know how far that is from the truth, or how hurtful it is for someone to tell you that you seem”dead inside” because of your gd eyecolor.i have learned to overreact with body language and tone of voice to temper people’s assumptions, but it took me years, and I was a lot older than Smanda was/is befire

    • Green Girl says:

      I’m with the others. I’m sure she’s emotionally exhausted after this ordeal. This has been going on for years with no closure in sight.

    • TG says:

      @Tifzlan – I wonder if some of your observations are based on the fact that she has been accused of a crime. I know whenever I read about a crime, no matter, how small, I always look at the picture to see if I can tell by looking at them that they are guilty. I try to be objective but I think it is actually hard to so that because once someone is accused of something, especially murder it is hard not to see dead eyes or whatever but if she was just someone you met on the street you might not think that.

      • Lissanne says:

        Well, I find her affect rather disturbing, and I thought Casey Anthony looked like a nice girl, to the end.

  11. Bert29 says:

    Just because the italian court system is a serious head-scratcher doesnt mean the US will invalidate the verdict and harbor an international high-profile fugitive. Also, the US has an extradition agreement with Italy, so… She can try to appeal again but she’s dunzo. (Not saying that is fair, btw. I don’t think she is a murderer but I do think she comes across as immature and below average intelligence.)

    • Tammy White says:

      It is highly doubtful US will extradite her. As far as US judicial system goes, once a person is acquitted, that’s it. It’s over. They can’t be retried. It doesn’t matter if they are acquitted at trial or on appeal. Just because the Italian justice system is different & prosecutors can appeal innocent verdicts doesn’t matter. It’s considered double jeopardy here in the US & violation of her constitutional rights. As long as she stays in the US, I don’t see it happening.

    • JessMa says:

      Countries will not honor extradition treaties if what is being done in the requesting country is not allowed in the country being asked to extradite. For example countries that do not have the death penalty won’t extradite criminal to the U.S. that are facing the death penalty. Knox’s attorneys will argue double jeopardy.

  12. Tapioca says:

    I’ve always struggled to believe that three people – at least 2 of them we know to be smart enough to be university educated – would conspire to murder someone closely connected to them, in their own apartment, with insane levels of overkill (40 wounds!) and no attempt made to dispose of the body.

    • notthatone says:


      • Merritt says:

        The problem is no one is ever been able to prove Knox or Sollecito used anything other than marijuana. I’m far from a marijuana advocate, but it does not make a person a killer.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        The only thing I’m murdering when I’m high is a big-ass bowl of mac n’ cheese.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Hey, we’ve smoked a lot of marijuana… let’s go murder my roommate just for the fun of it! said no one ever.

      • MrsB says:

        Drugs? Really? They were smoking weed, not doing crack.

      • msw says:

        Wow, she must have come down really fast to have time to scrub the crine scene if her own and Raffaele’s DNA! amazing how she only left Rudy’s.

      • Meredith says:

        What is this, Refer Madness? It was pot, not PCP or bath salts.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “What is this, Refer Madness? It was pot, not PCP or bath salts.”


      • BettyBlue says:

        ‘Reefer Madness’. Lol! Seriously.

    • Algernon says:

      “insane levels of overkill (40 wounds!)”

      Things I’ve learned dating a criminal investigator: Stabbing someone to death is really hard. Unless you know what you’re doing (or get lucky) and can go for a major artery/blood vessel right away, it takes a lot of effort to stab someone to death. It’s very inefficient and usually the result of a spur-of-the-moment decision combined with a handy tool nearby.

      I’m growing concerned that my current relationship might be turning me into a serial killer.

      • Sarah says:

        Algernon, on behalf of your SO, please stay in the relationship! (I mean, assuming it’s healthy, not abusive, makes you happy, etc.)

        I’m just saying that those of us who deal with murder all the time need to be around people who don’t so we can stay sane.

        As for the overkill, it’s commonly stated that she had over 40 wounds, but the actual number of real, gaping stab wounds was only about 5 or 6. There are always a lot of bruises and little nicks also counted as wounds. So while she was obviously brutalized, it’s not that someone stood over her body and plunged a knife into her 40 times.

    • Evi says:

      Imagine if they took something like bath salts? Then it wouldn’t be out of the question, would it?
      But no one will ever know what happened.

    • J.Mo says:

      It was supposed to look like an intruder smashed a window to get in so the body didn’t have to be moved. Someone suggested earlier the oddness, inconsistencies and lies could be explained by Amanda & boyfriend covering up that Guede was their pot dealer. I think this is a perfect explanation for some of their behaviour.

    • Lissanne says:

      Most of the “wounds” were abrasions, indicative of being held down or being prevented from screaming. Only 5 or 6 knife wounds.

  13. V says:

    I don’t think she’s guilty of murder, but she’s guilty of being self-centered. The biggest injustice is how greatly the Italian justice system screwed up this case from the get go. I think it would be better if they admitted how badly they messed up and had given a harsher sentence to the actual killer instead of trying to giver harsher punishments to the two people they “think” might be guilty of something.

  14. Kelly says:

    At this point it’s more about telling the truth and letting the poor Kercher family have some closure. Which will never happen, the creeps that emanate from Knox’s face tell me she’ll never fess up the whole story as it would somehow contain something unsavory about her, regardless of whether she did it or not.
    All in all, compared to what Meredith went through, Knox should stop complaining and be thankful that she’s alive, seeing as how she claims she didn’t do anything and was a victim, so presumably, she could have ended up the same way as Meredith?
    Makes you wonder though, if some lunatic was there and was hell-bent on raping and killing a girl, why pick one and ignore the other? Bizarre.
    I only pity Meredith and her family in all of this, no one else.

    • Samtha says:

      Knox says that she was at the boyfriend’s house during the time of the murder. That seems a pretty good explanation as to why he didn’t kill her too.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      Maybe that “creeps” on her face is the result of being called a whore, a murder, and being imprisoned for 4 years? Just a thought.

    • mayamae says:

      No Kelly, there can be more than one victim. I don’t think every falsely convicted person should take the injustice because they are lucky they are not the victim. I think it’s a pretty silly thing to say.

      It’s not bizarre at all that Amanda was left alive since she wasn’t even home. In fact, it is very common for a killer to pick one target and kill that person only.

  15. Anne says:

    Regardless of whether or not she was involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher, it’s wrong that she could be tried again and again and again until the prosecution gets the result they want. How is that in any way, shape, or form a fair justice system?

  16. Merritt says:

    I don’t think she was involved in the murder. I think it was Guede alone. And he will apparently be eligible for work release soon. That is the sad part in all of this. The Italian justice system has spent so much time convicting Knox and Sollecito, that the real killer is getting off far easier than he should. He should have been the one with the long prison sentence.

  17. Frida_K says:

    I’ve lived abroad and, as an undergraduate, I participated in two year-long study programs. It is amazing, the things American students will do when they get away from mommy and daddy. Yesterday we were on the Bitchy talking about kids who don’t behave in public (cf. the Kourtney Kartrashian post) and…let’s face it, those kids grow up and some of them go abroad.

    The study abroad office will say, over and over, that if you get yourself in trouble there are limits to what can be done. And, stunningly enough, there are limits to what can be done. But there are also the Precious Snowflakes for whom this notion just does not compute. And places like Perugia (smaller towns that host a lot of foreign students) have put up with a lot and aren’t always in the frame of mind to be patient about foreigners acting as though their town is a playground with no rules.

    She got a raw deal but I would not be surprised if there was a very real drug angle of some sort, or if it turned out that she knew more than she’s been saying.


    • Sullivan says:


    • Merritt says:

      Where the drugs though? Did the police ever find anything other than marijuana or marijuana paraphernalia? I find it strange that people think they would be able to hide evidence of hardcore drugs, but not attempt to clean the crime scene to hide the body.

      • Xera says:

        Her boyfriend was known by the police has a hard drug user, she had dealer numbers in her phone directory

    • LadySlippers says:

      @Frida: Too many of the young members of the American military are the same. It’s like someone pushed their ‘let’s be stupid’ button and just held the button down…. And then people wonder why Americans are disliked abroad because so many of these people go hog-wild and are completely disrespectful of the host country and their citizens. It’s really, really shameful. (Right after we left Japan a sailor beat a Japanese woman to death for @ $100 and came abroad the ship covered in her blood. So very sad).

      I didn’t follow this case but have followed others (for example, Timothy McVeigh’s) and reading the books is really quite the eye opener (read his attorney’s book — WOW). Things aren’t always what they seem and the US justice system is far from perfect.

      It’s just an unfortunate story all around but my heart really goes out to Meredith’s family. I hope, no matter what happens, they find peace.

      • Kelly says:

        Jesus that’s horrible, what happened to that sailor, was he arrested and court-martialed?
        This whole thread is gonna make me have nightmares I can tell…

      • LadySlippers says:

        Nope, he was one of the first sailors that the US Navy handed over to the Japanese authorities almost immediately*. When he came aboard covered in blood, the Navy ship called the MAs (Master of Arms or the Naval Police) and they put him into custody shortly thereafter. It wasn’t long after that the Japanese authorities came looking for him.

        It’s stuff like this that REALLY gives the US a bad name abroad. No one wants to mess with Americans for fear of fall-out and Americans have committed some heinous crimes in Japan. The US then adds insult to injury by not allowing the offending American to face justice in that country for the crime. Granted, the justice systems abroad aren’t perfect, but then again, neither are ours (not when well over 1/3 of dealth penalty cases are found to have the wrong offender and we either killed an innocent person or was about to).

        *In every country the US has an American military base, there is an agreement set up with that country called the Status of Forces Agreement or SoFA. The hard part is we often don’t live up to our end of the agreement which causes (understandably) a lot of issues with the host country. So we Americans are ‘told’ to be respectful of our hosts but we all know we’ll get bailed out of almost anything because Uncle Sam doesn’t play fair. So young Americans act like spoiled brats in other countries because that’s exactly the attitude Uncle Sam also takes. ‘No one messes with us so we do what we wanna do’ is the prevailing attitude.

        That sailor (mid 2000’s) was one of the first times the US actually honored the SoFA agreement like we were supposed to. So when you see the Japanese protesting American soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airman in Japan– you’ll have a tiny understanding of why.

        Getting back to the post, not saying Amanda is guilty but it makes it hard for foreigners to appraise us Americans honestly because often Americans HAVE gotten away with murder (and rape among other heinous crimes) and the US Govt helps. Not very cool is it?

    • Algernon says:

      My boyfriend is on a federal team that deals with Americans who get in trouble abroad. He says the bulk of his job is divided between tourists gone wild on cruises and study-abroad students getting into trouble.

      • LadySlippers says:

        He’d be swamped if he added US military members to his roster.

        It’s really shameful how some Americans act in another country.

      • Algernon says:

        He has actually come home from trips and said, “Thank God I’m not in the military.” He says the Army CID and NCIS guys have the craziest stories.

        It is shameful but it also seems to me that a lot of people don’t realize that justice is not universal. He has described people’s shock, like real, genuine shock, upon realizing that American laws don’t apply in other countries. If you get in trouble abroad, you are at the mercy of the native legal system, not ours. But people seem to think saying, “I’m an American citizen!” will get them a free pass. It doesn’t. All it does is get you a lawyer from the consulate. Or, if things are really bad, my boyfriend shows up. But that’s all it’s going to do. Get you an advocate.

      • Green Girl says:

        I went overseas for a program when I was in college, and I was told over and over to blend in with the woodwork. It’s great to go out and have fun, but don’t draw attention to yourself!

  18. elo says:

    There is no concrete evidence linking her to the slaying but, much like the Scott Peterson trial, her behavior comes off as such that it isn’t hard for me to see how they got a conviction. Is she guilty? I don’t know but, she is cold and I think she knows way more than she says.

  19. serena says:

    I don’t believe Amanda, nor Sollecito. They killed Meredith and are doing everything they can to be seen as ‘victims’ and people actually do, that’s a shame.

    • Renee28 says:

      It is. I’m American and I wish people would look at this case objectively instead of seeing her as a “poor American being persecuted.” They may not have actually stabbed Meredith but I think they were there.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Oh please. The “poor American” angle is one that is always invented by the foreign presses as a way to conveniently slander any one of 303 million people as self-absorbed, arrogant, bigoted, superficial, spiteful, ignorant, vain, ugly, rude, or any other such characteristics that they feel they have the right and the knowledge to impose on an entire country. Nobody in America sits around screaming at the treatment afforded to sweet, innocent, unendingly perfect little darlings like Amanda Knox or whomever is the latest target of this anti-American ploy. It is a fabrication of various factions of the press who don’t have any facts going for them and therefor have to result to slander.

      • Diana says:

        I’m not american, and consider myself fairly unbiased, and looking at it objectively, without the marred view of the press and the tarnish of her reputation, I believe in her inocence.

      • msw says:

        I don’t give a flying f is she is an American. Looking at this case objectively, i see a gross miscarriage of justice from a crooked court. I thought she was guilty as hell until I educated myself about all the facts, including how the prosecution made up a crazy story using conjecture and outright lies to build a case, and then benefitted from their own screwed up police work. A wrongful conviction is wrong, no matter what one’s nationality is.

      • Renee28 says:

        @We Are All
        You’re rambling so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. But you prove my point. So many people are getting defensive and trying to make excuses for Amanda instead looking at all the inconsistencies in her statements. At the very least she knows more than what she’s saying.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        When I think of objectivity, I think of facts…not nationality. Thinking or having a hunch that someone was there does not support the idea that one is being objective.

        My belief in her innocence has nothing to do with her nationality, it has to do with the way in which the evidence points to Rudy Guede and no one else. The prosecution has a very weak case with very little factual information regarding Amanda.

    • bluhare says:

      I agree with you.

  20. Beth says:

    I think she knows more than she admits. I feel so sorry for the Kercher family.

  21. Mar says:

    I think there was a giant drugged out orgy and they saw the guy kill her. There is something that she is hiding but I don’t know if She even was sober enough to recount

    • Suzy from Ontario says:

      There is no evidence that I’m aware of that any sex orgy, drug-fueled or not, ever happened or that anyone ever tried to make one happen. That is a wild theory that came directly out of the prosecutor’s imagination, was leaked to the press and they jumped on the salaciousness of Foxy Knoxy and a sex-crazed and perverted young American girl. Where is the evidence that ever happened? Just because a prosecutor has wild theories and tells them to the press doesn’t mean they occurred, but people read stuff in the newspaper and suddenly it’s fact. This prosecutor was known for outlandish theories and was being investigated for abuse of office, among other things.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      If there was a drugged out orgy, why was Rudy’s the only DNA found on/in the victim? That doesn’t sound like an orgy to me.

      • shady says:

        haha, oh because Amanda stood at the doorway and told Rudy what to do, and then sent Raffaelle in to pick up meredith’s bra clasp and then come back out. It all makes perfect sense.

  22. Talie says:

    So she’s stuck in the US for the rest of her life — it’s a big country. There’s no way the system will send her back to Italy.

    • JessMa says:

      She can also go to Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands and other U.S. territories. Not a bad fate. Better than being in a tiny cell.

  23. Kelly says:

    It is done, the Italian Justice system has made its decision and The US government ,must allow her extradition. US citizens might find the Italian appeals system as strange and cruel as I find the US death sentence appeals system, but Italy is a EU country whose legal system is under EU scrutiny. If the US refuses to hand her over, there will be a lot of people here who will find it hard to accept extradition from the EU to the US.

    • Kelly says:

      By the way, I am Kelly 23 and these are my only two posts – sorry to the other Kelly.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      Italy has refused to extradite people to the US, so I don’t think this will be seen as a big deal if the US takes the same tactic as Italy in this case.

    • Tammy White says:

      Naive thinking on your part. I seriously doubt she will be extradited.

    • Seagulls says:

      People are almost never extradited – either direction – especially if the case against them seems slim. I can’t think of a country that just hands over their citizens as requested. Deals are always being made.

    • JessMa says:

      What are you talking about? It is not even over by Italian standards. Knox can appeal this verdict again. Please inform yourself.

  24. Suzy from Ontario says:

    The prosecutor had a lot of problems and like Jose Baez in the Casey Anthony case, he just came forth with a scenario that had no facts to support it. Sadly, just like in the CA case, the jury and much of the public hooked on to the idea of a perverted sex party and the persona of Foxy Knoxy and Knox and her boyfriend were pretty much convicted on that alone even though there was no evidence anything like that took place other than in the prosecutions imagination.

    Douglas Preston said that the same prosecutor tired to accuse him of crimes and have him thrown in jail when he was wtiting The Monster of Florence, an account of a real serial killer in Florence during the 70s and 80s with fellow journalist/author Mario Spezi.

    “Preston first encountered Mignini, one of the prosecutors in the Monster case, when he started researching the crime. Mignini didn’t appreciate Preston and his writing partner, Mario Spezi, poking into the facts. He had Spezi arrested and thrown into Capanne prison, where the three Meredith suspects are also housed, and accused him of being the Monster of Florence himself. ““When I lived in Italy, I was the target of an investigation by Mignini in which he tapped my cell phone, bugged my writing partner’s car and hauled me down to Perugia for an interrogation,” Preston says. “He accused me of obstruction of justice, perjury, planting false evidence and even being an accessory to murder. I am still under indictment in Italy for a string of secret crimes.” (from

    It was outrageous and Preston had to flee Italy. Mignini has been under investigation for abuse of office and other charges but even while being investigated they allowed him to continue prosecuting the Kercher case. Preston’s experience as well as his curiosity as a journalist in addition to being a novelist, made him look into the Knox case in detail and he believes that Knox is innocent and that like him, she and her boyfriend were simply accused of outrageous things, thrown in jail, and then the press fed on Mignini’s imaginative accounts of what MIGHT have happened and their portrayal of young sexual deviants who pulled Kercher into a night of horror.

    I don’t particularly like Knox and I don’t think she comes across as very empathetic or has displayed much public remorse or sorrow for her roommate, but then again, who knows how she has really behaved behind closed doors. Plus I don’t think she knew Kercher that well. Was she stupid? Yes. But I have sons who are in their early 20s and they can be pretty dense at times and I’m sure that she never expected that she would actually be thrown in jail. She probably did lie originally about some things to cover up smoking pot or sleeping with her boyfriend, maybe out of embarrassment or her parents finding out things she didn’t want them to know. But I don’t think she killed anyone and the sex games thing was just a scenario in the mind of a crazed prosecutor.

    Some people cannot change their minds once things like that story get embedded, even if there is no truth to it. It becomes so real in their head. I’ve seen it with people who have been in jail in the US and then DNA later exonerates them and yet people will still be suspicious and think they must’ve have something to do with it. It’s hard for people to accept that the police could be wrong or could arrest and jail someone if they are innocent. But it happens. Even the best police work and fair prosecutors can make mistakes and in Knox’s case the prosecutor was far from fair.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      I very, VERY much agree with your articulate and thoughtful analysis.
      Thanks for the info about Preston-really interesting stuff…

    • Nicolina says:

      How interesting! Your obviously well researched analysis shows that there is a precedent of the prosecutor bungling cases and being unfit to perform his job, based on his obvious lack of objectivity and logical reasoning. Thank you. It’s terribly unfortunate that despite this precedent, there are many people who blindly stick with him and his version of events.

  25. Lia says:

    I’m Italian,living here in the US and while I was reading the American press this morning, I was totally baffled by something you could explain to me.
    Why are people in America so eager to trash Italian judicial system based on argumentations like”I saw the Lifetime movie”?
    I mean,isn’t Amanda the one who had a HUGE mediatic campaign to convince of her innocence backed by a billionare? Isn’t she also the one who accused an innocent man?
    I don’t know if her and Sollecito are guilty or not,but I trust the judicial system,which has analysed the case over and over again and probably knows more than us all.

    • sapphoandgrits says:

      Your Italian investigators accused an innocent man, not Knox.

      And, the Lifetime movie porteayed Amanda and Raffaele as sex-crazed Satanic murderers, not as innocent.

      She is innocent, period. You cannot have your own facts. NOTHING ties her to the murder and rape. The guilty man is in prisen.

      • bravocueen says:

        I completely agree with this. Who could trust a system where a case is put on in one way, and promotes one set of “facts” and motives to get a desired result. The result is overturned (by what seems to be a part time judicial system), and she is declared not only “not guilty” but “innocent”; so the government puts on an entirely different case, with a different set of “facts” and motives in order to get the desired result. The American judicial system is not perfect, but we would never get away with the BS that I have seen in this case, by the prosecutors, the investigators, the police. . . I will be pissed if the United States even thinks of extraditing her to that kangaroo court of a judicial system.

      • Lia says:

        Which facts? Were you on the crime scene? Have you assisted to the processes? That’s exactly what I meant :you seem to be so sure but maybe all these informations,you are so sure of, were filtered by the media! A campaign backed by Trump can’t be uneffective right? We should stop pretending to know everything about this case and let the judge to their work…

    • KB says:

      Didn’t the Italian police contaminate the DNA evidence and the crime scene? I think that’s what sealed the distrust for a lot of Americans.

      • Xera says:

        The Italian police didn’t contaminate the crime scene, that’s the defence trying to pretend the DNA traces are contaminated while they are in fact incapable to advance a single hypothesis on how any trace of DNA could have been contaminated. Knox blood mixed with Meredith blood in two places in the bathroom and in Filomena’s (an other roommate) bedroom, Sollecito’s DNA on Meredith’s bra, Meredith DNA on the knife found in Sollecito’s house…

        For people wondering why there is no DNA from Knox on the crime scene, the answer is there is, mixed with Meredith’s blood, and as it’s not convenient the PR spinning machine redefines the crime scene as Meredith bedroom only (the blood in the other rooms shouln’t count, it’s not fair!).
        Also, contrarily to what tv crime shows would let us believe murderers don’t always shed DNA on the crime scene, it’s quite usual not to find any, especially in a pool of blood. In this case Guede is the only one to have left is DNA on Meredith sleeves, probably because he was restraining her while someone else was stabbing her.
        An there was Knox DNA on the handle and on the handle/blade junction of the knife that had Meredith’s DNA on it’s tip

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Xera, Meredith’s DNA was NOT found on the knife. After the first trial the court appointed two independent experts to test the knife. It was rye bread, not blood of the vicitm on the knife.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “while they are in fact incapable to advance a single hypothesis on how any trace of DNA could have been contaminated.”

        There is video of the police contaiminating evidence. Handing it around to several people without gloves, then putting it back into the crime scene. etc. There is video of this behavior.

      • msw says:

        Those trace amounts of DNA were there due to cross contaminatio from a completely bungled crime scene investigation. That’s why they were there. Do you think DNA could have gotten there because knox lived there and her boyfriend came over? How is it possible Knox scrubbed herself and Sollecito out of the scene while leaving Guede’s? This pathetic excuse for evidence wouldn’t have even warranted a hearing in a competent court. I don’t think it could even pass on CSI.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “The Italian police didn’t contaminate the crime scene”

        There are several videos showing multiple instances of police crime scene contamination. How can you say the police didn’t contaminate it? Have you even attempted to watch these videos?

    • Samtha says:

      The Lifetime movie has nothing to do with it. It’s the fact that in the US you can’t be tried for the same crime twice that has people condemning Italy’s legal system.

    • Kelly says:

      Well I trash any judicial system because they’re all based on the idea “let them go if there is insufficient evidence”. So many murderers, rapists, etc. get away with it because there wasn’t enough evidence to lock them up behind bars. And unfortunately, a lack of evidence does not necessarily equal not guilty, more often than not it equals incompetent police force or skilled killer.
      I do wonder though what happens when you only have a witness and no evidence? If you saw someone commit murder and the police can’t find enough evidence to convict, can they convict based on your testimony alone?

      • Algernon says:

        Yes, but it’s pretty difficult. It’s called the “CSI Effect” because juries pretty much demand some form of DNA evidence or an expert witness to explain something sciencey as proof. Because of this, there is now an actual part of the judge’s orders to juries that has to remind them that real life is not neat and tidy like TV and there is rarely the compendium of evidence you see presented on shows like CSI. That’s kind of sad when you think about it.

      • KB says:

        Over zealous prosecutors would put so many innocent people in jail if we didn’t have “innocent until proven guilty.” We like to believe they’re noble, but without laws to prevent it, they’d put away anyone on weak evidence just to close a case and add another win to the board.

        Luckily, dumb criminals usually screw up again at some point. OJ Simpson, for example.

      • Nate says:

        @Kelly: Because then we’d simply be putting innocent people in prison based on theories, feelings and hunches. Imagine how terrible that would be. Anyone can claim that they’ve seen a murder. Anyone can point a finger at a victim. Imagine the different motives that could prompt that sort of scenario: grudges, delusions of grandeur, to name a few. That alone can’t convict someone, thank heaven. That would be ludicrous. Even when people come forward and confess to a crime, while that used to be evidence that trumped everything else, eventually it was discovered that there might be other reasons/motives for someone to confess to a crime they never committed (again, thank heaven), and it’s still considered a burden on the prosecution to PROVE the suspect is guilty through irrefutable evidence. Yes, unfortunately, some really greasy criminals have gotten away with crimes because there wasn’t enough to lock them away. And yes, there are flaws in the system. There are cases where literally everyone knows that a certain perpetrator/suspect committed a crime, but they can’t lock him/her away because of lack of evidence due to bad processing, contamination of evidence, evidence being used up, dried up, tested before state of the art forensics was available, etc. It IS sad, but it would be far worse to lock up thousands of innocent people by throwing out the system altogether.

    • paola says:

      The italian judicial system is not perfect just like the american one is not perfect.
      Like somebody said in a post above ‘The justice systems abroad aren’t perfect, but then again, neither are ours (not when well over 1/3 of dealth penalty cases are found to have the wrong offender and we either killed an innocent person or was about to). ‘
      I totally agree with this.
      The fact that there is an american white woman involved in a crime scene abroad makes this story very juicy and lots of people have different opinions about it, and rightly so.
      I just don’t feel like dissing the italian system in its totality because tv and media in general always manipulate the stories, involving politic’s affairs, and very often people never know the real truth behind the events.
      I am italian, and proudly so, I believe in the system and I’m sure Amanda and Raffaele were in some way involved. Nobody has the right to diss a judicial system, especially a country where you can easily buy a weapon and that still uses death penalty as a solution to violent crimes.
      Nobody is perfect and certainly no judicial system is perfect either in Italy or abroad.

      • blue marie says:

        Your point would have been better made had you not gone and knocked another judicial system yourself.

        I wasn’t there, I don’t pretend to know what happened, but I find the arguments on both sides fascinating.

      • paola says:

        Sorry blue marie But all i see today is people dissing the italian jurisdiction in every possible way. it doesn’t mean i don’t respect your culture and your country though.
        it is a very fascinating matter.. and unluckily we’ll never know the truth..

      • bluhare says:

        Read the posts here, blue marie, and tell me what you think of all the comments on the Italian system. paola didn’ knock another judicial system. She just said that the US system may not be any better than the system everyone here has no problem ripping to shreds.

      • blue marie says:

        No worries paola, I get what you’re saying..And my feathers would be ruffled reading some of the comments as well.

        @ bluhare: I don’t disagree with her sentiment, folks are, for lack of a better phrase, spitting on her government and acting like they know what’s best. The truth of the matter is that no one here was there so no one can emphatically say she’s innocent or guilty as much as they would like to try. Like I stated upthread, while I don’t know if she did it or not I do believe that she’s hiding something..

      • paola says:

        Thank you bluhare 🙂

        i am not a patriottic citizen but i can become quite sensitive on some matters like this one 😀

      • LadySlippers says:

        @blue marie: Paola was quoting me and I was the one to knock the American judicial system. Me, an American that has lived overseas, but nonetheless an American born and bred. Paola was just agreeing with me. And she has a fair point about guns and our death penalty. Other judicial systems may make mistakes but at least no one dies because of it. Very fair point.

        Personally, I think it’s uncalled for to trash an entire country for some people’s mistakes. From the comments I’ve read today, this case was grossly mishandled. However, I can pull up other cases right here in the US that are equally mishandled. So we’d be pretty even there.

        I would suggest to the people wanting to denigrate either the US or Italy to please refrain and try and keep the comments to the case at hand. This case sounds fascinating and those comments pertaining specifically to the case are the most enlightening.

        Bottom line, justice systems are flawed because human beings are flawed. And it matters not the flag flying in the court room. Let’s all hope and pray (or whatever is your preferred method of change) that people put down their egos long enough to allow justice to take place. Again, that’s irregardless of the flag in the courtroom.

      • JessMa says:

        Sorry that 1/3 statistic is incorrect.

    • Zwella Ingrid says:

      Thank you Lia. That is a point I’m trying to make. The Italian judicial system has seen all the evidence. Both from the prosecution and the defense. As much as we like to think we “know” about this, or the “facts” –we don’t have a freaking clue. No one short of God knows the facts. The Italian judicial system has the best shot at it, since they have ALL available information. Since that is the case, they have the best shot at ascertaining the truth, unlike the rest of us.

    • Milla says:

      Lock the black guy, give an American girl a free pass. I think she made a deal when she was in Italy to go back to the States and never leave the country. She probably gave some information about her ex boyfriend at the time and now 2 guys will be locked, but she will live happily ever after. Something is off with this girl, she seems like has no empathy, like she’s in a movie.

      • Seagulls says:

        She’s living in her own Kafka-esque nightmare. It really bothers me how everyone wants her to act in a certain way based on how they think guilty or innocent people should act, especially four years after the fact, a trial, imprisonment…. I don’t think any of us knows how we would act. I find this all fascinating, if maddening, and I don’t otherwise particularly care about the case. Just everyone writing with such certainty as to how she should be acting is surreal.

    • JessMa says:

      Lia, I think it is because the concept of no double jeopardy is so ingrained in America judicial system. From a very early age we know that in our judicial system once you are acquitted that is it. The prosecutor does not get another bite of the apple. So when we see a system where the prosecutor can just rinse and repeat until he gets the outcome he/she wants it seems crazy to us.

      It is similar to our feelings on the first amendment. Most American are horrified when the hear people in other countries are prosecuted for hate speech. It is not that Americans love hate speech, it is that we feel it should be protected. It is an ingrained belief most hold dear.

      In this case it didn’t help that the lead prosecutor was being investigated for corruption and seems obsessed with satanic sex rituals.

      I have been to Italy three times and think it is a lovely country, but I am much more comfortable with my justice system. That being said it is not perfect either, but at least I understand it.

      Also try not to take it personally. As an American I have heard insults from every corner of the world my whole life. I know that there are good and bad elements in every country. Focus on the positive.

  26. sapphoandgrits says:

    She and Raffaele are innocent — a good US analogy is the West Memphis Three. Anyone who thinks she is either knows nothing factual about this case or has a vendetta. Facts are facts. DNA doesn’t lie.

    He is crazy for not having flown back to the DR yesterday.

    She will not be extradited, no matter what that fool Dershowitz. It doens’t matter about Italian law, as per a USSC decision, her Constitutional laws trump any treaty, and we do not allow DA do-overs here. They get one bite of the apple here — no double jeopardy.

    I am betting the Italian government does something, because this is really embarrassing to them.

    One last thing: the guy who raped and murdered her, who stole her rent money and phones, whose DNA was all over that room, whose DNA was found inside Meredith, whose bloody footprints were found, whose poo was in a toilet, that guy? Getting out on parole this year or net year. That’s what the Kercher’s should be angry about. I think they and their attorney see 12 million reasons why they should go after Knox instead.

    • Seen says:

      @sapphoa. You can’t know she is innocent. Period. You weren’t there. You can believe it or wish it but you simply can’t know it. Also- it’s not double jeopardy or a do over, but part of Italy’s appeals process. I’m american – don’t know if she’s guilty or not – but I sure do hate seeing such emphatic statements made to insult other commenters or mark their ignorance for believing something different than do you.

      • Seen says:

        Edit – OJ Simpson had DNA “evidence” acquit him. Was he innocent ? Read up on that trial to maybe learn how DNA can be manipulated and corrupted in its gathering. It’s by no means the be-all end-all to definitive justice. It’s simply a tool used by both sides.

      • bluhare says:

        Thank you, Seen. I agree with you. I was also going to post about how a jury of OJ’s peers found him not guilty!!

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        Thank you Seen! Well put!

      • msw says:

        Nope. OJ was not “cleared” by DNA evidence. That would mean the DNA evidence shows he was not involved. The defense argued DNA testing was not reliable, as it was contaminated at the crime scene lab and appeared by be tampered with. The police lost that one for the prosecution. In this case, the contamination is what led to the presence of Amanda and Rafaelle’s DNA and got them convicted–the exact opposite cause and result.

      • Seagulls says:

        @bluhare – like in every trial, a jury of his peers didn’t get to see all the evidence that was shown to the rest of the American public, or hear any of the damning background info, or anything else that became common knowledge to most of us back in ’94 because they were sequestered and only allowed to see certain things. That’s not exactly the same thing as having all the evidence arrayed and then deciding on a verdict.

  27. Sandy says:

    I’m more fascinated, and repulsed, by the PR aspects of this case. The Kerchers have been playing the PR game in spades since she’s come home, knowing that extradition would be the end-game. So Amanda is going out for as many interviews as possible, in her new “unfoxy” haircut, and drumming up public sympathy. Everyone is on-board, especially since she is an attractive, not-underprivileged white girl. An American out-cry will ensue once Italy demands extradition, and the government will have to consider it.

    • Kelly says:

      Sadly, every court case is almost always more PR games and appearances, and less solid fact and unbiased logic

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      …or maybe people are actually concerned with truth and factual evidence?

      Some of you seem to think that conjecture or “gut-feeling” is enough to convict someone and that is why so many innocent people rotted in jail or were placed on death row until the inception of DNA testing.

      Please watch After Innocence-it might make you think twice about jumping to a guilty verdict based on circumstantial–or in Knox’s case–NON-EXISTENT “evidence”.

    • Mel says:

      Considering the huge scandal, in Italy and elsewhere in Europe, that followed the refusal by the USA to extradite the US pilots who were directly and unquestionably responsible for the death of 20 people in 1998 -to mention just one example – I doubt the US government would rush to a conclusion…
      BTW, it seems Alan Dershowitz thinks so too.

      • Sassy says:

        You are referring to the Dolomite ski gondola that was clipped by an American jet, right? Disgraceful on US part to not permit the pilots to be extradited. It was clearly a negligent “accident”. if proper speed and air clearance had not been violated, it would be another matter, but 20 people dead is not going to go away. And I am sure when the time comes and Italia asks for Amanda, someone here may just let her go back. Yes, Dershowitz knows the score.

  28. tabby says:

    Funny how during the first trial the only person that was found guilty was the black guy. Nobody could believe this poor innocent white girl can do such a thing. Talk about white privilege, now people are outrage that she is found guilty. She was apart of the crime.

  29. Feebee says:

    My takeaway from this case at this point is that the innocence or guilt of Knox and Sollecito is a moot point. The prosecution from start to finish (or whatever point they’re now at) has been a cock up of royal proportions. Yes, they’ve had a massive media circus to wade through but it appears they bought into that too.

    Two trials with massively different theories of the case and no clear understanding of the connection to the convicted killer currently serving time for the crime. This is an embarrassing miscarriage of justice but I don’t think the Italians see it the same way.

  30. xxx says:

    To Kaiser, in Italy the court cases that involve jail time immediately have 3 trials and the winning outcome of the 3 trials is the one that sticks:) The justice/political system here (I’m in Italy now and am here very often) is far worse America. Corrupt, buyable, court cases go on for years as is the case now with Amanda Knox. Same goes for if you are trying to sue someone including financial losses, you will wait years for a court date.

  31. Mrs. Darcy says:

    I am an American living in the U.K., and let me just say that I am not looking forward to the onslaught of biased reporting that is about to start all over again. I am bothered by the number of people who base their perceptions of her guilt solely on her personality/demeanor. I have read a number of things that to me indicate she is kind of a cuckoo nut – not necessarily an unhinged murderous one, but possibly someone with a lack of social graces -this Rolling Stone piece, written a couple of yrs ago, gives a pretty varied insight into how she has been misconceived and twisted by the media and Italian prosecuters bizarrely obsessed with Satanism and sex.

    Also a pretty detailed account of the numerous mistakes the investigation made, things that I do not see how any second trial could improve on. They botched the time of death completely. They botched all physical evidence through various Scooby Doo errors. They interrogated Knox in a language she didn’t understand much of the time, with numerous people in the room shouting at her, with her being slapped in the back of the head for emphasis before she broke down and “confessed”. Did she confess that she herself had anything to do with it? No, she pointed the finger, under much duress, at an innocent man, under heavy police suggestion. This was then used against her as “evidence”.

    So what is more likely, a convicted multiple burglar like Guede acted alone and botched the crime, or Knox, by all accounts of everyone who knew her a somewhat gullible and naive girl, got involved in some dodgy sex murder with her virginal geek boyfriend? She could have left the country at any time in the weeks immediately after the crime but stayed behind initially to console Kercher’s parents.

    She has been persecuted as a witch in Italy, with the Italian cops saying she “smelled of sex”, and the lead prosecutor, who connects Satan to seemingly all of his investigative work, painting a rather dramatic and salacious picture of a young sex vamp mastermind. It’s ludicrous and there is not a scrap of evidence to support their case. The true, convicted murderer had his sentence reduced for pointing the finger at Knox/Sollecito.

    I am not saying that there isn’t a dim possibility she did have involvement, I am saying the criminal case is beyond a joke and if Obama sends her to Italy he’s an idiot.

    • Ok says:

      Mrs Darcy. A standing ovation to you for this post. Very eloquent.

      During most of the trial, I did think she was guilty mostly due to posts from Eyes for Lies and her odd, flippant behavior in the court.

      But I did have a change of opinion as I began to read more and more about the case.

      But you do give a really wonderful summary.
      I do not believe she will ever be extradited because of the double jeopardy situation that is in disagreement with the US Legal system.

      But I feel badly for Raphaele. He should have just moved out of Italy 2 years ago. He is stuck.

    • Thank you Mrs. Darcy for delineating my position so eloquently. I arrive here after wading through yesterday’s & today’s comments at the Atlantic—truly shocking many of them. Since I rarely spend time on such cases & haven’t followed this one except at a distance, I have no verdict to defend, though there seem to be enough open questions to give anyone pause. There are two aspects which occupy my mind: 1) how it is to be a coed aged 19; 2) how it is to be suddenly dropped into a culture & a language not one’s own with only rudimentary command of that language.
      1) When I was 19, I thought I held the world in my hands whereas my father didn’t have a clue; by the time I had reached 21 it was clear that I still had a great deal to learn, whereas my father was actually very wise about very many things. So much for youthful exuberance & inability to to analyze situations realistically.
      2) When I came here, I had a quote from Schiller & a few bare bones of dialogue (enough, for example, to keep me out of the men’s room). It was soon clearly a myth that not everyone could also speak English (though many tried to practice on me) & that I had the sore face muscles to prove it (didn’t understand one word in a hundred but kept smiling to show that I was friendly).
      Had I been exposed at that point in my development to similar accusations without the necessary linguistic help, had I been kept under an hours-long verbal inquisition without understanding its implications, my lot might have been similar to AK’s: lie if it seems what they want, look helpless much of the time, sign what they want signed & end up being accused of something awful without understanding it & with no hope of escaping.
      Everyone in this sorry mess has my sympathy—independent of legal system, sex, beauty or lack thereof &, most important of all, race (the references to the ‘pretty white girl’ are really jarring). Can only hope the powers that be find their way out of this hole since they seem to have dug a deep one.

  32. msw says:

    This entire thing is absolutely insane. It is evident the prosecution concocted this absurd, wild theory (originally invoking Satanic rituals, not for the first time for Magnini, the prosecutor) and twiddled around all the evidence to make it seem as if Knox and Sollecito were involved. They clearly were not. They came up with six different theories for motive in this recent trial. But the biggest hole in the prosecution’s story was the DNA. Somehow Knox managed to clean up her own and Solliceto’s DNA only? How? They caught the person who did it. There is not one shred of evidence to implicate either Knox or Solliceto. In fact, it completely exonerates them. I can’t believe how many people are willing to imprison two innocent people because they were awkward or kind of weird (as Amanda surely is). Or how many peopke think she has “dead eyes”– i can tell you as a person with the same shade of blue eyes Amanda has, i have also been accused of looking unfeeling. Its just a quality blue eyes get sometimes and it makes people uncomfortable. It doesn’t make soneone a freaking murderer. Those ofyou who think she is guilty or knows more than she is telling, please ask why. There is NOTHING to substantiate it.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      It’s clear from your comments here that Bradley Cooper and his “serial killer eyes” did it.

      Totally tactless of me to make light of the situation but really, I couldn’t agree with you more.

      It’s funny how people are claiming that it’s her appearance as a “pretty white girl” that spurs people to defend her, yet those same people seem more than happy to condemn her based on her appearance or her demeanor. Interesting indeed..

      BTW, loved your assessment, msw and I just have to add that I’ve always wanted blue eyes, perceived “coldness” notwithstanding 😉

      • msw says:

        Thank you.that puzzles me too.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “It’s funny how people are claiming that it’s her appearance as a “pretty white girl” that spurs people to defend her, yet those same people seem more than happy to condemn her based on her appearance or her demeanor.”

        So true! Great point!

        msw, people are probably just jealous of your gorgeous peepers! Blue eyes are beautiful. I too hate that people are so quick to judge based on appearance. I look pretty sweet and innocent, which works in my favor sometimes, but it can also lead to people being patronising etc. People are fools to underestimate me, but I do like surprising people. 😉 Next time someone says your cold and unfeeling, bury them with a bear hug!

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Tiffany-you won this thread. Seriously. You had an educated, informed answer for every argument.
        Both you and msw are my internet heros today. Well done, ladies 😉

      • msw says:

        Thanks, I certainly appreciate all the thoughtful commenters in this thread who are willing to think for themselves and make opinions based on the facts and not on their prejudices or assumptions. I honestly thought she was guilty at first, and now I’m embarassed by that, but I was willing to change my mind instead of clinging to the faulty evidence that caused me to think that in the first place. Part of why I care so much about this is I’m honestly concerned by the lack of critical thinking in favor of clinging to old ideas and outright bias.

  33. Diana says:

    I think this is a fine example of what happens when trials occur in the media and not in a Court of law. You can think the girl is cold for whatever the press feeds you, but not because she has been portrayed like an insensitive monster by unethical reporters does that mean she should be convicted of a crime when no evidence shows she committed it.

  34. Mel says:

    Just to clarify a point that is often missed by foreign, especially American, readers:
    She was not tried for the second or third time – this is still part of the original five-level legal process.
    So, she has only been tried once – and assuming her defence will appeal, the “trial” (the original legal process) is not over yet.

  35. Barbiegirl says:

    An innocent person does not change her version of the events and accuses innocent people several times. I believe Meredith was killed during some sort of sex game that went wrong, probably unintentionally. But the three of them are guilty. Amanda has a great PR team and very influential parents. I remember they even called Hillary Clinton at the time, to ask for help or something. I hope she ends her years in prison like the other two. It is disgusting that publishers even offer this murderer (or accomplice) a book deal, predictable and totally normal in America, but still disgusting. The reason she is out is that she got a famous and expensive lawyer, a great pr team and a cute face, but I believe she will pay one day or another. If it was my daughter being killed like that, I would probably kill Amanda myself and go to prison, I bet I would feel better and so would any other parent whose daughter has been killed in such a terrible way. Now I am curious to see what happens. Unfortunately being Italy basically a colony or satellite State of the US after WWII I doubt that the US will ever extradite Amanda, so she will end her life in the States, sitting on the millions of her book. And that is modern society for you.

    • Jayna says:

      I thought she was guilty too at first, but did you even follow the appeal? Beyond corrupt and twisted so many of the facts that it was mind-boggling. I don’t believe she’s guilty, but at the least I would have doubts after really following the appeal and what came out about the trial. It was mind-blowing how they were rail-roaded and convicted.

    • msw says:

      An innocent person WILL sometimes believe a version of events planted in their head at times of great stress and under duress. This is not an opinion, it is a studied, documented phenomenon. The police repeated an event to her over and over again, saying Patrick did it, and after hours of being questioned in Italian, yelled at, hit, and denied food or rest, she broke and told them what they wanted to hear. She has said she genuinely believed it at the time, and I believe her, because this is a real side effect of interrogation like that. It’s still not right and she did time for it, but I blame the police, not her. That was the only time she “changed her story.”

      • IzzyB says:

        It’s true. I witnessed a pretty bad GBH. It was my friend hurt and there was so much blood I was sure he was going to die. The police questioned me for 4 hours, three of them in there, I was panicked for my friend just seeing him lying in blood over and over again in my head, and they grilled me non-stop until I wasn’t even sure who instigated it any more.

      • LadySlippers says:


        It IS a documented and studied phenomenon where a person will change or adjust their story depending on the environment. It has NOTHING to do with guilt or innocence and everything to do with trying to ‘please’ the questioner. It’s the reason so many people in the psych world are against torture and strong interrogation methods — they don’t work — you don’t get the truth, you get whatever it is that will make the questions stop. That’s it.

        Please do not judge a person based on that alone.

      • msw says:

        that is terrible, izzy, i am so sorry. I have gotten confused on things i sawthat were nowhere near as traumatic–just something as simple as which side of the intersection a car came from in an accident i witnessed. Brains are not operating normally when in shock or distress.

      • Seagulls says:

        Thank you! This has been driving me bonkers! Human beings are terrible witnesses, and what’s worse, we’re convinced we’re infallible so anyone changing their story – even though we all do it though we think we don’t – is immediately a lying sack of crap.

  36. neve says:

    oh to have been a fly on the wall of the apartment that night. watch this space for the hollywood script-writers waiting for an appropriate time to push some Oscar engineered movie.

  37. Irishserra says:

    I’ve always maintained that Amanda Knox is innocent, but that has been based on reports I’ve read from the English-speaking media, like Xera said. I suppose it’s difficult to really tell what went on when you’re limited to one primary version of events. I would be curious to have more information.

    • msw says:

      I believe on Amanda’s website, there are links to all the translated court documents, and unless you speak fluent Italian, that’s as good as it gets.

      • Mel says:

        There is plenty of documentation – both translated and original – on the True Justice for Meredith Kercher, too.

      • msw says:

        If I post a link to the website, my comment gets flagged as spam, so I won’t include a link to the True Justice website–but I will encourage everyone to check it out. If you believe Knox and Solliceto are innocent (or at least, not guilty) based on the evidence, this website will validate you. If you believe the satanic cult/sex orgy gone wrong theory, the validity of the “double DNA knife” which turned out to have rye bread and not Meredith’s DNA on it, and Amanda’s perceived weirdness are all smoking guns for their guilt, it will validate you too.

  38. Zwella Ingrid says:

    I don’t know if Amanda is guilty or not. So many things about her story don’t add up. I haven’t read through all of the trial proceedings yet, but you can read more at or google True Justice For Meredith Kerscher. The site is down right now, it has been overwhelmed with visitors, but as soon as it comes back up, I encourage anyone interested to read through the information on the site. I would tend to believe she was guilty if there was some discernible motive. But from what I have read, there is no motive that makes any sense. I do believe however that IF she is innocent, then all of them are innocent, including Guede. She has just come across as a liar so many times in interviews, etc. that it certainly makes you wonder about her guilt. As I said, I remain undecided but I’m definitely not jumping on the “poor innocent girl” bandwagon. Since none of us on here even know a small portion of the facts, we are all just spouting our half baked opinions that don’t mean crap.

    • msw says:

      We do know the facts. If you mean none of us were there, that’s true, but there are plenty of facts which exonerate Knox and Solliceto and point to Guede only.

      • Seen says:

        You don’t know the facts as they occurred – you know the facts as they are told to you. There is a difference.

      • msw says:

        You mean the court documents?

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        Seen, Once again you have hit the nail on the head.

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        msw you do not know the facts. Were you in court to hear all of the evidence presented?

      • msw says:

        Again, court documents are not enough for you? The evidence they presented is there, unspun by the media. The evidence points to Guede and no one else. This should have been a slam dunk and they still managed to completely screw it up. I am not a god, so if that’s what you mean when you say we don’t know everything, fine. But there is plenty of evidence showing this for the farce it is.

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        msw, so based on court documents that you have read in their entirety, you have determined that Amanda Knox is 100 % innocent, and that the trial is a farce? Wow! Thanks for clearing that up for everyone else.

      • msw says:

        Yes, and I used my brain to deduce the obvious. Glad to clear that up for you.

        Even if she was guilty, the court certainly did not prove it with any shred of credibility. All of this insanity was a total farce, yes.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Oh for crying out loud. This is like the Battle of The Informed vs The Battle of the Willfully Ignorant.

        Instead of saying “well you don’t know the truth”, why not form an educated counterargument? Saying “your stance isn’t valid because you weren’t there” works both ways, by the way. No one knows EXACTLY what happened except for the people there and that’s the case with EVERY trial in history–no need to point out the obvious.

        That being said, there’s a reason why the judicial system exists and a reason why juries are summoned-because neutral, unbiased parties are there to hear facts and make an assessment of guilt/innocence based on the evidence presented. BTW, juries don’t hear everything either–but that in no way, shape, or form means that a juror (or msw in this case) can’t form a thoughtful opinion based on FACTS.

      • Nate says:

        @Seen & Zwella: Ugh. I don’t know why I’m bothering at this point, but…call me crazy, I have hope for humanity if you just keep believing, keep trying, and keep praying. Judas!!!

        No one can be convicted unless they are proven, PROVEN, guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This is standard procedure in order to protect the innocent. Is it flawless? No. Have innocent people still been convicted? Yes. It’s beside the point. No one is claiming to know, definitively, that Knox is or isn’t guilty. What EVERYONE is saying, is that THERE ISN’T ENOUGH EVIDENCE (you know, the stuff used to prosecute a suspect) TO CONVICT HER. It’s proven FACT (yes, fact. Get over it) that the crime scene was processed incorrectly. Watch the videos, for hell’s sake. There was DNA evidence that pointed to Guede. IF Knox or her boyfriend were in on it, there’s no way to tell, as NONE of the evidence (you know, the stuff used to prosecute a suspect) can prove it. If she’s guilty, it doesn’t matter, because the process used to collect evidence from a crime scene was done shoddily from the get go. That’s what happens when you can’t do your job correctly, and that’s the real reason behind the outcry. Quit deflecting using race, nationality, etc. There have been cases here in the US and everywhere else where this sort of shit has happened. It’s again, beside the point. The investigators messed up, the prosecutor is incredibly shady. It is what it is.

      • msw says:

        Thank you Nate. To be clear, I AM saying they are innocent, not just arguing there is no evidence to convict them. I believe the evidence shows they were not there at the time of the murder, and there is nothing to implicate they helped plan it. (And I’m not basing this on the sh*t the American media sold, because I don’t use it–my only news source in the US is NPR and I have not tuned in to any of their coverage of this case. But I do love the above implication that I just took at face value “the facts as they were presented to me” instead of doing my own research of the original sources, which were presented in court.)

        Either way, in a competent court, this would have never made it to trial, and it is obvious they were going after these two with gusto even though no credible evidence supported it. They very clearly constructed a scenario they believed plausible and built the case of evidence to suit their needs, rather than looking at the evidence and building a case based on what was available and credible.

  39. Dimebox says:

    Under US law the prosecution cannot appeal an acquittal. As an American citizen, who is in the US, Knox is protected by the Constitution. Under our laws, which came from British law, this recent trial was double jeopardy. The only US citizens who are exempt from our Extradition Treaty with Italy are members of our military, except in cases of double jeopardy.

    • msw says:

      Thank you. She may not be in double jeopardy by Italy’s standard, but it is double jeopardy by ours. The US won’t extradite her.

      • Make mine a double says:

        US constitutional law doesn’t apply to foreign legal cases. A country’s legal system cannot be read across to a trial in another country. Therefore, as has been stated many times before here, the double jeopardy knock out doesn’t apply. According to the Italian legal system no double jeopardy has occurred as it’s all still part of the same, original trial process.

        Whether the US will extradite her, that’s a whole different question but the Italian authorities are well within their legal rights to request it and legally, the US has no reason to refuse. Refusal will be a political decision, not a legal one.

      • msw says:

        I am aware we do not apply our law in other countries and it has no effect on her verdict in Italy. The question is if the US will consider her to be protected by our constitution, and how they will respond politically. I don’t expect the US to give her up.

  40. Connie says:

    One thing I always find interesting in cases like these is the mention of body language. Some people act as though they’re body language experts and when someone is convicted of some heinous crime they will say they knew all along simply based on body language. I think it’s likely that the person convicted happened to display the body language that falls within an individual’s expectation of how a criminal would act.

    A person should be judged by the evidence presented but unfortunately in this case, the investigation was so botched that if Knox were guilty it’s hard to definitively prove it.

    • Trillion says:

      It’s important to consider Mignini’s (the prosecutor) very colorful professional and personal history and the differences between a prosecutor’s role/influence in Italy v.s. other systems. ( Also, from my understanding, at her initial detainment, Knox was held under duress for 12 hours without being allowed to sleep, eat, relieve herself and was understandably feeling insane, alone, confused, terrified. This also happened to another American (a journalist) accused by the same prosecutor for murders years before this case. He was not even in Italy at the time of the murder! Such was the insane revenge-seeking of Mignini. The journalist’s account of his interrogation experience, similar to what they put Knox through, is harrowing (

  41. Meggin says:

    I bet she is regretting every studying abroad in the first place lol. Crazy story. She has changed her version of things a lot and therefore, I am leaning towards the fact that she is most likely guilty.

    • Trillion says:

      It is extremely rare that a violent crime like this be committed by a female. It’s not outside the realm of possibility, but it is something that nearly never, ever occurs (if ever). This is an important point. The motive (violent sex-play) feels so totally out of some demented, frothing, male fantasy. Remember too, that this is a very conservative religious area. I will guess a lot of sexual repression going on here so a story like this really excites the population. This case is comparable in some ways to the West Memphis 3: Rural, religious area and a judge unable to admit he’s wrong.

  42. anna says:

    I’m Italian, and we’ve read really a lot of this powerfully sad story, every second day on the newspapers for several mounths and over again through these years. It’s true, the police messed it up in the beginning, and that’s a small town in Italy. The one thing that I retained over all of this time is that the poor girl died in a very slow way, the most terrible thing, it took hours, she could have been saved. Nobody knows the complete truth outside the two lovers, but the reconstruction of the story has been based on the work of a number of competent investigators just like in every civilized country. Our trial system, which comes form the first accomplishment in justice of all the times, the roman one, and a solid giuridical history and culture, is a three session one, in order to respect the principle that the person in trial is solidly guaranteed in his right to defend himself. Each time there is a different team of judges, in order to this. I’m not so proud of many things about Italy, as many of our politicians have ruined her in the last twenty years, but c’m on, respect at least a wisely designed engine and an excelent school of giuris-prudentiae as we call it. In Italy we use to trust our justice institutions, although we don’t trust many others, alas. Also it is sad to know that the two young people in love were seen juggling and joking in an underwear shop in Perugia the very second day after the murder, though that doesn’t mean nothing with reguard to their innocence. And if we really want to be judgimental across countries, I suggest to know better about the Cermis tragedy in the late 90ies, caused by the lack of judgement of few american soldiers in Italy. No trial happened, neither in Italy neither in the US. A black spot that we long ago forgave or forgot in the name of a felt alliance.

  43. Nicolina says:

    Quick question: would all those who presume she is guilty or that she knows more than she’s told because she hasn’t acted as emotional as they would like her to, feel that same if she had Asperger’s or a similar condition? I’m not saying she does at all, however, just because a person doesn’t act as emotional as you think they should, doesn’t make them sneaky or a murderer. She just may not be a very emotional person, something many, many others share. If it were me in her shoes, I would have an extremely difficult time trying to control my rage and frustration at being wrongly convicted. But I am a very emotional person. Basing your belief that she’s guilty on her lack of perceived emotion, is just ludicrous and shameful. By those standards, Casey Anthony should be innocent since she cried and carried on in her jailhouse tapes. Give me a break!

    To the poster above who asked why it has never occurred to anyone that Meredith was lacking defensive wounds because she was sleeping, frozen in terror, or unconscious, thank you! Some common sense! Lacking defense wounds doesn’t necessarily mean someone was holding her down.

    Oh, Lt. Joe Kenda, if ever there were a case for you, here it is!

    • Zwella Ingrid says:

      She slept through being stabbed 40 times?

      • Nicolina says:

        I never said that was conclusively what happened. She could have also been unconscious. Was there any bruising found on her wrists consistent with the theory that she was held down by an unknown 3rd party? She could have also been tied down, which would have also prevented her from defending herself.

  44. Minxx says:

    “The evidence and accusatory theory do not justify a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather, nothing has changed. There has always been a marked lack of evidence.”

    She’s STILL saying “look, you didn’t prove anything” instead of saying ” I didn’t kill Meredith”. I followed that story for a while and I’m convinced this girl has something to do with the murder. Too many lies, too many changed stories, alibi that doesn’t make sense, pointing finger at an innocent man. This girl has dead eyes and zero empathy. I have no sypathy for her.

    • msw says:

      As i said twice in the comments already, this “dead eyes” thing really pisses me off. I have been told the same thing, having the same shade of blue eyes as Knox. So first, thank you for being yet another person to insult me by proxy and let me correct you on your bullshit. I have been told on multiple occasions that I am coming across as unfeeling or uncaring when the exact opposite is true. It has caused me problems. It is hurtful. For all people talk about how blue eyes are beautiful (which they are) and desirable, think of the words that go with them. “Ice blue.” “Piercing.” “Cold.” Blue eyes make a lot of people uncomfortable, I’ve learned. But I don’t think its fair to make hateful statements such as a person being “dead inside” because their eye color makes you uncomfortable, so I would like the entire internet and the entire world to STFU with it already.

      Second: why on earth would you think soneone is capable if a murder based on how they look. That is completely illogical to the point where I can’t even understand why you would say it.

      • Nicolina says:

        @msw I agree wholeheartedly with everything you’ve been posting. There are so many people who are just completely ignorant and use phrases like “dead eyes” to justify their mistaken idea that anyone who is different from them must be hiding something or be a soul-less murderer. Gee, we really have not progressed from the witch hunts and trials, have we?? Burn the witch! Kill whatever’s different, makes us uncomfortable, and justifies our ludicrous and wildly inappropriate assumptions! Rolling my ice blue eyes over this!

      • Suzy from Ontario says:

        I agree. It bugs me no end when people talk about *dead eyes* or how they *know* that someone is a killer because of how they look. People see what they want to see. They also, clearly, aren’t interested in researching the facts when they can use *dead eyes* to determine guilt. Whatever. It’s pointless to try to have a logical discussion with people who are illogical.

        @Nicolina – I love Lt. Joe Kenda too! LOL! He’d get to the bottom of it! 🙂

    • msw says:

      Oh, by the way, she has explicity stated she did not kill Meredith. A lot.

      • Minxx says:

        Oh, poor dear .. Give me a break. I HAVE BLUE EYES and it’s not the colour that bothers me. As I said before, she said too many lies and she accused an innocent person. Her story doesn’t add up. This is the reason why I think she was involved. All you took from my comment is “dead eyes”. If she had a good alibi I would have not accused her, even with her creepy look and apparent lack of empathy for the victim. Too bad you’re taking your story exclusively from the American media outlets. Poor Amanda, for some crazy reason framed by the nasty, “medieval” Italian justice system.

      • msw says:

        As I stated numerous times in this thread, I did not get my information from the american media. I got it from the court documents. When I did not get it from primary sources, I got it from sites which were actually anti Amanda and British media. Feel free to review my other comments, I addressed all your other points throughout this thread and didn’t find it necessary to repeat it for the millionth time. And if you think someone is guilty because of the way they look, you’re part of the problem.

  45. Juliette says:

    Based on the evidence, Amanda Knox is innocent.

    Despite the lack of evidence: Amanda Knox HAS been punished. She’s spent years imprisoned, isolated in a foreign country, away from family and any support system.

    Despite the fact she is more likely innocent than not, Amanda Knox will CONTINUE to be punished: She’s never going to be able to travel freely abroad. She’s never going to be able to truly clear her name. A google search will always tie “Amanda Knox” to this scandal and murder. She’s always going to be years behind on her education, her path towards making a career for herself will be hindered, she’s not at an achievement level with her peers because of this case. Amanda will never be able to live the life she would have lived if Meredith had not died. These are lifelong punishments that will follow a woman, who is more than likely completely innocent.

    • Nicolina says:

      Absolutely. There is no way she can ever just disappear into obscurity and never have her name tied to such a horrible crime and miscarriage of justice. She carries a lifelong sentence for a crime she is innocent of.

  46. PoliteTia says:

    The trial of Amanda Knox? How about the murder of Meredith Kercher? A bright 21 year old woman’s life is gone. The yo-yo conviction, in the Italian court, must be just heart wrenching for both families. But please, quit glorifying murder end of this travesty and send condolences to the family of a murdered victim Meredith Kercher.
    This makes me happy I live in a country were ‘Double Jeopardy’ is not an after thought.

    • shady says:

      Meredith’s killer is behind bars, and up for appeal in a couple years. My condolences to the Kercher family for THAT.

    • themummy says:

      No one is forgetting Meredith Kercher or her family. People always like to pull out that line. Look, Meredith is dead. It’s awful. Beyond awful. And no one has forgotten it or is belittling it. BUT Amanda Knox is still going through this experience, which is HERS TOO. And so why should we abandon her? Makes no sense. You can support the Kerchers and empathize for them, but that doesn’t mean we should lock up an innocent person. That is not logical AT ALL. Every single statement Knox gives mentions the Kerchers before anything else.

  47. Nikita says:

    As an european, i can tell you that we laugh about italy! They cant even handle their own country! Their goverment changes all the time , nibody is surprised that they cant handle this trail! Its a farse and embarrasing for italy…. Think about Silvio berlusconi…. And then you know everything you need to know how italian law works…. NOT !!!!! I dont know if she did it or not but this trial is ridiculous! I love italy, its a beautyfull country with great people, awesome food and the best coffee on this planet but their goverment and laws and how they work is just bad.

    • paola says:

      I’m trying really hard to not be extremely rude with you.
      Not to be disrespectful but please never come to Italy again. I’m sure, since you come from what I assume a perfect place, you’ll be able to find nice coffee, good food and lovey places somewhere else.
      Your comment is beyond ignorant and stupid and we don’t need that here as well.
      On the other hand though I’d love to know where you live. I’m sure I can say some stupid clichés about your country and be a total asshole too.

      • themummy says:

        She nothing but complimentary stuff about your country. She only spoke ill of your government, which, well, what with Berlusconi and whatnot hasn’t been the greatest in recent years. I don’t think saying there are problems with the government is a huge insult to your nation. It’s a fact that there are problems with the government.

        My husband is from Palermo and he agrees that the government/law is the one glaring problem in an otherwise amazing country (and I agree…and I ADORE Italy and am always so happy there). Our friends in Italy generally agree. I don’t know why you took such offense to the comment. The “laughing at” bit was a little much, but the rest…? Facts. Berlusconi tainted the way the rest of the world views Italian government (much like Bush did here…and rightfully so…he was a crook and an embarrassment). Do you think he and his actions should have endeared people to him??!

      • Hiddles forever says:

        Please, I am from Florence, lived there for 30odd years and Italy has the most disgusting, corrupted, appalling justice system of the whole world. Without even mentioning the laughable political class (they were slapping each other in the Parliament two days ago!) and the incredible, maddening bureaucracy!
        You will stay ‘molto larga’ dear Paola because be sure that many Italian expats won’t come back. Enjoy the good coffee, I can buy Lavazza here too.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        @Paola-I thought her comment was perfectly fine and not rude at all. She made no stereotypes about Italy or Italian people, simply criticized the Italian judicial system..I’m surprised you would take offense.

        Hell I’m American and I have plenty of problems with the American judicial system-I would be fine with people criticizing it or the American government-wouldn’t take it personally at all.

        The only thing I can think is that you’re feeling ganged up on thus becoming defensive because this doesn’t sound like your normal self….

      • paola says:

        @ The original kitten

        I just found extremely offensive saying ‘my country laughs at yours’ and considering I already know what kind of problems we have. The politicians take the piss every single day, the taxes are ridicolously high and we have no respect in the world community whatsoever. I already know all this and I hate to see my country beeing laughed at because there are so many good people, hard workers and honest people and even if i’ve been living abroad for the majority of my life it hurts like hell seeing my fellow citizens talking smack about it. and i know that maybe i’m taking this too much on the personal side but hell, no place is perfect. no one should laugh at one another and most of all.. italy is not only good food, nice coffee and lovely places.
        rant over.

        sorry i’m on my period, fellow celebitches i’ll be all nice and smiles (and snarky comments) by monday, i promise 😀

    • Miss Jupitero says:

      I am not going to say very much, but I have to say something.

      I am half Italian. I love Italy, love the people, love the food, love the culture, love the poietry, LOVE, LOVE, LOVE.

      But the justice system there is a misnomer. It is completely corrupt. I have followed this case rather closely, and there is absolutely no hard evidence to convict Knox, and the DNA evidence exonerates her. Those are the facts. The burden is upon prosecution to prove its case (or should be), and in this case, the prosecution failed. No amount of good coffee balances that out.

      “Foxy Knoxy” was persecuted because she was odd, she was different, she was a bit of a sexual adventurer, and she wass easy to label as a “slut.” She was easy to jump on, and the sensationalist press jumped on her. This was personal from the word go. In a civilized world though, you do not convict people on “gut feeling” or the how their eyes “look.” Give me a break.

  48. Mingy says:

    What a maddening case..for me the evidence shows she’s innocent, my gut says not so much. It must’ve been agony for the jury.

  49. themummy says:

    Anyone who actually knows the facts of the trial knows Rudy Guede did it and he did it alone. I think it’s insane that this is still going on. I’m so sure she’s innocent that I would feel perfectly comfortable having her at my house as an overnight guest with my kids home and all. I’d be perfectly comfortable sleeping with her in the next room. Innocent is innocent.

    If I were in her position, there would be no way in hell I’d go back to Italy. If they tried extradite me and the US agreed to it, I would shoot myself in the head. Sounds extreme, but I’d rather end it than rot in an Italian prison for 28 years. One way or another, I would not be going back. Or I’d go into mega-hiding…plastic surgery, etc.

  50. Hiddles forever says:

    They are all guilty in my opinion. Yet, I guess the investigation done by Italian police was so messed up from the start that they probably trashed a lot of evidence and.. At this point, I would let them go, no point in trying to convict someone you can’t prove anything about.

    About the whole “let’s deport Amanda back”, what for? The average time served by any criminal in Italy (excluding mafia padrinos) is two years. I wouldn’t bother but it is reknown that Italian justice system is the most bureaucratic of the planet.

    Don’t worry, Amanda won’t go anywhere.

    • Mel says:

      “Don’t worry, Amanda won’t go anywhere.”

      Quite literally, I am afraid.
      She is now confined mainly to the USA, for the rest of her natural life.
      That is, unless in due course – should the defence’s appeal (which I am assuming is a given) be rejected and the current verdict is upheld – Italy issues an extradition request, which the USA, contrary to the opinion of many readers, may very well honour.

      And that’s not counting the Interpol, mind you.

  51. LilyT says:

    I’m an American, but let’s get some sh*t strait.
    1) Our justice system is indeed based on the lofty (and perhaps unrealistic) idea that one is “innocent until proven guilty”. We also know, this is often not the case, especially for poor minorities who are vastly over represented in our prison system.

    2) Some people engender more sympathy from the media, juries, and law enforcement (and receive better treatment). Often these are upper class white women like Knox.

    3) that said, the justice system in Italy has it’s own problems. It seems that the case has taken on a very Anti-American us vs. them tone, which is unfortunate considering this is someone’s life we are talking about. It also seems, considering various accounts of the evidence in the case, including DNA evidence which should be rather straightforward, that there was some sloppy police work done and people are trying to cover their asses.

    4) I don’t find Amanda to be very convincing and I do think there are things she is not saying. That said, I don’t necessarily think she was directly involved. The fact that there are so many differen accounts of what happened, of the evidence, of how the case was handled (or mishandled)… Well, the whole thing seems like a clusterf*ck of incompetence. If adequate evidence isn’t there, if the case was bungled… Then she should be found innocent.

    5) if the guilty verdict is based upon accurate and sufficient evidence then she should be arrested and serve her sentenc… This legal red tape bureaucratic shiz is a bunch of bull.
    (If I ruled the world)

    SUMMARY: this whole thing is a hot ass mess.

  52. Gorgonia says:

    I’ m writing from Italy and I have to say I didn’t really follow this case, so I won’t say anything about Amanda or Raffaele’s eventual innocence or guilt. After a bit I lost interest in this sad story and for this reason: during the later years, in Italy, the justice’s job is too much under the light of the media, especially on tv. A crime happens: I think the police, the investigators, the judges should work in silence and not to speak to the journalists until they close the case. Instead, we see the opposite, they are on tv every day, and talk, talk, talk. This is not good for the investigations and the proof is we got a lot of unsolved crimes or judgements full of doubts. A good judge should not become a celeb. I don’t know if in other countries happen the same. (I apologize for possible mistakes, as I said, english is not my mother language)

    • LilyT says:

      I agree, it becomes entertainment and a production for public consumption. It’s a shame.

      Well said 🙂

      • Gorgonia says:

        With all the respect for the victims and their family, my feeling is this kind of murders, turned up on tv as “film noir”, are useful to mesmerize people and to turn off the attention from other problems ….

  53. Irishserra says:

    Sooo…. Has anyone here watched “Hetalia?”

  54. KC says:

    I don’t understand why people seem to care so much about this story.

    • Vera says:

      Because she was sexually promiscuous and some idiot people want to see her pay for that alone. That’s the ugly truth.

    • msw says:

      Because its a civil rights issue. At least, that’s why I care.

      • Bwarf says:

        It is neither a civil rights issue nor about people wanting her to pay for promiscuity. She was definitely involved in the murder. If you check the analysis of her statement you’ll see that’s true. Unfortunately, statement analysis isn’t used or else she’d never have been set free.

        Forget about behavior analysis, words are what people should pay attention to. Forget about contaminated evidence or what the police have done, if you read through her statements you’ll see how guilty she is.

      • msw says:

        What makes you think I HAVEN’T read her statements? They are in no way the smoking gun you seem to think they are.

      • msw says:

        You nicely highlighted exactly why this is a civil rights issue, by the way. If you are referring to the statement on the True Justice website, I hardly think a team of non-experts can submit a parsed, overanalyzed bits of conjecture in which they criticize use of the passive voice. Yet apparently some people actually believe this should be admissible court evidence. Unreal.

      • Bwarf says:

        Again, not a civil rights issue. I have a different source for statement analysis, from a verified professional who actually assists in criminal cases. The only victim in this case is Meredith Kercher.

        I don’t see how anyone, even someone not interested in statement analysis, (REAL analysis), can think she’s innocent after all the flip flopping she’s done in ALL of her statements.

        I think a lot people go by what they’ve read or seen in news without really digging deep into the hundred of pieces of evidence, statements, and records on the case.

      • msw says:

        Except I have. I did not get my information from the media. I got it from primary sources. Including fmaterial from True Justice. I think you’re just too obtuse to be reasoned with. The evidence connecting Knox and Solliceto to the crime is not there. You cannot make it appear no matter what your personal opinion is.

  55. bettyrose says:

    I absolutely cannot wrap my head around a young woman with a nice life and a bright future contributing to a heinous crime against another young woman. Doesn’t mean it didn’t happen but it’s just so beyond my understanding. Women are cruel to each other all the time but not to this degree.

  56. Vera says:

    All these stories about how “weird” Amanda is and the oddities of her behavior mean absolutely nothing. Evidence of nothing. God forbid someone act weird. When people bring up her odd behavior as being “telling” etc. I discount everything else they say. That’s not evidence. She’s probably Aspergers or something.

  57. emmie_a says:

    I think it will be interesting to see if Sollecito changes his story in the coming months. Maybe IF there is something him and Amanda have been hiding he’ll use it to get a lesser sentence? He’s got to be reeling that he’s stuck in Italy and will probably serve time while Amanda is free. But if his story doesn’t change then I’d really believe that him and Amanda are truly innocent (which is what I mainly believe to be true right now but I’ve only casually followed the case)

    • Lex says:

      He might change his story but it’s likely it would be lies. He had no real reason to protect Amanda for all this time. .. if there was something he knew that could nail her for the crime he would surely have already shared it. He turned on her years ago by changing his mind about her alibi and saying she left his apartment late at night rather than sleeping over as he originally said.

    • Bwarf says:

      They are both liars. He can’t sell her out without selling himself out, he is equally guilty as they were both involved.

      • Lex says:

        He could get a reduced sentence though. Rudys sentence was cut to 15 years because he expressed remorse and apologised to ghe Kercher family. Time will tell.

  58. Barbara says:

    My granddaughter is in Italy at present working. I am looking forward to her modeling contract ending in March so she can come back to the states. Makes me nervous with her being alone there.

    • Bwarf says:

      Why be nervous? Italy is a marvelously beautiful country with very friendly people. Meredith kercher’s only mistake was associating with Amanda Knox, an American, btw, who now really has no choice but to stay in America. Italy is as safe as the US and I’m sure your granddaughter knows proper safety measures while out of the country.

    • J.Mo says:

      Barbara, I hope your granddaughter is enjoying a beautiful country and educational experience that will benefit her future. My best wishes from British Columbia, Canada to her there.

    • Sixer says:

      Barbara: annual murder rate per 100k citizens in Italy is 0.9. Where I am, in the UK, it’s 1.2. In the United States, it’s 4.7. Tell your granddaughter to stay in Italy!

    • JWQ says:

      @ Barbara: I am Italian, and I am very well aware of the reputation my country has. We have our problems, there are times in which I feel embarrassed for my entire country for the inadequacies and the general unprofessional behaviour that we are shown to have, and sometimes we DO have… but what you just said is no different from saying that it’ s better not going to the USA because I could get shot at any given occasion because of your weapon policy, or even that it is fine to think that any American in the country is a warmongering, uncultered bigot whose main problem is getting a bigger helping of fast food crap. I am smart enough to refuse to believe so, even if that is the picture we are fed, and I suggest you to do the same!

      @ Bwarf, J.Mo and Sixer: Thank you.

    • msw says:

      Italy is a wonderful, beautiful countty with more culture than you could consume in a lifetime. Don’t worry about your granddaughter. I traveled in Italy for 8 days, alone, when I was 19 and it was an experience I will never forget. I actually got hassled far less in Italy than several other countries I traveled in alone, as a young woman–I hope she’s having the time of her life.

      I do worry about what this case means about the Italian justice system, but we certainly have our own problems to worry with here in the US, and hopefully she hasn’t run afoul of them–no reason to think she will in Italy.

    • Cletus says:

      probably if she goes anywhere there are people, she’s in danger. even then, there are bears and shit. or lightening, tsunamis, plate tectonics, tsetse flies, holes she could fall into… danger abounds. this is why I never leave my house which is padded (but not too padded) and has no corners or sharp or pointy things, and also I don’t let people come in here… not that they really want to which is TOTES FINE WITH ME.

    • caz says:

      If she chooses her friends & associates well she’ll be ok. Surrounding oneself with dodgy people (even if unintentionally) increases the risk of danger.

  59. Anonymouse says:

    As a UK citizen I would just like you to be aware that a pretty young lady is going to act demure and would not hurt a fly as the PR hots up .She needs the US public on her side to influence the media and it appears as if those dreadful people have no idea about our innocent princess..PLEASE take a step back the ONLY victim is Meredith.What if this was a US girl murdered brutally in Italy.??? No-one is sure of what really happened BUT it needed more than one person to kill her and whatever happened that girl knows more than she is saying.Be aware of how the US appears in all this.No justice system is perfect and that unfortunately includes the US .Before everyone starts flag waving THINK..What if this was a black UK man who may have killed a pretty white American girl.Would you still feel the same???.I have never commented before but one thing is certain That girl will cry and people will sympathise with her rather that the young girl who was mutilated by more than one killer .

    • Cora says:

      You have assumed far too much in your post. My opinion that Amanda is innocent is based on the facts of the case, not on her “demure” demeanor. And to answer your question, if someone murdered an American in Italy, I would want the real killer in prison, not an innocent person, regardless of the race of the accused (I like how you assumed we were all racists, too, that was a nice touch).

    • msw says:

      Like Cora, I want the guilty people imprisoned. I want innocent people free. I do not care about the race OR nationality of the victim or the perp. I don’t consume American media aside from our well respected NPR channels, because I find it to be incredibly biased and incomplete in general. On this particular case, I haven’t seen ANYTHING in American media at all. I never watched her interview with Katie Couric (of whoever it was) or listened to the saucy news reports on the trials. I based this opinion on the facts of the case as they were presented in court and from sources which were actually biased AGAINST Knox and Solliceto and found them not only lacking evidence to convict them, but indicating their innocence. Nice try, though, and thanks for assuming we’re too dumb to see past skin color and politics to make up our minds about something.

    • Bwarf says:

      Agreed @anonymous. Don’t forget, she tried to blame her boss, then tried to say she was confused, then the police put that idea in her head, then she didn’t know what she was saying blah blah blah. More lies as she can’t say anything definitive about anything. If you know anything about memory and, yes, statement analysis, you’ll see how much of a liar she is, how she tries to manipulate and persuade with her words and refusal to be direct and to the point about ANYTHING.

      In part of her statement she said, “I’m very confused at this time. My head is full of contrasting ideas and I know I can be frustrating to work with for this reason. But I also want to tell the truth as best I can. Everything I have said in regards to MY INVOLVEMENT IN MEREDITH’s DEATH, even though it is contrasting, are the best truth that I have been able to think.”

      This small statement alone shows more about her than anything. She can’t even say she’s told the truth, she actually admits involvement (“my involvement in Meredith’s death”) and admits that everything she said is contradictory. The best truth she’s been able to think? Not just the truth?

      Everyone should google peter Hyatt statement analysis to really learn what statement analysis is. Every word, every sentence is analyzed.

      • msw says:

        That’s the best you’ve got? Statement analysis? Junk science and absolutely not evidence. There is not physical evidence to actually link her to the crime, since it has all been tossed out, and duly so.

        How about you google Saul Kassin and compliant confessions.

      • msw says:

        You should be googling Saul Kassin and compliant confessions, as well as the validity of statement analysis. Or don’t, its obvious your mind is made up and untroubled by pesky contradictions.

    • Kiddo says:

      I have to concur with others. I believe she is not guilty and probably innocent, because the investigators were buffoons and contaminated the crime scene. The prosecutor looked like a fool and had a vendetta. I would feel exactly the same way, with the same evidence and circumstances regardless of the color of her skin.

  60. emma says:

    She is guilty as sin. I don’t have to prove it, the Italian courts already did! Accept it, the world is full of psychopaths in all colors, shapes and sizes. Stop identifying with her because she looks like your college roommate or the girl next door or the girl you want to hang out with. Get a life.

  61. anon33 says:

    Reading this thread has made me scared. I am actually in shock. I can’t believe how many commenters just really do not understand the legal system, or what the point of evidence is, or how evidence can be contaminated. And how many people are basing their thought that Amanda is guilty solely on their “feelings” about what kind of person she is. Wow.

    And, too, this belief that all judges and attorneys must only have the most noble intentions, so we must trust the judges reports and the prosecutor’s theories without question. I work in the legal field and I can assure you that that is 1 MILLION percent ABSOLUTELY not the case. Most of the time, quite frankly, it’s the exact opposite.

    Wow. Just wow.

    • prayforthewild says:

      +1 Wow indeed.

    • Bwarf says:

      Ha. I KNOW she is guilty by what she has said, how she has acted and evidence. People keep saying there’s no evidence…omg!

      Then she tried to blame her memory issues on having smoked a joint. Ridiculous.

      Anyone, even if under a huge amount of stress, being questioned by police about the murder of a friend, would have absolutely no doubt regarding your whereabouts. INNOCENT PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR STORIES. Case and point. End of story.

      • msw says:

        Saul Kassin -compliant confessions. I know you’re a last cause, but maybe it will help someone else.

        Its already been established the evidence does not place Amanda or Raffaele at the scene of the crime. Your insistence that she is guilty does not change this. If you have evidence otherwise, share links. Only to evidence that hasn’t been contaminated, please.

    • msw says:

      Yeah. That’s what has me so hot under the collar. It’s crazy making. Makes you hope they’re never on a jury, right?

    • mayamae says:


      Some of these people give me chills. I pray that these people never land on an American jury. If the defendant doesn’t look right, or if forensics is fu*ked up ……. Guilty and the Death Penalty!

      These are random thoughts after reading this thread the last two days.

      1. Regarding KNOWING someone is guilty by their affect – See David Dowaliby, father of murdered child Jaclyn Dowaliby, 1988 Midlothian, Illinois. The only evidence was eyewitness testimony by a mentally ill man, who was testifying to something he saw 75 yards away, and in the dark. The witness said he recognized the nose!!! The public and jury felt that David did not act “right”. He was convicted in 1990, then in 1991 the Illinois Appellate Court reversed the conviction, with no chance to retry. The Cook County States Attorney refused to consider any other suspect, including the brother of Jacyln’s biological father who is a paranoid schizophrenic who lied about his alibi that night. I grew up reading about this case, but the interested can learn about it at Injustice Anywhere.

      2. How a prosecutor can be flat out insane and out to get witches and devil worshipers ……. words can not express my thoughts on that topic. The greater the distance between religion and government the better, in my American opinion.

      3. According to some here, Amanda Knox is a brilliant mastermind. Clearly, Amanda and Raffaele, after taking an online forensic class, donned full Hazmat suits, cleared all the DNA implicating them, yet made sure to leave Guede’s DNA behind. Brilliant I tell you!

      4. If Amanda and Raffaele were involved, there’s no way they would not have turned on each other. Especially Raffaele, since he was the innocent virginal geek, seduced by the American whore. He could easily have received immunity to testify against her. They dated for 5 minutes, there’s no reason to stay loyal to one another, other than their innocence.

      5. On the topic of Amanda not wailing enough, or mentioning Meredith (the victim) every 2 seconds – I’m sure Amanda’s feelings are incredibly ambivalent. They knew each other briefly, and who knows if they even truly liked each other. If Amanda is innocent, which I believe, she is another victim of this crime. I’m sure it’s difficult for Amanda to continue mentioning Meredith and her family in every interview, when the Kercher’s continue to blindly back the prosecution and call for Amanda’s conviction. It’s a little hard to sympathize with those working for your destruction.

      6. I wouldn’t be surprised to see an American boycott against tourism in Italy. It happened following the way Aruba screwed up the murder of Natalie Holloway. I’m not sure how I feel on the topic, but it is the only way American’s can weigh in on the case if they support Amanda.

      7. I believed Amanda was guilty for a long time. Then I started actually paying attention to the so called “evidence”, and the total insanity of the prosecutor, and slowly changed my mind.

      • Bwarf says:

        Sorry but amanda is not popular enough to warrant any kind of boycott on Italy.

        Did you also pay attention to the so called evidence in oj Simpson’s, Casey Anthony’s, Terri korman, et al who were either acquitted or not charged? Sorry but evidence is not always going to give you the outcome that is right. I’m not saying evidence is useless, but there are cases where it has gone in the wrong direction. The perceived lack of evidence from Knox supporters means nothing. Her statements say everything. Peter Hyatt always said “the subject is dead but the statement is alive.”

        You really don’t know how accurate statement analysis is, how much information you can get from a statement. Did you know that you can likely tell through statements whether a girl is falsely accusing a man or rape? Or that you can tell that someone is lying and/or withholding information? Or that more often than not, some form of confession is found in a statement of someone claiming their innocence? She is a liar, manipulator and she deserves her conviction. Her PR Firm is probably working overtime now.

      • msw says:

        Gotta get one more nail in the coffin there, eh, bwarf?

      • Kiddo says:

        Wow, “Statement analysis”. Please, there is a reason why polygraphs aren’t admissible in court in the US. They are not a reliable source of truth. The results are indicative of stress responses, which are only slightly better than using a crystal ball as to guilt versus innocence. Some people react to stressful things in abundance while others don’t.

  62. Cletus says:

    Nobody is ever really going to know what happened except for the people/person who were/was there. It’s that way pretty much all the time, even when someone confesses to a crime. Everyone slants their account of everything, all the time- it can’t be helped because we have no choice but to analyze through a haze of Self- meaning we are only who we are and can never be anyone else, and can’t ever see anything through someone else’s eyes. We can sympathize, we can empathize, we can try to be objective and we can even get pretty close- but we all see things differently because we are not a Hive mind. We’re not the friggin’ Borg, here. So no- nobody will ever know how it all really went down. That’s why people “practice” law- they practice, get it? Sometimes they do it good and sometimes they don’t. The legal system is made up of people, who are fallible. Therefore should anyone trust the legal system anywhere? I don’t. Just saying.

    If I am accused of a crime, it is up to my accusers to provide the evidence of my wrong-doing because it is super hard to come up with evidence of something that didn’t happen. I might be accused of murdering my neighbor, and it would be really hard to prove that I didn’t. I wouldn’t have an alibi because I live alone and I was home. Also my DNA and/or fingerprints could be at my neighbor’s house because sometimes she invites me over for coffee- and her DNA and/or fingerprints are definitely at my house because sometimes I have her over and I haven’t run my dishwasher yet and also I don’t scrub every surface of my kitchen after she has gone because that’s weird. So how could I prove I didn’t? I can’t, really. I can promise real hard I didn’t- the lack of her blood on my person or found clothing is not proof alone of my innocence because I *could have* destroyed the evidence (that doesn’t exist- but what if it did exist and now it doesn’t because I got rid of it? Only I didn’t get rid of anything because I didn’t have to because I didn’t kill her, but what if I DID- you see where I’m going). That is why burden of proof falls on the prosecution. The defense is supposed to vehemently advocate for the accused- to introduce reasonable doubt. That is their job.

    As for the accused’s affect- if you haven’t sat down with me and actually been in a room with me where you could put your eyeballs on me and read all my body language and be able to take into account your knowledge of what has transpired in the time before I was led into your interrogation room, you have no business attempting to read my affect. Do you know why you can wear clothes without going crazy? because your brain shuts off the stimulus of wearing all that shit. you don’t feel it every second. It’s the same thing as walking into a room that reeks of fresh poo- give yourself a minute in there and your brain will eventually tell your nose to stfu- you won’t smell it anymore. Emotional stress is very much the same. People can get used to anything. If I have been harangued, interrogated, freaked out and terrified, after a while the tears ARE going to dry up and the fear and horror are going to become my new normal. The adaptability of humans is amazing. For instance, I hate to fly. I would rather go on a long flight than a short one, though, because my physical ability to be in a state of panic is self-limiting. I can’t go on an adrenaline-fueled fight-or-flight bender for 22 hours- I am biologically incapeable of that. So after I’m accused and hauled around, confused and scared for a while, after that I got nothing left. Enter my weird affect. people seeing me after-the-fact are going to wonder how I can be so ‘cold”. I’m not cold, I’m freaking EMPTY. Anyone would be.

    Is she guilty? Hell if I know. This whole thing reeks of a shit-show, and it happens. It happens in Italy and it happens here in the states, and everywhere there are humans and a codified legal system, it happens. Miscarriage of justice? MAYBE. It happens. is it fair? No.. but that is what happens when you deal with people. Sometimes they fuck shit up a little, and sometimes they fuck it up a whole bunch, and sometimes they hardly fuck it up at all. It has always been this way. The only difference is that the world is a lot smaller than it used to be, and people can wave their opinions and their hands way up in the air and then proceed to wave ’em all around like they just don’t care. My opinion in no way makes me an expert, even if I manage to find a platform (like the Internet) that reaches the writhing mass of humanity, and even if my opinion sways the masses. SO THERE.

  63. Sue says:

    Experts have agreed (and defense has never even bothered to challenge) that at least two people had to have killed Meredith.
    Guede did not act alone. Until the other killer(s) are found/ brought to justice Knox and Sollecito will be suspect.

    Meredith was a striking mixed-race beauty. She even starred in a rock video a year or so before her death. Tragic. Here’s the video if anyone’s interested.

    • msw says:

      TRIGGER WARNING out of respect for those who may be upset by descriptive scenarios of violence and sexual assault.

      And yet it is not at all evident he had one accomplice, let alone two. The prosecution argued Meredith’s hands were held down while Guede and Knox stabbed her. They alleged it was impossible for Guede to have done it alone because Meredith was athletic and would have fought him off. First of all, Guede was also athletic and played basketball in the piazza daily, and since he wears a size 11 shoe, I imagine he is tall. I can’t find record of his height. Meredith practied boxing and karate, but she was probably easily outsized and outstrengthed by Guede. If knowing how to box and practice karate was all a woman needed to defend herself against an attacker with a knife, we would have a lot fewer assaults on women. It appears she attempted to fight him off, but not very vigorously, based on the fact that she had some superficial defense wounds. What are the two most obvious reasons someone would have a hard time defending themselves: someone else was there helping, or because they were weakened by violence they endured? There is no evidence her hands were held down as far as I remember, but there is evidence she had a hand violently covering her mouth and that she was choked aggressively. Choking will easily weaken a person to the point where they cannot defend themselves vigorously. It’s definitely no indicator she was held by 2 or 3 people. The next assumption was someone had to lift up her neck to expose it for cutting. Again, if she had bruising on her face, that could have been the moment her neck was exposed. Another possibilty is he grabbed her by the hair and pulled it back–that will expose your neck in a hurry. Again, if she had already been choked, it would be extremely difficult to fight back, even moreso after she was stabbed, and that requires two hands and no more. The prosecution also alleges he could not have held her back while he removed her clothes and raped her (specifically, her pants, underwear and sweatshirt–the prosecution also speculates shoes, but there were no evidence regarding who removed them so I don’t know how they would know), so she must have been held back by someone else–I would like to know, first of all, how the prosecution thinks you can remove a sweatshirt from someone while they are held by another person; it would actually be easier for Guede to do it on his own. Second, as I said before, it’s irrelevant because she could have easily been in a weakened state by that point and unable to defend herself. Is it so far-fetched to believe she screamed when he approached her and he covered her mouth, and then choked her, before commiting the other acts? There’s no indication he didn’t lead with that; I would even think it was likely, and he covered her mouth and choked her to get her to be quiet. Then, she would have been in a weakened state throughout the rest of the attack and unable to defend herself.

      Clearly, it is NOT evident based on the attack that Guede had accomplices as the prosecution claims, but it doesn’t necessarily mean he acted alone, either. The wheels come off the accomplice argument because of the footprints, first. All the bloody footprints belong to Guede. They identified the brand/make and size of the shoes (size 11 Nike Outbreak 2’s) and found he had a box for those exact shoes in his apartment. He later admitted he threw the shoes away while he was fleeing in Germany, so this is indisputable. For a time, the prosecution argued one of the prints was Knox’s and one was Solicetto’s. The one which was “Amanda’s” was on a pillow and it was incomplete, partial. The tread matched Guede’s shoe. The one which was “Rafaelle’s” was also identical to Guede’s–their shoes were similar, but distinct. Guede’s handprint was under her body, in her purse and on her pillow. No trace of handprints or footprints from the two who were allegedly holding her down and/or stabbing her. Guede also left a trail of bloody footprints going out the flat. If Knox and Solicetto or any other party were involved, they did a hell of a job avoiding leaving any trace of footprints or handprints, in blood or otherwise. The bloody footprint in the bathroom was attributed to Solicetto by measurement but pretty clearly belongs to Guede, if you look at the prints of both men’s feet and the picture of the bloody footprint–the big toe and the second toe are squished together, which explains the mismeasurement. It appears Guede took off his shoes and rinsed them in the bathroom, and while he did, he left a watery, bloody footprint on the mat and also smeared blood on the doorframe and lightswitch plate.

      There was no DNA for either Solliceto or Guede found in the small bathroom, where the murderer cleaned up, even though the footprint obviously came from one of the men. Knox’s DNA (one small drop of blood was on the faucet area, she had an ear piercing infection, which was bleeding, and non-blood DNA) was there, which could be from contamination of the crime scene or because she lived there. It’s not shocking that a person’s DNA would exist in their own bathroom, so that means nothing. Unfortunately, the investigators did not do any random sampling of the apartment, or they would have found mixed DNA of everyone who lived there. Instead, they called it evidence, which is stupid but helped bolster their construction of the events. The head investigator denied any mishandling and said they completed exemplary work, despite video evidence to the contrary. You will not find this in the post trial write up from the judge.

      The DNA overwhelmingly points to Rudy. The only credible genetic material they found was Rudy’s on Meredith’s body and in her vagina, and on the sweater she was wearing. They did find a trace of Solicetto’s DNA on the bra clasp (the bra itself had blood and Guede’s DNA only), after the idiot investigators left it on the floor for weeks, passed it around with dirty gloves, and put it back on the floor after testing. Meredith’s fingernails and sweater and bodily injuries only contained her own DNA and that of Guede’s–NONE of Knox’s or Solliceto’s. Solicetto’s DNA was in the house because he had been there recently, visiting Knox, it spread to the bra clasp because they reused gloves and swabs and cross contamination occured. Knox’s DNA was reasonably found in the bathroom and other rooms she used because she lived there, and the cross contamination in the bathroom completely negates any significance of Knox’s DNA found (again, none in Meredith’s room or on Meredith’s body or belongings). This was videoed by the investigators themselves, and then they claimed to do a flawless investigation. It was also weeks after the murder and the investigators had traipsed through the entire flat without any consideration for damaging the evidence. The evidence should have been thrown out immediately based on the contamination as it presented a false picture of who was there.

      Is it really logical to think that the only place Solliceto’s DNA would have ended up was on the bra clasp and no where else in the room? Is it logical that the murder victim had one attacker’s DNA all over her and none of the two “helpers'” DNA? If Knox and Solliceto were there, they did a hell of a job cleaning themselves out of the murder scene while leaving Guede’s DNA all over the place. They must have magic powers that let them see all the different alleles and meticulously scrubbed away their own. As far as I’m concerned, this indicates they were not present for the murder.

      • @msw—Love your undaunted spirit! Like Don Quixote you aren’t afraid to do battle against windmills. In the face of such ingrained prejudice you’ll probably never find satisfaction, but do keep up the good fight.

  64. jane16 says:

    Interesting comment by the appellate judge that acquitted Knox & Sollecito. He says there is no evidence against them and slams the recent re-conviction:

    “Speaking about the latest decision, Judge Hellmann said: “I remain certain that there is no concrete evidence at all against these two young people.

    “This new sentence was on the cards – it’s tied to the decision made by the Supreme Court – Amanda’s not doing a bad thing by not coming back to Italy.”

    In its ruling last year the Supreme Court decided that “errors” had been made in the 2009 appeal court hearing and that these should be “remedied”.”

    I also find it very odd that in this new trial, the “motive” has changed from satanic sex orgy to a fight over cleanliness in the apartment!?!

    • Lex says:

      The old ‘motive’ got thrown out with the old prosecutor who was found guilty of misconduct, I believe. He had tried to apply ‘satanic ritual’ to multiple other cases and was involved in some dodgy financial dealings.

      They then decided to focus on the “Amanda was a slob”, “Meredith hated Amanda” angle. They said the final straw was when Rudy didn’t flush the toilet – Meredith saw it, got angry, so the other three killed her. Sounds likely! How horrifying that your freedom could come down to whatever weird story someone can think up.

      • msw says:

        The Satanic ritual thing may have been a myth–for what it’s worth, Magnini always denied saying that and i believe it is not written in the court documents. But whether or not he related this particular murder to satan worship, he did obviously come up with a sensational story and then they tailored the evidence to fit it, rather than fitting the evidence to the crime.

  65. AnnieCL says:

    It is so easy to assume that she is innocent purely because you can relate to her -a young woman, pretty & seemingly educated. And of course, notwithstanding the prejudice that a LOT of people have about justice systems outside their own jurisdiction. If you have any knowledge of cases you will know that a lot of ‘evidence ‘ can not be admitted for certain reasons even though, if you were the afflicted party & had experienced the attack you would know that it’s true. I for one do not believe that Amanda Knox is innocent nor her boyfriend Raffaele…read a little..& understand that you can hold an ill – informed opinion & believe it all the same.

    • msw says:

      It is amazing that multiple people in this thread are accusing those who think she is not guilty of just being biased for her looks/nationality/pr team/whatever, which is bias in itself.

  66. Pixiestix says:

    Watching Amanda Knox’s odd behavior throughout this ordeal, her facial expressions during the recent round of press, her lack of empathy for the Kircher family, or even mentioning the real victim in this case, has always made me doubt that she’s given us the whole truth. Clearly her family’s not getting their money’s worth from the PD blitz. That, coupled with initial bungling of the evidence on the part of the Italian police, makes this case one where the truth will never fully be known.

  67. Truthseeker says:

    Amanda’s lack of emotion or flat affect may very well be because she’s worn out from the ordeal. She also may be a sociopath, but that doesn’t make her a killer. My guess is that her real crime is that she probably didn’t really like her roommate and to call her a friend is phony. That may explain part of why she behaved the way she did initially and why she seems uncomfortable and why she seems to always comes back to “me, me, me” rather than thinking about what happened to her “friend.” She’s guilty of not giving a **** her roommate died I think.

  68. Lex says:

    Whether or not Amanda actually killed Meredith has become completely irrelevant. It remains that the court cannot reasonably prove that she did do it (even though she’s been re-convicted – the “evidence” is outrageously underwhelming).

    Her innocence or guilt is no longer a factor in this case. Regardless of her actions, if they cannot prove she did it, she must be found not guilty.

  69. Kikio says:

    So what happens now? Will she have to go back and serve time? If so, how long?

  70. Mare says:

    American media isn’t reporting 1 percent about this case. It just keeps repeating “there is no evidence” and “she’s innocent” and disrespecting italian legal system. Let me just say, there’s nothing wrong with italian legal system, it’s not perfect but Italy is not Iran or North Korea. It does not sentence innocent young people to 28 and 25 years of prison based on nothing. If you believe that, I’m speechless. Also, it does not keep having retrials. This was not a retrial. This is part of one legal process. Educate yourself, please. There is plenty of evidence against Amanda and Raffaele. I could now count down thirty things that prove it, someone will come and say for every one “it’s a coincidence”. One thing can be a coincidence, two also, maybe three but you can’t have dozens of things and just write them all off. For every physical proof, her defence has said “it’s contaminated” (without proof of contamination), for every witness “they’re unreliable” etc. It’s quite ridiculous. There is a lots of proof, from the fact that it is literary impossible that Guede did it alone (AND his bloody footprints are seen leaving straight from the victim’s door to the front door and out and he never came back but the scene was cleaned and rearranged few hours later) to the fact that Amanda and Raffaele changed their alibis 3 times, lied countless times, their bloody footprints were found, Amanda’s DNA mixed with the victim’s, phone records, computer records, witnesses, the fact that she blamed the innocent man, that she said “she bled to death” before anyone knew how Meredith was murdered, they lied about their phones, they lied about the morning after, they lied about calling the police… so many lies… literary countless lies from these two. And some things they refused to explain ever. EVER. Never wanted to be cross-examined. Innocent people have only one version and nothing to hide. These two are not innocent, justice has be done and it will be completed when they both end up in prison. It makes me truly mad and disappointed that so many people keep defending two people convicted of murder.

    • Mel says:

      Amen to that.
      Personally, I have no opinion whether they are, in fact, guilty of Meredith’s murder – but the reasons people, especially the American public (speaking in general), are using against the conviction are beyond ridiculous. What bothers me is that so any seem averse to even reading/listening to those who try and make them see the realities of the case and of the judicial system involved.

      And to those who keep pointing the finger to the Italian police and justice system (which is imperfect, as all justice systems known to man) and comparing it to the USA system… PLEASE. Ever heard of the JonBenet Ramsay case? How well did the US police did in that case?
      Or the DIXMOOR FIVE? Does that case ring any bells?
      And these are just two examples among many.

      I really hate it when people make such cases a nationality issue.
      And I have a nagging suspicion that, had the murder occurred among Americans, in the USA, far more Americans would be calling Amanda a murderer – whether she is or isn’t one.

      • betsy says:

        I don’t know if I can speak for everyone, but I don’t think most people, American or not, who are objecting to the ‘evidence’ and the methods of the prosecution are condemning the Italian judicial system. Just this case in particular. I don’t need to repeat the specifics of mishandled evidence, shoddy DNA lab work and so on. That’s what most object to. The Italian judge (Claudio Pratillo Hellmann) who reversed the conviction states “I remain certain that there is no concrete evidence at all against these two young people.” also “Amanda’s not doing a bad thing by not coming back to Italy” Now that’s not from or about any Americans, that’s an Italian Judge speaking who examined the evidence in this case.

      • msw says:

        A lot of people mistakenly thought the Italian court was practicing double jeopardy, because their legal system is different from ours. I saw very little praise for the American system, though, except in comparison to mistaken assumptions about the Italian system–no double jeopardy, the burden of proof, etc. I don’t have a problem with the entire Italian legal system and don’t know enough about it to critique it; I have an issue with this case.

        I keep hearing about how the US media isn’t reporting the facts while citing evidence that has been deemed uncredible by independent experts. I am not naive enough to think the US media isn’t hiding some of the facts–I don’t pay attention to it, so I really don’t know how they perceive her or what they report (although we sure do love a good salacious headline)–but it sounds like the whole truth isn’t getting out overseas, either. All the smoking guns I’ve seen referenced have good counterarguments. If others have information to indicate the evidence actually IS credible, please post, I am interested in seeing in (seriously, I’m not being snarky).

        And with that, it’s been real, everyone, but I am going to bow out of this conversation now–I care about this case a lot and need to step away from commenting about it for a while.

  71. J. says:

    Interesting fact: The Kercher family and Rudy Guede share the same legal representation. Oh, and he also represents the police on their slander case against Amanda.

  72. jane16 says:

    A really weird comment by the judge yesterday:

    “Judge Alessandro Nencini said he agreed to be interviewed by Corriere della Sera for Saturday’s editions because he knew the sentence would create a media storm.
    Nencini says the jury had come up with a motive that will be made clear in a written explanation of the verdict, expected within three months. But he hinted at the conclusion, saying that up until 8:15 p.m. on the night of the murder, Knox and her now ex-boyfriend had other plans, but that something changed.
    He told Corriere: “If Amanda had gone to work, probably we wouldn’t be here.””

    How weird is that last line?

    • Kiddo says:

      Yeah, because the only people who ever, in the history of the universe, changed plans were murderers. /s

    • jane16 says:

      So I guess he thinks that if Amanda had only gone to work, she wouldn’t have turned into a depraved, insane, murderer. I can’t wrap my head around this bizarre type of thinking. I also read a lot about the prosecutor, Mignini. He sounds like a loon and I think he has screwed up this case (and others) so badly that the truth will never be known in many instances.

  73. RickyRickyRicky says:

    Just a thought…if it were anyone other than all-American wholesome looking Amanda, would we be calling Rafaello her boyfriend after one week? If so, I’ll need to revise my list. Clearly, they were just shagging at this point.

  74. truthful says:

    Guilty Ice Queen, maybe her “boyfriend” will write a book and the truth will come out.

  75. Sandbag says:

    Maybe guede will write a book when he gets released I am beginning to think that a fourth person was at the crime and is on the run.