Extended interview: Amanda Knox on new trial, helping those falsely convicted
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 12. 2023
- Amanda Knox speaks with Joyce Taylor about the new trial she's facing, why she's doing it and the influence motherhood has on her commitment to help others.
Who is here after she was the Italian courts have found her guilty again. 😊
Why is the interviewer smirking and having these happy facial expressions? Completely inappropriate
No you have to act in order to get the person you are interviewing to thing you are on their side so they will answer your questions.
It's called EMPATHY. Something you clearly lack!
“[…] especially American kids. You would go cooperate with the police.” Seems quite biased to say such a thing. Please bring me the facts that American kids would be more prone to cooperate with the police than kids in other countries.
Amanda Knox has been smirking and having happy facial expressions and hardly acknowledged the victim that lost her life through out all these years. It’s like she’s learned during these last years to mention Meredith at times, and with something that seems like empathy.
Her family hired a PR firm, this interview is part of that PR
Amanda accused an innocent man with the murder. She’s pretending to be this warrior for justice, has she ever apologised for putting an innocent man into jail?
She's a sociopath....
She also killed a girl
Yea, that's the only part that I don't get. Do we know this for a fact? Coerced or not, she owes him that especially in her line of 'justice'/'innocence' work! It's kinda hard to believe she hasn't and/or worked to free him once she learned of her own brainwashing.
The police accused him, she just signed a paper. He was in wrongfully custody for 14 days, she was for more than 4 years. Go after the police and leave her alone!
@@jgp1294 She's been set loose, she's gonna kill more people
I would NEVER step foot in Italy again if I were Amanda!
She already has on at least two occasions.
They convict convict her again
I never want to step inside Italy after Amanda.
She was lucky she killed somebody while in Italy. If that happened in America she would have been dead by now
@@adobo1976 If you never want to step inside any country that has never had someone who was wrongfully convicted, good luck. That includes the US.
I have watched...read and listened to every bit of information about Miss Knox's story since 2007...
It is astonishing to me that the Italian officials still can not get this right...
It has been seventeen years...!!!
Send in a third party...
British intelligence perhaps...
A young girl was murdered and seeking justice for her and her loved ones appears to have been completely forgotten about...
Miss Kercher deserves better than this surely...
🇿🇦
The British sent their investigators to look for Madalaine MacCann in Portugal and what good came out of it?
@@kazmirz7269 God, that story haunts me still. That one of the women "saw a man carrying a child along the sidewalk across the street". That HAD to be Madeline! 😲 So sad & terrible.
But they did catch Meredith’s killer and put him behind bars. What are you talking about?
@@jgp1294 I heard his last name recently - begins w a G? Like Groepe or something - is that right? And he's now being released from prison after having "served" his term? That's shocking!! While the falsely accused & coerced Knox is still fighting her way thru Italy's effed up *non-justice system?*
@@jgp1294who. Who killed her. How do you know
At 32:43 she says she wasn’t given a lawyer or interpreter. That’s a lie she had been in Italy all of 2 weeks when Meredith was killed and barely had any Italian as she had just started classes. This wasn’t even an intensive language program as she said she had plenty of time on her hands. She admitted she could barely speak to Raffaele and let’s face it there’s not much to talk about when you’re smoking reefer and busting it down in the bedroom most of the time. It is clear in the court documents that she was given an interpreter as there is absolutely no way she would have been able to understand the questions let alone respond to them when she was allegedly being “interrogated”. She herself said that her interpreter was impartial only after she put herself at the crime scene and the Italian rightfully stepped up their interview questions and she got flustered and couldn’t keep her story straight. Neither could her alibi who incidentally was Italian and didn’t have the excuse of not being able to speak the language.
Let’s not forget Lumumba was released from prison not because Amanda retracted her statement but because he had an airtight alibi. So my question to Amanda is had Lumumba not had an airtight alibi would you have let him go down for the crime?!!!!
I’m now understanding her involvement with the Italy Innocence Project which is nothing to do with her helping victims of wrongful convictions but ultimately to do with her helping herself once again to overturn a conviction of slander which she actually did do without ambiguity when she accused Patrice Lumumba of murdering Meredith. I get it now.
This woman is most definitely a psychopath of the worst order. I am a therapist and that baloney about traumatised people face their trauma head on. Untrue!!!Most traumatised people try to forget their trauma bury it, not look at it.
Amanda tries so hard to say what she thinks is the right thing to say to seduce her audience but that’s the problem …. that’s what is disingenuous …. the trying.
I really wish she would just tell the truth. It’s so much easier …
6) "Let’s not forget Lumumba was released from prison not because Amanda retracted her statement but because he had an airtight alibi."
Let's not forget that the police IGNORED Amanda's two statements given to them in writing on Nov. 6 and 7:
"In regards to this "confession" that I made last night, I want to make clear that I'm very doubtful of the veritity [sic] of my statements because they were made under the pressures of stress, shock and extreme exhaustion. Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn't remember a fact correctly. "
AND
" I’m sorry I didn’t remember before and I’m sorry I said I could have been at the house when it happened. I said these things because I was confused and scared. I didn’t lie when I said I thought the killer was Patrick. I was very stressed at the time and I really did think he was the murderer. But now I remember that I can’t know who the murderer was because I didn’t return back to the house. "
The ECHR ruled in 2019 that her statements were RETRACTIONS:
""Secondly, only a few hours after the interviews in question, Ms Knox had promptly RETRACTED HER STATEMENTS, IN PARTICULAR BY A TEXT THAT SHE HAD WRITTEN ON 6 NOVEMBER 2007 AT ABOUT 1 P.M. AND HANDED TO THE POLICE, BY ANOTHER TEXT WRITTEN ON 9 NOVEMBER 2007 FOR HER LAWYERS AND IN A TELEPHONE CALL TO HER MOTHER ON 10 NOVEMBER 2007 WHEN HER LINE WS BEING TAPPED. In spite of all that, six months later, on 14 May 2008, Ms Knox was charged with making a malicious accusation."
7) " So my question to Amanda is had Lumumba not had an airtight alibi would you have let him go down for the crime?!!!!"
Read the above and you'll find your answer. What else could she have done than what she had already done by telling the police TWICE in writing, telling her lawyers in writing, and telling her mother when she knew the police were listening? Send them smoke signals? Write it in blood on her cell wall?
8) "I’m now understanding her involvement with the Italy Innocence Project which is nothing to do with her helping victims of wrongful convictions but ultimately to do with her helping herself once again to overturn a conviction of slander which she actually did do without ambiguity when she accused Patrice Lumumba of murdering Meredith. I get it now."
You haven't got a frickin' clue. The ECHR is the legal body that told Italy to redress the "fairness of the" slander conviction, not the Italy Innocence Project:
"Consequently, the Court held that the Italian Government had not succeeded in showing that the restriction of Ms Knox’s access to a lawyer, at the police interview of 6 November 2007 at 5.45 a.m., had not irreparably undermined the fairness of the proceedings as a whole. Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention had thus been breached."
9) "This woman is most definitely a psychopath of the worst order. I am a therapist and that baloney about traumatised people face their trauma head on. Untrue!!!Most traumatised people try to forget their trauma bury it, not look at it. "
IF you're a therapist (which I question), then God help your clients, because you're an idiot. She didn't say MOST PEOPLE face their trauma head on. THIS is what she said:
35:36:"...the blessing part of my, the worst experience of my life being so public, is that I could never lie to myself and say I'm just going to pretend this didn't
happen. And like change my name and just move on as if it didn't happen. And I knew that there was no escaping it and as a result it forced me to say if I don't like the story that is being told about what happened, I'm going to be traumatized for the rest of my life and triggered and sort of debilitated by this this experience. Instead, I'm going to try to imagine a life where I'm not debilitated, I am empowered by this experience and that's a story that I can drive towards. That is a story that gives me actionable choices and offers me
opportunities that I can embrace..."
10) "Amanda tries so hard to say what she thinks is the right thing to say to seduce her audience but that’s the problem …. that’s what is disingenuous …. the trying. "
So now you're not only a therapist, but you know what Amanda is thinking and what her motives are. The Psychic Therapist? LOL!
I was a young Art student studying and living in Florence, Italy at the time Amanda and Raffaele were on trial and wrongfully imprisoned, When Amanda talks of her initial period living in Italy it resonates with me, I visited Perugia on many occasions and crossed paths with Meredith Kercher on one of them, And had her phone number written on a small piece of paper, Rest in peace.
It was awful. We put up a lot of bond money. Our family did. We ran fundraisers paying Seattle Prep back. We were all just a bit traumatized but she needs to get home.
Omg prison? My boobs got enormous lol.
I’m I am swollen because this is worst food in history of food.
No Amanda Knox is a killer and deserves to rot in prison!
I dont know if she did... But shes definitely a scatchy person. It doesnt mean she did it, but i find this case fascinating because of who amanda is and how she behaves.
Amanda; you were twenty years old. And you did implicate an innocent person.
Your brain isn't actually competent as a skilled individual until into your 30's. Some teenagers can do that but they are a minority. Most twenty year olds just simply are not wired to contradict authority figures.
Nor are young adults are equipped to know that so-called adults beyond 25 are automatically wired to be honest. Most are failures at being able to resist temptations to assert authority in an honest fashion.
Your well documented experience is a peculiarly famous example of poorly regulated authority run amok.
@@AdMaiora2 And this is part of being badly wired at 20.....that you are also blind to this fact.
You are an example of total imbecility, ignorance and gullibility.
Amanda was mature for her age. She was studying abroad and learned a couple of languages. I remember she said that she was reading Harry Potter in German. Even at 20 years old with a not fully developed frontal lobe, Amanda definitely showed signs of being mentally and intellectually mature
@@dominikabanel340 BREAKING: Amanda Knox (@amandaknox
), who falsely accused Patrick Lumumba, a Congolese man, of the murder of British exchange student Meredith Kercher in Italy in 2007, has been re-convicted of slander. Lumumba had been kind to her, giving her a part-time job. However, she deliberately lied about him to exonerate herself and later blamed police pressure. The court has just reconvicted her. lol
@@TheVAULTofHORROR in German becaue she is partly german. her aunt lives in Germany and her pal Rudy Guede was running away to Germany
She has guilty knowledge. If she didn't do what she was there or she staged that scene, she's gotten away with it and now she has this big platform to do things with other people. It's bizarre she should just shut up. Be glad she's home and go away
@@PK-gw2rz except of course they found, and covicted the guy that did it. His dna was all over the place. He had a strange deal tht doesnt exist in italy now where he confessed so they wouldnt do a trial, and in return he got 1/3 off his sentence. He only did 13 years, and after he got out he was almost immediately accused and arrested for abusing, and raping his girlfriend, and is awaiting trial. So go ahead and get that shes guilty idea out of your mind.
@@Badspinache So true. One small correction: the 'abbreviated trial' that Guede opted for did not require he confess or plead guilty, which he didn't. He has never admitted he killed Meredith or had any part in her murder and I doubt he ever will. It's not to his benefit as he has been able to convince some gullible fools that he's just the poor scapegoat because he's black.
So let me get this straight....Italian authorities were happy to sentence the WRONG person to 25 years in prison but upon finding the RIGHT person....eased his 30 year sentence to 16 years and then eventually, in 2020 released him to serve out his term doing "community service". Are my facts straight?
Not quite. Rudy Guede opted for a 'fast track trial' which was his right in 2008 (murder defendants can no longer opt for this). This a non-jury trial but is heard by only a judge. There's basically no defense presentation and is quickly concluded. The 'reward' for not having a long, drawn out jury trial is an automatic reduction of the sentence by 1/3. He was originally sentenced to 30 years but that was reduced to 24 on appeal. A 1/3 reduction of 24 is 16. He served 13 of those 16 years. Very soon after completing the parole last year, his former partner accused him of beating her up and repeatedly raping her. He's now awaiting trial for these charges.
@@mytrip6991 Thanks a ton for a more thorough understanding of what happened!! Greatly appreciated!
@@neologian1783 You're welcome. It's refreshing to see someone who actually wants to know the facts rather than just have their opinions confirmed or spew ignorant hatred.
@@mytrip6991 You are most welcome. And thank you for the gentle correction! It was appreciated.
Yes and it stinks! This case was handled horribly.
To all the people who seem to feel conflicted on this case, read the book Meredith Kerchers father wrote on this whole case. Could be ambiguous to the odd supporters of her, but also an insight into the families view of the cold hard initial evidence of the first trial . She changes her story multiple times, as did Rafaelle Sollecito , whether she is guilty or not of the murder she had an involvement of some sort. She was never ‘acquitted’ of murder , the final verdict in 2015 said she was involved but, it couldn’t be upheld due to insufficient evidence to prove the circumstantial conflicts within the case. It’s a loophole , she didn’t get convicted for murder twice by two different judges for no reason.
John Kercher's book, although a loving tribute to his daughter, basically just repeats the prosecution's claims when it comes to the evidence pretty much without question. This isn't unusual as it's normal for the loved ones of a murder victim to believe the police when they tell them they've got the person or persons responsible. It's also not unusual for the family of victims to continue to believe in the accused's guilt even after they've been acquitted. If they accept that person's innocence, they have to accept that the killer is still out there and may never be caught... they 'got away with it'. That is understandably impossible for some becomes it means they have no closure.
The problem with the 'cold hard initial evidence' is that the really critical evidence was shown not to be scientifically supported (Meredith's alleged DNA on the knife and Amanda's 'blood' mixed with Meredith's), or highly likely to be the product of contamination (Raffaele's DNA on the bra hook), or just downright wrong ( Amanda's alleged footprints were in Meredith's blood). Other claimed evidence was also shown to be unsupported or disproved: that no one could have climbed in through Filomena's window, that the rock was thrown from inside, that glass was only on top of items in Filomena's room.
The myth that Amanda changed her story multiple times is just that: a myth repeated by those who don't know the case very well. Her description of what happened was the same before and after the interrogation of Nov. 5/6 . It's only during that unrecorded, lawyer-less interrogation that her story changed...and which she recanted twice in writing within hours. False confessions are not rare at all. Also remember that even in the 1:45 and 5:45 statements, she never confessed to being involved in the murder and never mentioned Raffaele at all. The two statements also contained events that were proved to never have happened but which the Chief of Police proudly declared that same day that Amanda had "buckled and made an admission of facts we knew were correct," ...only they weren't.
There is no evidence that she was involved in any way whatsoever.
Your last claim that she was never acquitted is patently false. This is the final verdict of the 2015 SC:
"According to article 620 lett. a) of the code of criminal procedure, it is annulled without appeal
the challenged sentence in relation to the crime of paragraph b) of the rubric for being extinct for
prescription;
according to articles 620 lett. I) and 530, chapter 2 of the code of criminal procedure, in relation
to the crime of slander, annuls without appeal the challenged sentence in relation to the crime of
paragraph a), d) and e) of the rubric for having not committed the act."
To be clear: crime 'a' is the murder charge, 'b' is the theft of € 300.00, two credit cards, and two cell phones, and 'e' is simulating a burglary. These three charges were annulled under Art. 530, chapter 2 of the code of criminal procedure which is an ACQUITTAL. From the Code of Criminal Procedure:
"Art. 530. Acquittal."
"2.The court shall give a judgment of acquittal even if there is no proof, insufficient evidence or contradictory evidence that the fact exists, that the accused has committed it, that the fact constitutes a criminal offence or that the offence was committed by a person liable."
Notice the last part of the Court's ruling: "... for having not committed the act". To claim this is a 'loophole' is factually false and intellectually dishonest as is your claim that "she didn’t get convicted for murder twice by two different judges for no reason." You ignore the inconvenient fact that she was also ACQUITTED TWICE , once by two judges (Hellmann and Zanetti, 2011) and definitively by five judges of the SC (2015).
Totally hear you, however, I’m more than aware of the case having read all the transcripts of every trial .There were two convictions and yes in your opinion rightly so, legally ‘two acquittals’, but with conflicting information in the final ruling .I’m not a legal expert just someone giving an opinion.
The ‘trace-DNA’ evidence that was used formed a major part of the evidence against her. However, couldn’t prove there was a plausible motive for the murder is all I’m saying .
@@sonic1192 The conflicting information in the final ruling is based on a pre-existing 'judicial fact' regarding Knox being in the cottage the night of the murder. In Italy, a 'judicial fact' is not necessarily an 'actual fact', meaning it's a 'fact' that has been made definitive by the Supreme Court. Once that happens, it cannot be considered anything but a fact and cannot be overturned or disagreed with by any following court in a related case.*
Marasca-Bruno could not, by law, say that Amanda was not at the cottage the night of the murder, did not hear Meredith scream and did not commit calunnia. That's because the calunnia conviction, which included those events, had already been made definitive by the Chieffi SC in 2013.
*The reason Knox's calunnia conviction was able to be annulled last October is due to a new law in Italy after 2015 ( CPP Art. 628 bis). It permits the annulment of a definitive conviction if the ECHR subsequently finds the conviction unfair due to the violation of civil rights. In Jan. 2019, the ECHR found Knox's calunnia conviction was 'unfair' due to her right to a lawyer and to an impartial interpreter being violated.
Yes, the "trace DNA' was crucial to the finding of guilt in the first trial. But during the appeal trial, that 'trace DNA' was found to be unreliable as evidence.
It's refreshing to find someone who has actually read the court transcripts. Most people base their opinions on misinformation posted on YT videos or guilt-biased websites. Or worse, on 'body language'.
She assisted in the commission of the crime y cleaning the murder scene. She should be convicted as an accessory.
@@mytrip6991that's garbage and libel
I've always believed that she might not have done the killing, but she had something to do with it.
On what basis?
I hear that a lot but no one ever gives me a reason why they think that.
There are multiple reasons for her possible involvement, hence two convictions of murder , read Meredith Kerchers father’s book on the case or the original court transcripts , it’s there in black and white, but understandably open to debate.
@@sonic1192 Those two convictions were annulled by two acquittals. In the motivation reports from the two acquitting courts, it's carefully explained why those convictions were overturned.
John Kercher's book is hardly an unbiased source. It's basically just a repetition of the prosecution's claims.
I've also read the original court transcripts which is what I base my arguments on and why I often quote and cite them.
Can you explain what evidence places Knox or Sollecito in Kercher's bedroom or even in the cottage that night?
100% she did it it's written all over her face even though she has mastered lying no innocent person acts like she has or tells a huge web of lies.
She has the motive she didn't like Meredith and they got high and killed her. Who else did it like wtf? Can't believe so many gullible clowns actually believe she is innocent
I still belive she knows more , shes slick but i dont believe her.
Anyone viewing this Interview, what I would like to draw attention too is to how many within Law enforcement and other authorities in any Country in the World are proven, typically at a latter date, to be shown to have been incompetent and that incompetency can be at the highest levels and also extend to other institutions such as Judges and Lawyers and with that, all I am saying is, how innocent individuals can be falsely accused and incarcerated or equally someone guilty of the offence are missed and not convicted. I could reel of plenty of examples of this for the U.K. and if it can happen there we can conclude that it can happen in any other European Country and Italy no exception. What an absolute Nightmare and RIP to the young British woman whos life was brutally ended where she should have felt safest, that was the biggest tragedy that I think everyone agrees on.
I agree. Italy has paid millions of euros in compensation to tens of thousands of people who were unfairly arrested or convicted:
"According to official data from the Ministry of Justice, in 2019 the total expenditure for compensation in cases of wrongful detention on remand amounted to approximately €43.5 million, while with reference
to compensation for wrongful conviction under Article 643 CCP, the total amount incurred in 2019 was about €5.2 million.7 In total between 1992 and 2021, the number of cases of wrongful detention on remand amounted to 30,017, for a total public expenditure of approximately € 819 million, compared to 214 cases of wrongful conviction arising from judicial review, for a total of approximately €76 million" (Compensation for wrongful convictions in Italy* Simone Lonati)
Amanda Knox was paid 18,400 euros ($20,000) in damages, costs and expenses by Italy as ordered by the ECHR in Jan. 2019.
How many guilty people have also gotten away qith their crimes?
@@leesteal4458 Plenty, but the you have to look at the evidence. In this case, it does not support guilt. If you think otherwise, present the evidence you think supports her guilt.
Amanda's crime was she was American, blond and v pretty. I can imagine what those police were like, especially the police women. The press loved the story of an angelic looking murderer. I live in Italy and was there when the whole thing happened. The police trampled all over the crime scene. It was all so unprofessional, an Italian mess. RIP Meredith
I'll just leave this right here "Various eyewitnesses came forward to place Guede, Knox and Sollecito at the scene of the crime, and the fact that the young lovers had bought bleach the following morning suggested they were trying to cover their tracks. The evidence appeared overwhelming and all three were convicted" and then she got off on a technicality!! I think it's sick all the sympathy for Amanda Knox, from this very one sided interview It seems everything is about her - that's pretty narcissistic!! While everyone seems to have forgot about Meredith the real victim.
I'll just leave you with this right here: You're being dishonest about that quote as it comes from an article written in Oct. 2011 which was a review of John Follain's book. As the article also says, but which you left out: " Witnesses were shown to be confused." Oh, they were shown to be more than "confused". Every single witness who "came forward to place Guede, Knox and Sollecito at the scene of the crime," was discredited for various reasons. One claimed he saw Knox and Sollecito together the previous summer before Knox had even arrived in Perugia and months before they had met one week before the murder. Another, Antonio Curatolo, claimed he saw Knox and Sollecito (not Guede) watching the cottage for several hours. But when questioned in court, her said he was sure of the date because he saw students in costumes getting onto busses going to the discos for the holiday. That would be Halloween. The night BEFORE the murder. Another witness ,Hekuran Kokomani, an Albanian immigrant serving prison time, was the prosecution’s “super-witness.” The convicted drug dealer claimed that Amanda and Raffaele jumped out of trash bags on Halloween and threw olives at him. He claims that Amanda had a gap between her teet (she didn't). Kokomani was finally dismissed from court when the judges realize that he was lying to get a ‘vacation day’ away from jail.
"the fact that the young lovers had bought bleach the following morning" proved NOT to be a fact when it was revealed in court that the store owner, Marco Quintavalle, who claimed over a year after the murder that he saw Knox waiting outside his store the morning after the murder had 1) never claimed she bought anything, much less bleach, 2) store receipts showed nothing had been sold by the store that morning, 3) the store cashier said she never saw Knox, and 4) policeman Oreste Volturno's records showed he had interviewed Quintavalle several days after the murder and had shown him photos of Knox and Sollecito. Quintavalle recognized them as customers but made no mention of having seen Knox at his store the morning of Nov. 2, only before and always with Sollecito whose apartment was just up the street. Oreste had specifically asked Quintavalle about any bleach sales and the shop owner never said anything about Knox or Sollecito buying bleach or anything else.
There was no "technicality", which is a claim often made by those who just don't know the facts. The pair were acquitted because there was NO evidence placing either of them in Kercher's bedroom or to the murder. I suggest you read the final report before posting on the case again.
She didn't get off on a technicality, and saying she did doesn't make it so. The prosecution tried to claim Knox cleaned her DNA up from the crime scene, leaving behind only Meredith's and Guede's. That premise should have been laughed out of court, yet was taken seriously in Italy. You say sympathy for Knox is sick, but all you're repeating is what the tabloids printed, based on information provided to them by the bizarre prosecutor, who built a case against Knox based mostly on his own twisted fantasies. I think that's pretty sick!
@@williamanthony9090 It doesn't take a brilliant mind to question the possibility of how two people can remove ONLY the INVISIBLE fingerprints and INVISIBLE DNA of themselves while leaving those of two others.
@@williamanthony9090 What is sick is your total misinformation on this case. That the crime scene was washed is objective and established, it should be obvious even to a brainless idiot - like you -. How can an individual leave a single bloody foot in another room? Did he fly to get to the other room and put his bloody foot on the mat? (A footprint which, among other things, according to some reports does not coincide with Guede's foot.) The floor has been washed, in fact the footprint is not complete, the heel is missing, although it is evident that the person placed the entire foot on it . That aside, there is scientific evidence and luminol to prove it.
AK's DNA was not found on the victim's body, but Rudy Guede's was not there either, since the skin does not retain the DNA of others, unless it is in large quantities (like spit), or under the nails. Only her own DNA was found under Meredith's nails, while in her vagina there were traces of Guede's saliva. Furthermore, if AK's DNA had been under Meredith's body, it would not have been found because there was too much blood and since they were both females it was much more difficult to detect it, while the male DNA, having a y chromosome, was more detectable. Despite this, the two women's DNA were found, mixed in several places, such as the bathroom sink and the bloody light switch in Meredith's room, but Amanda lived in that house, so this evidence has less value than that of Guede. it is amply demonstrated and clear that she locked Meredith's room to delay the discovery of the body, and moved around the house freely for hours before calling her Italian roommate (who was in town at her boyfriend's house and could have returned at any moment) to say that there was something strange and therefore raise the alarm; if that door had been wide open, as Rudy had left it (proven by the shoe prints), she wouldn't have been able to tell that story about taking a shower and everything without having any inkling, premonition, fear or worry. A story which however is far-fetched even like this, because there is no human being in the world who would not worry about their roommate and a locked door, after seeing traces of blood in the house. Furthermore, no one would have had any reason to stage a robbery except someone who had the keys to the house.
@@mytrip6991 Yes they can. They know what they touched that night. No one buys bleach who isn't guilty PERIOD.
She still doesn't convince me of her innocence and I don't think that Meredith was her 'friend' either.
Interestingly, those who actually did know them, such as those living with them or socializing with them daily, all acknowledge they were friends with a normal relationship. Further, their actions, such as twice going to the chocolate festival as well as the classical concert a week before the murder are all indicators they were friends who enjoyed their time together. That you, despite this, would conclude they weren't friends proves you lack knowledge of the case. Perhaps you should learn the facts before forming opinions.
what would your motivation be to study abroad in another country as a 20 yr old and after 5 weeks decide to murder your roomate?
True to form...no answer.
@@starlightmckennah5241 Exactly. The prosecution changed the motive multiple times as they couldn't support any of them with evidence and some evidence actually disproved them.
The most popular motive that we see repeated among the uninformed is that Amanda was 'jealous' of Meredith. Only one person who knew the girls claimed this: Patrick Lumumba. In a (six figure) paid for interview (I Fired Foxy Knoxy) just after his release from jail he wrote "'Meredith was sparkly and she lifted your spirits...Amanda was jealous," "Amanda tried much harder, but was less popular. I didn't realise it at the time, but now I see that she was jealous," and "I knew then she was extremely jealous of Meredith." However, under oath in court, his testimony was very different. This is taken directly from Lumumba's testimony (April 3, 2009):
"QUESTION - And how were Amanda’s relations with Meredith?
ANSWER - And...
QUESTION - Do you know?
ANSWER - No, no.
QUESTION - You don’t know.
ANSWER - I don’t know, I knew they were friends, friends and that's all."
In that article he also told many lies including that he'd 'fired' Amanda. Again, in court, he never once claimed he had or was planning to fire her. He also claimed Amanda came to hate him, but in court, he said they got along just fine.
@@TheTruthCalls yea but her lack of empathy shows she didnt like meredith. i mean she only bawled out crying when she was acquited the first time.
She went thru hell. Thank God she got out of Italy alive. She was manipulated and coerced. She’s Innocent. The amount of people that think she would’ve killed her friend and roommate is astounding. She had no reason and she wasn’t an insane psychopath. It’s obvious Meredith went thru hell at the hands of a brutal rapist who took her life. His DNA was all over the apt he only served 13 years and is out free today. Not this girl on her study abroad first time to Italy trip. I remember the trial it was so scary to watch the Italian courts railroad her.
It’s the duping delight in her interviews and saying no but shaking her head us. What’s with all the laughing???
I believe her. That Italian prosecutor projected his own prurient psycho-sexual fantasies onto the case and then smeared them all over Ms. Knox. His actions were a regrettable miscarriage of justice, and I hope he knows that.
I don't apart from her lies about a million facial expressions to me say she is guilty as hell, a decent actress but she did it or was involved.
The motive was there jealousy , they obviously done it when they were high. Somebody innocent does not make up a pack of lies over and over again guilty 100%
What a pile of BS!!!!! Guy who has 400 cases a month, is projecting something into a random drug addict ? Perugia is full, too full of Americans, of foreigners in general!! Why would the old experienced prosecutor even pay attention to Amanda? She isnt special at all! She is arrogant liar. She hung at the police station UNINVITED, and then made a victim of herself, claiming- and notofying falsely all media - that she was "interrogated for 56 hours!!!!" The prosecutor WAS RIGHT FROM THE START. Just the same as the prosecutor in McCanns case. And both were ridicluled and mocked. The prosecutor isnt new to this town. For 800 years in Perugia, the students do shennanigans, especialy around Haloween- not called like that obviously This is American invention but nothing new around that time of year, there were murders in that time too- all alcohol an drugs related. All students life and party related. You are projecting this case on your own ignorance and simplicity. And by the way: have you seen Italian women? Amanada looks like the broom stick next to the ugliest of them. They are the real beauties.
@@hellothere-mx6wuHave you ever even been to the US? Looks like you totally lack any international communication experience to realize how different the facial espressions of americans may be from the facial expressions of some europeans, in particular italians. Exactly like that crazy elderly procecutor.
@@zyvezet yeah nice probably we have her personal friends and family defending her here. When they ask her if she killed Meredith she says no but nods her head at the same time.
She tried to shift the blame and frame an innocent man. So much of her behaviour screams guilty I have never seen a wrongly convicted innocent person act this way. She was convicted twice for a reason no random burglar killed Meredith they did and nothing will change my mind .
You can see her soul is destroyed by the guilt she is loving with , her lying has gotten better before it was obvious something was very wrong when she spoke but you can still see through her if you know what to look for.
@@hellothere-mx6wu Nothing screams guilty in her behaviour, it's all biased presumptions. And as a foreign woman living in Italy (who has also lived in the US) and knowing how conservative and inflexible provincial italians still are regarding behaviour, habits, fashion and any ways of self-expression, I've never for a second believed she could be guilty. Just completely misunderstood by an elderly man who didn't know what "mentality" differences are.
The trial for the annulled defamation conviction begins on April 10.
Hanno due possibilità : o condannarla di nuovo e coprirsi d' infamia , o assolverla e risarcirla ! Caso politicamente interessante !
Nonsense, Knox, it is not yet annulled. Better not go to Italy, they will eat you alive.
@@sertorio1040 Vero. Ma in questo nuovo processo, le sue due dichiarazioni firmate prese illegalmente durante l'interrogatorio non sono ammissibili in tribunale perché i suoi diritti sono stati violati.
@6991 In teoria ha già vinto , ma a Firenze niente è sicuro !
@@peterquennellnyc I don't know if you're the real Peter Quennell or just a troll using his name. Either way, you're one sick person.
As for your claim, you're also a liar:
"By AFP - Agence France Presse
October 13, 2023
Italy's highest court Friday overturned a slander conviction against Amanda Knox, the American jailed and later acquitted of the 2007 murder of her British roommate, and ordered a new trial."
"Daily Mail, 25 February, 2024
Amanda Knox is due to make a sensational return to Italy, where she was initially found guilty of murder before being cleared, in order to fight a long standing slander charge.
Officials have set a date for the hearing of April 10 and she is expected to fly in from the United States to the Italian city of Florence for the proceedings."
BREAKING: Amanda Knox (@amandaknox
), who falsely accused Patrick Lumumba, a Congolese man, of the murder of British exchange student Meredith Kercher in Italy in 2007, has been re-convicted of slander. Lumumba had been kind to her, giving her a part-time job. However, she deliberately lied about him to exonerate herself and later blamed police pressure. The court has just reconvicted her. lol
it wasnt overtuned . in fact they aaded onto that sentence
You were 20 year old KID? Amanda you travelled from America to Italy as a KID? You tried to imagine the memories you did not have? why? are you doing it still to show that you are innocent? and if you did not know Italian language was not better to don't use it and wait until comes the person that can help you to talk with the police? and the last thing why in all her interviews nobody has sympathy for Meredith? because Amanda does not like it? why everyone just say poor Amanda but not Meredith that was murdered in that horrible way?
1) "You were 20 year old KID? Amanda you travelled from America to Italy as a KID?"
In American English, "kid" is often used to describe young college students: "college kid n, US, informal (university-age student)"
"Kid" is also commonly used for adult children as in "My kid just got married."
2) "You tried to imagine the memories you did not have? why? "
She told you why:
"The only thing I could think to do as a 20 year old kid was to believe them and to try to just give them what they wanted. So I, I tried to imagine memories that I didn't have and then they 'Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah.' When I didn't remember correctly, they would hit me in the back of the head and you know, not enough to leave a mark, but enough to startle me. And um and enough to convey to me that when I gave them something that they didn't like, they would not accept it."
3) "are you doing it still to show that you are innocent?"
She doesn't have to "show" anything; she was acquitted in a court of law. She's explaining what happened during the interrogation. An interrogation that was found to have violated her rights which “irreparably undermined the fairness of the proceedings as a whole” according to the ECHR. This resulted in her defamation conviction being annulled in Oct. 2023. She was granted a new trial for the defamation charge which starts April 10.
4) "if you did not know Italian language was not better to don't use it and wait until comes the person that can help you to talk with the police?"
You're speaking from hindsight which is always 20/20. She spoke a very basic Italian and was trying her best to answer the questions being asked of her by police.
5) " why in all her interviews nobody has sympathy for Meredith? because Amanda does not like it? why everyone just say poor Amanda but not Meredith that was murdered in that horrible way?"
Your claim is just plain wrong. I suggest you watch other interviews.
She is innocent! She was framed.
its typical for sociopaths. THEY TAKE THE WHOLE ROOM.
@@mytrip6991 oH MY.....you think we dont know???? Using the word "kid" is not random: she justifies her stupidity wih her young age, but mind you: nobody from all flatmates was kissing passionaltely next to a bloody murder scene in their HOME. NOBODY hung at the police station UNINVITED. Nobody was "stretching", singing, "helping" which can only be seen as fishing at what the police knows. She is sto stupid....she thinks she can floood the public with her endless talking. THis fact only shows that something is wrong with her. Im not even mentionning her incriminTING AN INNOCNT PERSON AND NEVER APOLOGISING FOR IT.
@@Ali-gb7mf and this is why she framed Patrick Lumumba?
Book deal, movie, attention, attention, attention. LOOK AT MEEEEEEEEEE! Just go away.
Hey, no one made you watch this! You could've just kept on scrolling. Also, CZcams makes video recommendations based on preferences as well as past video searches. How do we know you haven't searched this case before? If you did, then you brought this video on yourself.
Your comment says.......
" LOOK AT MEEEEEEEEEEEE.."
Time to take the advice you gave to Amanda.
You know what to do.
Bye....
Another book deal to raise money?
She has no other book deal.
@@mytrip6991 yet.
@@melgrant7404 Why keep suggesting she'll write another book when there is no evidence of this? It's been 11 years since her book was published.
@mytrip6991 high time she had another then.
@@mytrip6991 Her husband says she’s working on a new one.
Arguably one of the most bizarre cases I’ve heard about
It really is, and I think it will continue to be talked about for quite some time.
There's nothing bizarre about it, Except the fact that these two people in their twenties were imprisoned without one shred of evidence.
Besides, Sollecito is a very sweet and romantic man, so one really needs a lot of imagination and creativity to think he could be compatible with a the profile of pervert loving murderous orgies with strangers.
He had never met Guede. She barely knew Guede, the perpetrator.
@@CapcoorIt absolutely will. It's yet another reminder of what can happen when an investigation gets tunnel vision. The case itself was very straight forward. The evidence of Guede committing the crime was overwhelming, was consistent with his behavior in the weeks prior (i.e., burglaries) and his recent assault on another young women proves he has is capable of being violent. The case only went "bizarre" after Mignini and Giobbi decided Amanda was involved and proceeded to fabricate a case against her. Fortunately for her and Raffaele the Supreme Court saw through it, but not until it cost the two of them four years of their lives.
@@TheTruthCalls Do you know Amanda met with Mingini recently?
@@CapcoorAs far as I know, they last met in late 2022, so I'm not sure I'd call that "recently", but yes, I am aware they have established a relationship. Why?
I DON'T THINK SHE WAS INVOLVED AT ALL, NO NEED TO RAPE HER FRIEND AND MURDER HER, THEY COULD HAVE HAD A 3 SOME, SOME RANDOM DUDE DID IT, I BELIEVE IT'S THE MAN SHE ACCUSED
Amanda truly was an innocent student and did nothing wrong. She should have stayed out of the way of the Press cameras when all this happened. She was out in Public with the boyfriend outside of the crime scene and culturally did not go down well in that country.
lmao
She believes her own lies.
She has only duped the willingly gullible.....
Sociopath.
Amanda has been reflecting on, analysing, manipulating, making money from, researching her case (while honing her media skills) for close to twenty years.. and yet she still fails to make me feel any emotion.. even when she cries- or speaks her most deliberately impactful and intelligent sentences. We are not taught enough to simply go with our gut.. and my gut has never once wavered from telling me that Amanda is a highly intelligent but deeply troubled and complex narcicistic sociopath. She physically looks so unstimulated.. it's very hard to explain what I mean.. but I can only imagine how much Meredith's gut was screaming at her.. but unfortunately, we aren't conditioned to follow our gut instincts.. and is unfortunately why so many people have been killed because they didn't want to seem impolite. My respects to Meredith's Family and friends 😔
Well, you're in the minority. It's clear she is innocent.
@@Newsbro89No, it’s not clear at all.
@@Newsbro89More like it's "clear" she's as guilty as sin....
Oh, we should just judge people in a court of a law upon "gut feelings". OF COURSE! Genius! Gut feelings are NEVER WRONG! By which I mean YOUR gut feelings are never wrong, as surely you meant. After all, you're a really smart person, and you know just how everyone should look or act in all situations so that they don't SEEM guilty. Why do we even need evidence, you can watch them respond to a question and divine the truth deep into their soul, you can even diagnose their mental condition! Wait, what about my gut feelings? Or maybe we should have a gut feeling vote? After all, ain't no such thing as lynch mobs, never has been, never will be. Everyone's gut feelings are equal, regardless of prior bias or how much information they have about the case. Just the gut! It always knows!
@@victoriavancartier7379 says who? You? Too bad she was acquitted then.
A young girl is dead in her apartment!
Story still dark!
Would like to know why they where so indifferent about the death about the poor girl?
Sorry don’t believe her even now!
What makes you think they were indifferent?
@@mytrip6991 Good question! I don’t know and i wonder why so much crime appears everywhere!
@@mistieblue9 A question you asked but didn't answer. Why makes you think they were "indifferent" to Meredith's death?
@@mytrip6991 All the story was so strange!
@@mistieblue9 Not if you know the facts. It was a simple burglary that escalated into a rape and murder by Rudy Guede. Only the idiot police and prosecutor turned it into a salacious girl on girl murder.
As an American she was an easy target for those corrupt officers. But, the real killer already has another violent charge against him...hard for the Italians to hide that from the internet even though they bent over backwards to save the illegal immigrant from punishment. Not to worry though they'll let him out early for good behavior just like they did when he was sentenced the first time. Italy has seen a 556% increase in illegal immigrants from 2020 to 2024. Sexual assaults and violent crimes went up 50% during this same period.
Rudy Guede was not an illegal immigrant as he had a residency/green card. He was there legally which is why the police were able to identify him from his fingerprints that were on file as a resident. He'd lived there since he was 5 years old. Legal or not, he's a piece of sh**.
Her actions were suspicious how her boyfriend and her were acting right after they found the body. Thought it was appropriate to do cartwheels while waiting to be talked to at the police station. And im sorry but she points the finger at her boss as he was one of them knowing that was a lie. Shes saying what the cops said to her but thats heresay. She may of not been the one to kill her roomate but i think she knew about the death before the body was found. She doesnt take any accountability for the actions she did do.
1) "Her actions were suspicious how her boyfriend and her were acting right after they found the body."
Vague claims are very difficult to address. What actions exactly are you talking about 'right after they found the body"?
2)"Thought it was appropriate to do cartwheels while waiting to be talked to at the police station."
Now, that's a specific claim so I can address it.
First, Knox was not waiting to be interviewed/interrogated. She had not even been asked to come to the police station that night. She and Sollecito were at a friend's place having dinner when the police phoned Sollecito at 10:00 PM and asked him to come in. As Knox was with him, she came with him instead of going back alone to his apartment.
Second, When Sollecito went with the police to be interviewed at 10;30, Knox waited for him in an area by the elevator and did some Italian grammar drills in her notebook. A policeman came by and started asking her some question. Tired and stiff, she stood up and started doing some yoga stretching while talking to him. He noticed now limber she was and asked her what else she could do so she did a splits . Monica Napoleoni came out to of the elevator just at that time and had a fit. It was Napoleoni who claimed Knox did a cartwheel. The same Napoleoni who was later sentenced to over 3 years in jail for abusing her police powers to get revenge against her ex-husband and a court child psychologist who recommended she not get custody of her son. Several of her underlings, including some involved in the Kercher case, were also found guilty of helping her. Both Napoleoni and they lied to protect themselves.
3) "And im sorry but she points the finger at her boss as he was one of them knowing that was a lie."
Yes, she signed two statements written up by the police at 1:45 AM and 5:45 AM. She started being questioned about 11:00 PM according to the police. So almost 3 hours after she being interrogated, with no recording or record of what was said, and with out a lawyer, she signed what the police told her was 'the truth'. Why? Because they'd already decided what they thought had happened and any time Knox denied it, they yelled, threatened, called her a liar and, according to Knox, slapped her on the back of the head. As she wrote within hours of signing those two statement, she told the police she had only done so because she was so exhausted, scared, and confused she couldn't differentiate her memories from what seemed like dreams. The next day, she wrote again telling them that she could now think more clearly and she knew what she had signed wasn't the truth. She said, "I can't know who the real killer is because I never went back to the cottage." They ignored her recantation.
4) "Shes saying what the cops said to her but thats heresay."
What the cops say is also hearsay as they failed to record or even write down what was said doing that interrogation as was required. So what we have are cops just as likely covering for themselves as not. Do you think they'd ever admit to smacking or threatening her, which is against the law?
5)"She may of not been the one to kill her roomate"
But that is exactly what she was charged with and twice convicted of doing despite there being NO evidence of her at all in Kercher's bedroom where she was killed. And NO motive was ever established (which is why they kept coming up with new ones).
6) "...but i think she knew about the death before the body was found."
Why? Logic says she didn't. If she had, she and Sollecito would have done the following to cover for themselves and Guede:
a)Cleaned the bathroom (likely with bleach), especially any visible signs of blood,
b)Removed the bathmat with the bloody footprint,
c)Washed the bathroom, hallway, and kitchen floors and most certainly the visible bloody shoeprints,
d)Flushed Guede's feces in the toilet
But none of that was done as the evidence proves.
Remember, Kercher was attacked most likely when she arrived home at 9:00 PM but even if we accept the prosecution time of 11:00-11:30 PM, all this could and would have been done during the dark of night and finished well before dawn. Also remember that it was Knox who started the discovery of the body when she called Filomena to tell her that she found the door open, blood in the bathroom, and feces is Filomena's toilet. Sollecito also called the carabinieri to report the broken window, blood, and Kercher's lock door and inability to find her at 12:51.
A guilty person most likely would have cleaned up anything they thought would connect them to the murder. After allegedly having all night to do so, a guilty RS and AK would have gone to Gubbio as planned (and which RS's father could attest to) and let Filomena come home to find the front door open.
7) "She doesnt take any accountability for the actions she did do."
And what actions were those exactly? If you're talking about Lumumba, I suggest you google "Amanda Knox Nov. 6 memoriale and Nov 7 second memoriale. And you might want to read her apology to Lumumba in court. Here, I'll provide it for you:
Dec. 11, 2010:
“Patrick? I don’t see you. But I’m sorry. I’m sorry, because I didn’t want to wrong you. I was very naïve and not remotely courageous, because I should have been able to endure the pressure that pushed me to wrong you. I didn’t want to contribute to all that you suffered. You know what it means to have unjust accusations imposed on your skin. You didn’t deserve what you went through. I hope you’ll succeed in finding your peace.”
@@mytrip6991 You forget to mention the police brought the boss into the discussion because of the text Knox had sent him the night before, in regard to not having to go to work, ending with "See You Later." The police were convinced that meant she met with her boss the night of the murder, not realizing, or not caring, that "see you later" is a common American phrase meaning goodbye.
@@williamanthony9090 True. Actually, the text ended in "Good night" which is not something one says if they're seeing you later on the same night.
because they didn't realize that they would later be implicated
@@lynnhubbard844 What question is that in answer to? I don't know what you're referring to.
She lies about being hit in her head. Nobody have seen that she’s been hit, her translator also not. Lies
Do you think the police and the police's translator would admit that she was hit on the back of the head? Doing so would be admitting to breaking the law and result not only in her two signed statements being thrown out as evidence, but charges brought against Ficarra and the others for not reporting it. Sheesh.
The appeal has failed and this should be the end ot it bearing in mind that she was definitively convicted of the criminal defamation, again on appeal, back in 2013 by the Italian Supreme Court. Let's be clear about the offence for which she was convicted. It was not simply slander but effectively perverting the course of justice. She accused Lumumba of the murder, effectively as a credible eye witness who was there at the time it happened.
The offence, specifically, is laid out in Article 368 of the Italian Penal Code. The Article states that "anyone who with a denunciation, complaint demand or request, even anonymously or under a false name, directs a judicial authority or other authority with an obligation to report, to blame someone for a crime who he knows is innocent, that is he fabricates evidence against someone, shall be punished with imprisonment from two to six years".
And that is what she did, 3 times - in two signed statements (made 4 hours apart from each other and during which time she was not questioned) and in her Memorial.
Logically, had she been there at the time then obviously she knew Lumumba was not, and thus innocent. If she was not then obviously she knew she was fabricating evidence against him as the murderer. Guilty as charged either way.
Knox told the Appeal Court that she had been coerced by the police into falsely accusing Lumumba of the murder. She had not said as much before. There was no evidence of coercion she had offered at her trial or even in her book. Her claim that she had been cuffed a couple of times was disputed by the 3 police officers and the interpreter present. She was not interrogated for hours on end but for less than an hour over an exchange of texts she had with Lumumba which she had some dificulty remembering had occurred despite the fact that her phone had recorded her response but that Lumumba’s initial text had been deleted. The genesis of the accusation appears to have been (according to her Memorial - written when she was not being questioned) flashes of blurred images in her head and an “idea”, or perhaps a flash of inspiration? And in the Memorial she said - “ And I stand by my statements that I made last night …..”
The reason this has rumbled on for so long is because Knox will not let it lie. She went to the European Court of Human Rights alleging that her human rights had been violated. The ECHR ruled that she should have had a lawyer present with her during her interrogation ( a fact which the Italian Supreme Court had already accepted, taken into account, and ruled on, prior to the original trial ) and that the interpreter had been overly "familiar" with her. But the ECHR did not otherwise criticise the correctness of the already definitive verdict. The ECHR did not support her assertion ( at the Appeal Court) that she had been coerced into accusing Lumumba. However the Supreme Court decided, in the light of the ECHR decision, which awarded her a paltry 10,400 euos in damages, that an appeal court should reconsider the conviction specifically with regard to Italy's obligations under the Convention on Human Rights.
The Appeal Court - as I have argued elsewhere - came to the correct decision on re-affirming the conviction. Knox remains a convicted felon. The Motivation should be an interesting read.
Oh, and she was not exonerated but, bizarrely, acquitted of the murder charge, despite the overwhelming evidence against her.
Well, hello there, James. I see you're back with your misinformation. Still busy at "on life support" TJMK?
1. "The appeal has failed and this should be the end ot it bearing in mind that she was definitively convicted of the criminal defamation, again on appeal, back in 2013 by the Italian Supreme Court. "
No, it's not the 'end of it' as she is going to appeal the conviction as she has good grounds. The Florence court ignored the ECHR's ruling that she RETRACTED her accusation of Lumumba within hours:
""The Court therefore had to apply very strict scrutiny in assessing the fairness of the proceedings. It found as follows:"
"Secondly, only a few hours after the interviews in question, Ms Knox had promptly RETRACTED HER STATEMENTS, IN PARTICULAR BY A TEXT THAT SHE HAD WRITTEN ON 6 NOVEMBER 2007 AT ABOUT 1 P.M. AND HANDED TO THE POLICE, BY ANOTHER TEXT WRITTEN ON 9 NOVEMBER 2007 FOR HER LAWYERS AND IN A TELEPHONE CALL TO HER MOTHER ON 10 NOVEMBER 2007 WHEN HER LINE WS BEING TAPPED. IN SPITE OF ALL THIS, SIX MONTHS LATER, ON 14 MAY, 2008, MS. KNOX WAS CHARGED WITH MAKING A MALICIOUS ACCUSATION."
"Consequently, the Court held that the Italian Government had not succeeded in showing that the restriction of Ms Knox’s access to a lawyer, at the police interview of 6 November 2007 at 5.45 a.m., had not irreparably undermined the fairness of the proceedings as a whole. Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention had thus been breached."
2. "Let's be clear about the offence for which she was convicted. It was not simply slander but effectively perverting the course of justice. She accused Lumumba of the murder, effectively as a credible eye witness who was there at the time it happened."
You and Krissyg (akaVixen) have been pounding this lie for years. You and I both know that you cannot present a single piece of evidence that proves she was in the cottage, much less Meredith's bedroom, the night of the murder except for her RETRACTED within hours 'confession'.
3. "And that is what she did, 3 times - in two signed statements (made 4 hours apart from each other and during which time she was not questioned) and in her Memorial."
Bull: Two signed statements taken without a lawyer present or even an impartial interpreter which is why they were not allowed to be used as evidence against her in the recent trial. The ECHR ruled her Memorial was a RETRACTION, not an accusation: "RETRACTED HER STATEMENTS, IN PARTICULAR BY A TEXT THAT SHE HAD WRITTEN ON 6 NOVEMBER 2007 AT ABOUT 1 P.M. AND HANDED TO THE POLICE."
4. "Logically, had she been there at the time then obviously she knew Lumumba was not, and thus innocent. If she was not then obviously she knew she was fabricating evidence against him as the murderer. Guilty as charged either way. "
But she wasn't there. What you so PURPOSEFULLY OMIT is that her Nov. 7 memorial clearly states:
" I’m sorry I didn’t remember before and I’m sorry I said I could have been at the house when it happened. I said these things because I was confused and scared. I DIDN'T LIE WHEN I SAID I THOUGHT THE KILLER WAS PATRICK. I was very stressed at the time and I REALLY DID THINK HE WAS THE MURDERER. BUT NOW I REMEMBER THAT I CAN'T KNOW WHO THE MURDERER WAS BECAUSE I DIDN'T RETURN BACK TO THE HOUSE. "
5. "Knox told the Appeal Court that she had been coerced by the police into falsely accusing Lumumba of the murder. She had not said as much before."
Bull. To coerce: "To bring about or gain by pressure, threat, or force."
She has been saying it for YEARS and saying otherwise is a lie. Even in her Nov. 6 memorial she said " Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn't remember a fact correctly. "
From her June 12, 2009 Testimony:
"The declarations were taken against my will. And so, everything that I said, was said in confusion and under pressure, and, because they were suggested by the public minister."
"CP: And to make you say this, did they hit you?
AK: Yes."
" So, I was there, they were all SCREAMING AT ME , I only wanted to leave because I was thinking that my mother was arriving, and I said look, can I have my telephone, because I want to call my mom. They said no, and there was this big mess with them SHOUTING AT ME, THREATENING ME, and it was only after I made declarations that they started saying "No, no, don't worry, we'll protect you," and that's how it happened."
Don't give me this bullcrap that "she had not said as much before".
6. " But the ECHR did not otherwise criticise the correctness of the already definitive verdict. "
You just can't help but lie, can you? What the ECHR wrote:
""Consequently, the Court held that the Italian Government had not succeeded in showing that the restriction of Ms Knox’s access to a lawyer, at the police interview of 6 November 2007 at 5.45 a.m., had not IRREPARABLY UNDERMINED THE FAIRNESS OF THE PROCEEDINGS AS A WHOLE. Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention had thus been breached."
7. "The ECHR did not support her assertion ( at the Appeal Court) that she had been coerced into accusing Lumumba."
Another deliberate misrepresentation by you! Nor did they DENY it happened. What they said was that there was no evidence because the police violated her right to have her accusation investigated:
"... the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been:
a violation of the procedural limb (investigation) of Article 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights .
The Court held in particular that Ms Knox had not had the benefit of an investigation capable of shedding light on the facts and any responsibility, further to her allegation that she had been ill-treated on 6 November 2007 at a time when she had been entirely under police control. In spite of her repeated complaints, no investigation into the alleged treatment had been forthcoming."
8. "Oh, and she was not exonerated but, bizarrely, acquitted of the murder charge, despite the overwhelming evidence against her."
Again, you lie. Knox was acquitted with the stated "for not having committed the fact" by Marasca.
According to the Italian legal website "La Legge per Tutti" (The Law for Everyone):
"How does absolution work for not committing the fact?
The acquittal for not having committed the fact is pronounced by the judge whenever the crime has been committed, but not by the accused.
This is the case, for example, of the classic "exchange of persons", in which one subject is wrongly accused instead of another.
In conclusion: the acquittal for not having committed the fact completely exonerates the accused, who has nothing to do with the crime being tried.
Precisely because this type of absolution enshrines the total innocence of the accused from all guilt, it is said that it falls within the hypothesis of "absolution with full formula". "
Therefore, under Italian law, Knox and Sollecito were found to be legally "innocent", not just "not guilty".
Why don't you stop posting your misinformation and outright lies when you know it can be disproved?
I see you can't defend your own posts. No mystery why you can't.
Guilty
She knows exactly what happened and helped cover it up.
You mean by leaving Guede's bloody shoeprints in the hallway, his feces in the toilet and his bloody footprint on the bathmat? And point the last two out to the police? That's some job of "covering it up"!
She was totally innocent
@@beaubloomer4426
Wrong
@@beaubloomer4426 No she belongs in prison!
What is bizarre to me is that she remembers all including ‘interrogation’ not interviews and how they implicated her, I find it quite bizarre as when you are stressed and sleepless it’s very difficult to have a balanced view that you can then discuss all these years later. No empathy thoughts for the murdered Meredith and keep in mind she knew all these people had a full on relationship but also says she’d just arrived and was navigating her way around. We won’t ever know will we.
Once I heard people say they didn’t believe her bc of the way she “LOOKED”, I knew those people were nuts and out for drama or gossip only.
Welp she’s been reconvict by the Italian courts.
@@Devghost Hello. What do you mean?
She loos innocent and evil. Those people can "see" her.
I guess we need to stop to make up only the extremes: The media who made up a big story about her only because "how she looked and iceblue eyes" and all this. Obviously bulls... That is truly the dark side of group dynamics. Horrible. On the other hand we have - not excited, witch-hunt - own perspective on her. Each of us. Our own life-experience, intuition and so on. If one is easy to be manipulated and likes drama, again we get bulls... But after all we have to trust our own perceptions. And many people were not really convinced of her innocence. And out of many details of her behaviour, her speech, her facing the cameras additional to facts. Not all is so clear as it seems now, with her innocence. Still not clear the case. Many many details and aspects. And it is ok. We have to make our decisions out of these perceptions. Otherwise we were not able to function. BUT, but: Law has to follow other rules and normaly does fortunately. In dubio pro reo. Finish. That is the rule for law and that is good. But for me the two extremes have to be downsized: "Media hunt and group dynamic" on the one side and "no one is allowed to interpret anything of her behaviour as she is innocent". Both not realistic and not benefitial.
guilty narcissist
All the real evidence in this case points to one person, and it isn't Knox or her Italian boyfriend at the time.
No. The crime scene shows fight of more than 2 people.
You're ignorant.
Il nome è noto : GUEDE !
the evidence shows that more that 2 people were in that room. The wounds show that poor Meredith was held and someone else attacked her. She was held, raped and killed, and evidence shows that this wasnt done by one person. And check out Knox novel about rape, that she wrote at very young age.
@@dominikabanel340 La polizia , dopo l'enorme GAFFE ( caso chiuso ! ) vuole riabilitarsi e inserisce AeR sulla scena del delitto . Ma allora ci dovrebbero
essere le impronte di 3 aggressori in un piccolo spazio : numerose , mescolate , sovrapposte ....Invece NO ci sono solo quelle di GUEDE pulitissime !
She did it...
i have always thought that she is completely inosent she was just a 20 year old there is no evidence that proved that she was guilty the police and the preens at that time wanted a story people liked the story of her being evil and police need it someone to put in yail there is a lot of cases like that they ruin peoples lives
I don’t know why this interview. Does anyone care any more
24:40 what do you think of this? The interrogation took place in the middle of the night because the police knew the mom was arriving next day to support her...
Thank you for this interview. Both you and Amanda. 🙏🏻 I learned so much that I already thought I knew. I’m so happy for Amanda that she is able to take her horrible experience and use it to help others. 🙏🏻❤️ And I’m so happy to hear that you are being afforded the opportunity to clear your name legally. 🙏🏻 Sending you all the prayers!
She's a murderer only got away with it because female American and good looking.
She's a liar and apart from all the lies it is written all over her dam face how guilty she is.
@@hellothere-mx6wu Well, now... those are quite some claims made with no supporting evidence. What actual evidence supports her guilt?
It seems you hold the Italian judicial system in such low regard that they acquitted a murderer because she's "female, American, and good looking."
What 'lies' specifically has she told? Please give examples of "all the lies". And remember, in order to be a lie, the person must know it's not true.
Since you think you can see guilt "written all over her dam (sic) face", perhaps the courts should just hire you rather than have a judge/jury trial. You can take a look at the defendant's face and declare guilt or innocence. That would save a lot of time and money.
She certainly implicated Rudy Guede. Her 'memories/ flashback/ trauma' story, implicating him, is insane! Her slander trial is to begin very soon.
Um....you're mixing up Rudy Guede with Patrick Lumumba.
Guede was convicted of murder and spent 13 years in prison. He was released in Nov. 2021. Currently, he is charged with beating up and raping his former girlfriend and awaiting trial. He was deemed dangerous enough for the court to order him to wear an ankle bracelet with special supervision.
Lumumba was her boss at the bar she worked at. Scrolling through Knox's phones, interrogator Rita Ficarra saw Knox's text to him acknowledging his text not to come to work that night. She answered, in Italian, "Sure. See you later. Good night." Ficarra admitted under oath in court she believed "See you later" meant Knox was planning on meeting him later the night of the murder.
If you think her 'memories/ flashback/ trauma' story is insane then I suggest you do some research on "coerced/internalized false confessions", starting with this:
"We spoke with Saul Kassin, Psychology Professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and Williams College, who has researched false confessions for over thirty years, to find out more about the Central Park Five case, why people confess to crimes they did not commit, and how certain interrogation techniques can promote or limit the incidence of false confessions."
"Over the years, I have found that lay people have an easier time understanding why someone would kill themselves - they understand suicide and the motivations for it - than they do why someone would confess to a crime he did not commit."
"Years ago, my colleague (Larry Wrightsman) and I identified two types of false confessions that come from police interrogation. One we called coerced-compliant false confessions. These are cases, like the Central Park jogger case, where innocent people, who know they are innocent become so stressed, so broken down, and so confused as to what their best means of escape is that they confess fully knowing they’re innocent. In these cases they typically recant the confession almost immediately as soon as the pressure of the situation is lifted. The other type of confession is what we called coerced-internalized false confessions, and these are the cases where individuals actually come to believe in their own guilt as a function of the lies [by police] and their own suggestibility."
"Interestingly none of them actually confessed to raping the jogger. Each one implicated the four others and each one stated that he himself played a minimal role. So collectively there were five confessions, but in fact each defendant pointed a finger at the others."
(Coerced to Confess: The Psychology of False Confessions, Evan Nesterak, October 21, 2014)
Kassin then goes on to describe the Reid Technique, which produces many false confessions, and is what was used on Knox. Her description of her interrogation, written within hours, checks almost every box of the technique. Kassin also believes that Knox falsely confessed due to how she was interrogated and that she is 100% innocent.
Rudy Guede was the sole murderer
Wow that was long. Kassin can’t know if she was coerced, it’s her allegation of ‘gas lighting’ modern term. We don’t know, I doubt we will ever know the full truth. Was it wrong time wrong place!
@@lizroberts1569 Kassin knows the red flags of false confessions and he saw multiple classic ones in her description of the interrogation.
She is so articulate and intelligent and the interviewer was better than Barbara Walters in my opinion, because she was real, and as someone else stated, empathetic and relatable.
MOM. That is the ultimate title. MOM. UR MOM 💔🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Personally, I think you did it. No words can describe the horror of Meredith's murder and you were able to twist the system to suit your views. There were no false accusations, there was only the TRUTH.
What evidence proves guilt BARD?
No make up. Baby clothes all so she looks so innocent. Bull crap guilty!
What a silly comment.
What EVIDENCE supports her guilt? If you can't answer that, then you don't know what you're talking about.
She is guilty
Based on what evidence? The Italian SC disagrees with you based on the evidence.
Amanda Knox will be in court on Wednesday to hear the verdict:
Amanda Knox
@amandaknox
On June 5th, I will walk into the very same courtroom where I was reconvicted of a crime I didn't commit, this time to defend myself yet again. I hope to clear my name once and for all of the false charges against me. Wish me luck. Crepi il lupo!
I ain’t buying what she’s selling.
So explain how only one person, Rudy Guede, left overwhelming forensic evidence in the room where Kercher was murdered and Knox and Sollecito left none. What evidence anywhere in the upstairs apartment places them there at the time of the murder?
I didn't think you would or could.
She never acted like she was grieving for her friend whatsoever.
Really? And you were there to see her?
Probably because she was fighting for her own life from second one.
what do you want to see?
she bawling her eyes out and post a selfie to Facebook?
🤣
She only knew the girl for 2 wks of course she not gonna be balling her eyes out as if she knew her for yrs I mean come on use your common sense people!🤦🏽♀️
@@CyberneticOrganism01 Exactly. It's been 17 years and she didn't do anything wrong. I think some people just like to criticize.
Get away with murder. Meredith Kercher her victim will always be remembered.
Care to discuss the evidence you think supports that she 'got away with murder"?
@@mytrip6991 Like blaming some black man owner of a bar withxa bullet proof alibi of been the murderer ? like making cartwheels at the moment the body of her victim was lifted by the Italian police ? like not having an alibi ?
@@mytrip6991 ... and like taking a shower after the murder ?
@@mytrip6991 While she took a shower still were traces of blood in their bathroom and a huge turd at the John left by their third partner in crime that she even wasn't bother to flush.
@@mytrip6991 That as far as i remember. All this circunstantial evidence though, although very compelling. As in the OJ Simpson case no link was ever found that connected her directly with the victim at the time of the murder hence she was set free.
You are guilty of something! You will have to pay for that! Its a life taken
Something?
@@mytrip6991 Yea, right? It's like, "ok, so she didn't do it, but we don't like her so lock her up for something". I can't believe these people who think she was involved. It makes zero sense.
@@govindagovindaji4662 I came across this channel about 2 years ago and found it very informative. Don't get discouraged by the title. He's showing how PR infects justice.
@@govindagovindaji4662 People form opinions very early on a case or event. Unfortunately, they form these opinions when very little information is available and, most often in criminal cases, what information is released is done so almost exclusively by the police/prosecution. A lot of misinformation is reported and information that is later revealed not to be true. But it's a quirk of human nature that, once an opinion is formed, people will stick to it despite evidence proving them wrong. For example, in this case false information the police released early on included
1. The bloody shoeprints matched Sollecito's "perfectly",
2. Knox's DNA was found on Kercher's bra,
3. Knox bought bleach,
4. A receipt for bleach was found in Sollecito's apartment,
5. The parking garage CCTV camera caught Knox in the garage,
6. Kercher's DNA was on the knife,
7. Knox's bloody shoeprint was on the pillowcase,
8. Knox and Sollecito were 'caught with a mop and bucket" when the police arrived,
9. Knox's footprints were in blood,
10.The washing machine was running when the police arrived.
And there are many, many more.
They were not friends. Meredith and Amanda were not friends. The way she paints herself as the victim and has profited from Meredith’s murder is beyond disgraceful.
Yes, they were. Which you'd know if you bothered to read the depositions and testimonies of those who knew them. Even Patrick Lumumba testified they were friends as did the boys who lived downstairs and their Italian roommates.
@@mytrip6991 No they weren’t.
@@Kimberly-ul5ky And your evidence is what exactly?
This is mine:
Lumumba was the origin of the "Amanda was jealous" lie two weeks after his release in his Daily Mail interview. But under oath in court on April 3, 2009, he said nothing of the sort:
"QUESTION - And how were Amanda’s relations with Meredith?
ANSWER - AND...
QUESTION - Do you know?
ANSWER - No, no.
QUESTION - You don’t know.
ANSWER - I don’t know, I knew they were friends, friends and
that's all."
And
"QUESTION - And so, this, this friendship between Amanda and
Meredith, you were able to determine this because they were
at your place or another...
ANSWER - Meredith came twice, but they came with friends... If someone tells me: We are friends, I take note."
Giacomo Silenzi's court testimony Feb. 14, 2009:
Question: And what was the relationship like between Meredith and Amanda?
Answer: A normal relationship, that is, I also saw them going out together, a normal friendship.
Their texts on Halloween night ended with "XX" for "kisses".
Not one person testified to ever hearing Amanda make a negative remark about Meredith or complain about her.
Again, what evidence have you got to show otherwise?
@@mytrip6991 And? That’s not “evidence”. It’s hearsay. Opinions are not “evidence” of friendship. Neither is going out. Neither are XX’s in texts.
@@Kimberly-ul5ky LOL! Neither was hearsay nor opinions: they were SWORN COURT OATH TESTIMONIES. Do you know what perjury is?
Texts Amanda received from Meredith per court records of her phone log provided by the phone company :
31/10/2007 at 19:04:46: "Yes, I have to go to a friend's house for dinner. What's your program? X "
20/10/2007 at 22:57:16: "Hey sorry i had 2 go home n get changed do u still need saving XX"
20/10/2007 at 20:15:26: "Hey they're not showing it in tanna we're goint to shamrock XX"
19/10/2007 at 01:27:44: "hey u still out? X"
18/10/2007 at 23:38:24: "I'll meet u at the fountain in 5 X"
18/10/2007 at 22:27:00: "Why's he waiting? I'm in a diff bar. I'm gonna come down later n c u at wk tho XX"
18/10/2007 at 21:26:45: "Ur pretty boy or mary poppins? do u ned help? XX?
You obviously have never seen the court records even though they're available online. I have.
liar
I don’t think that she was guilty, just think she was young, immature, in a foreign country and handled the situation incorrectly.
She was probably guilty and young, immature & in a foreign country.
She should confess what she knows. She's hiding something.
She looks like her own grandma.
What a silly comment.
Similarity to Stephanie Lazarus
She didn’t call the police, it was another family called the postal police and Knox boyfriend who called the carabinieri. Another girl insisted Meredith’s locked door be broken down after there had been a break in of another room. Knox her boyfriend and Guedes prints were found in Meredith’s room.
Why continue to do interviews constantly raising her profile ? Sorry but the criminal judges thought the 3 were complicit, and I’d agree.
No physical evidence of involvement, no motive outside of lurid sex fantasies crafted by wanna-be Italian Sherlock Holmes.Your complaints should be about Geude's absurdly light sentence for a brutal r*** and murder.
Wrong. Only Rude Guede's DNA was found. You don't know what you are talking about. So keep out of it .
Amanda: "I, I 'I.
"My boyfriend of 5 days was spending the night." Speaks to her loose character.
It's attention seeking. She loves to talk about herself. Who is the real victim in this case? She was not exonorated Her case was dissmissed for lack of evidence.
Italy sucks, been there.
I was shocked to find out she's only 36. She could pass for 46. Guilt ages you.
She did nothing wrong! They caught the guy who did it…do your homework before opening your mouth
@@skyeblu1722 Stop 😭'ing. No need to simp for a killer.
believe she's telling truth and like interviewer but i believed her innocence when this happened
Your are wrong. She's sick. there was ample motive. The reason she threw her boss under the rug and he was arrested and put in jail for 2 weeks but he finally got out because he had a rock solid alibi by luck a Belgian man happened to see the newspaper article stating that he was arrested and came forward to state that know he was working all night at the bar. Amanda was pissed that she was going to lose hours at her work to meredith. In addition, they couldn't stand each other nor could Filomena. Amanda was a known slob and she never did her signed chores. The reality is, the most damning piece of direct evidence is the fact that Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith blood lit up under luminol in filomena's bedroom. That bedroom is particularly important because that is where the stage breaking occurred and the glass was on the floor from the window being broken. There is no way that Amanda's DNA could have mixed with Meredith blood being found under luminol unless she was actually present during the murder. Never mind the fact that her DNA was also on the handle of the knife that killed Meredith. And funny enough, early morning after the murder Amanda decided to go buy a big bottle of bleach which she attempted to conceal all the blood but thankfully the police had luminol. There are so many other details of circumstantial evidence as well such as her changing her story again and again, when she found out so that Solecito was no longer her alibi then she threw Patrick Lamumba under the bus. There is both strong direct and circumstantial evidence against her. She did it. Read the case details for yourself and stop listening to the pr campaign
@@primalcritters blah blah blah... you think repeating this over and over is making it any more intelligent? Learn the facts of the case for Gods sake!
I agree
She's aging fast
Amanda Knox is innocent
❤
30:11 very creepy!!! No empathy at all!
You seem to think that because she expresses how she's rebuilding her life that she's not being empathetic to the fact that Meredith doesn't have that chance. So what do you expect her to do? Curl in a ball, hide away and waste the rest of her life for something that RUDY GUEDE did? sheesh
@blueemoonlady Sigh. Here we go again. I wish I had a nickel for every time some accuses me of being Amanda, a family member or a friend. I'm none of those.
You are spouting the same misinformation I read from those who clearly do not know this case.
1) "explain why she lied so much and changed her story"
EXACTLY what lies did she tell? Be specific.
The only time her story changed was the one the police wrote up and she signed during the Nov. 5/6 interrogation. Her story was consistent before that interrogation and she told the same story after that interrogation. Within hours of that interrogation, during which they kept telling her she had 'traumatic amnesia', she told the police in writing (Memoriale 1) that they could not rely on what she'd said during the interrogation as being true because she wasn't sure if it had even happened. She said she had been so exhausted, scared, and confused by what they were telling her had happened, for which they had "hard evidence", and what she remembered. The next day, she wrote another "memoriale" to them in which she said, "This is what happened [that she'd been at Raffaele's apartment all evening and night] and I could swear by it. I’m sorry I didn’t remember before and I’m sorry I said I could have been at the house when it happened. I said these things because I was confused and scared. I didn’t lie when I said I thought the killer was Patrick. I was very stressed at the time and I really did think he was the murderer. But now I remember that I can’t know who the murderer was because I didn’t return back to the house."
2) "her blood was found mixed with kercher's in multiple places"
This reveals how little you know about the facts of the case. In fact, as proven IN COURT by testimony in 2009, Knox's BLOOD was NOT found mixed with Kercher's blood ANYWHERE IN THE COTTAGE. The forensic tests conducted by Patrizia Stefanoni proved that the ONLY place Knox's DNA, NOT BLOOD, was found mixed with Kercher's blood was in 3 places in the bathroom. As they shared that bathroom, Knox's DNA could have been from pre-deposited saliva, buccal cells (mouth), or skin cells that Kercher's blood was deposited ON TOP of or NEXT to. When the swab was taken, it would have picked up not only Kercher's blood, but also that innocent DNA left previously by Knox from simply using her own bathroom. I suggest you read the court testimony instead of repeating provably false claims and maybe learn how mixed DNA works.
@blueemoonlady Why are you so invested in her guilt? All the physical evidence pointed to the actual killer. The misconduct of the prosecutor is the real story, seeing as it ruined the reputations of two innocent people, after throwing them both in prison for years, and added to the pain of Meredith's family, by making them believe two innocent people had gotten away with murder. The tabloids beat the drums of hysteria without regard for the truth, in the face of indisputable evidence which clearly pointed to the actual killer, and which eventually led to Knox and her boyfriend being acquitted. Besides the rapist/killer, who fled the country the day after Meredith's murder, the other bad guy connnected with this case is the twisted prosecutor, who made up an elaborate, ridiculous, story against two innocent people, and basically got away with it until higher courts in Italy finally said: "Enough!"
She only knew the girl for a few weeks yea they became friends but I wouldn’t be balling my eyes out over someone I only befriended after 2 wks of knowing them yall just want to see her as guilty because the media painted a picture for you… use your own brain for once
@@jarricah7920 They knew each other 6 weeks but you're absolutely correct about the rest. The ironic thing is that, if Knox did ball her eyes out, these same people would be claiming they were crocodile tears. For some people, Knox is damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.
This drama has taken a toll on her. She was absolutely stunning. She has aged and I hold she can get relief.😢
You reap what you sow. Meredith s family gets no relief either.
I`ll help the police, I`ll acuse an innocent man............"Whatever is covered will be uncovered and whatever is hidden will be made known" Jesus`s words.
guede was wearing shoes and his shoeprints,outside Kercher's room,show him walking straight to the exit.
However,there is one barefoot bloody footprint in the bathroom on the mat...
Someone was barefoot with blood on the sole of their foot (feet?). The probable other bloody barefoot prints seem to have been wiped away.
WHO was there besides guede?
So you don't think that someone rinsing off the bottom of their bloody trouser leg would remove their shoe first and then put their dry shoe back on? They'd just stick their foot with a shoe in the water? Guede even wrote in his prison diary, " I had wet trousers and tried to cover it with the sweatshirt." Guede also admitted he was in the bathroom twice.
NO bloody FOOTprints were found anywhere in the cottage with the exception of ONE on the bath mat so obviously no one was walking around with bloody feet.
When people clean up blood visible to the naked eye, luminol will still reveal the swirls marks left behind because minute traces of blood still remain. No such marks were found anywhere in the cottage.
Logic and rational thinking tell us that Knox and Sollecito would NOT have deliberately pointed out the footprint on the bathmat to the police if it belonged to Sollecito. They had a minimum of 12 hours to clean the scene before Knox started the discovery process by calling Filomana and Sollecito called the police to report the break-in and blood in the bathroom.
@@mytrip6991guede "using his sweatshirt to cover his wet trousers" would mean that the top half of his trousers were wet.
Rinsing a bloody trousers leg in a bidet is not easy,and allows only the very bottom to be rinsed.
Even if he had rinsed it thus,wouldn't it be logic that the blood rinsed off would be very diluted? But the print on the bathmat is clear,as though it were hardly diluted at all.
Also rinsing does not logically lead to almost the entire sole to be wet,however stepping into (slightly diluted) blood easily does
Furthermore there are the measurements,which on almost all measure points point it to be sollecito's. Yes,I know the defence has found a theory to make it seem guede"s,cause they NEED it to be guede's,otherwise they have lost the entire case.
The measurements however do not lie,and point strongly to sollecito.
This leaves them deliberately pointing out the bathmat.
The bathmat was lying in amanda's room,they probably forgot about it,and when the found out they did,the best thing to do was tell about it,otherwise they were f***ed.
Ps,why was a bloody bathmat with footprint doing in amanda's room in the first place?
@@-draigh 1) "guede "using his sweatshirt to cover his wet trousers" would mean that the top half of his trousers were wet.Rinsing a bloody trousers leg in a bidet is not easy,and allows only the very bottom to be rinsed. "
False. The bidet had a faucet that would have allowed water to rinse from the knee down by simply bending his knee and turning the leg to the side under the running water.
The fact remains that he wrote in his diary (pg.2) "I had wet trousers and tried to cover it with the sweatshirt. There were a lot of people in the street, in Piazza Grimana."
Trying to cover it with his sweatshirt was an attempt to hide his wet trousers. No one said it was a successful attempt.
2. "Even if he had rinsed it thus,wouldn't it be logic that the blood rinsed off would be very diluted? But the print on the bathmat is clear,as though it were hardly diluted at all."
Have you even seen the photos or video of the footprint ON the bathmat? The footprint is not "clear". Its edges are blurry which shows it WAS made with diluted blood, not blood alone. This is a major reason the experts came to very different conclusions as to its measurements and who left it.
3. "Also rinsing does not logically lead to almost the entire sole to be wet,however stepping into (slightly diluted) blood easily does."
That has got to be one of the most nonsensical things you've said. His FOOT was rinsed in the bloody water in the bowl after he rinsed the trouser leg. How do you put your foot in the water without getting he sole wet? Upside down?
4. "The measurements however do not lie,and point strongly to sollecito."
Once again you reveal your very limited knowledge of this case. The measurements taken by the police experts (Boemia and Rinaldi) were very different from those taken by Prof. Vinci, the defense expert. B & R failed to take into consideration Sollecito's hammertoe and only used photos of the bathmat. Vinci used both the photos and the mat itself. Additionally, he used a forensic lighting tool called Crimescope that allows photos to be enhanced by using different colors revealing more detail and clarity.
5. "The bathmat was lying in amanda's room,they probably forgot about it,and when the found out they did,the best thing to do was tell about it,otherwise they were f***ed.
Ps,why was a bloody bathmat with footprint doing in amanda's room in the first place?"
OMG. You think the bathmat was found in Amanda's bedroom? The bathmat was found in the bathroom in front of the sink and shower as photographed and videotaped by the police! Honestly, try and do some research before commenting on something you obviously know very little about.
@@mytrip6991 you said: "simply bending the knee and turning the leg to the side"
This would mean that the water diluted blood would not have reached his footsole(iit falls vertically,not horizontally). And definitely not almost the entire coverage of the sole.
Also! rinsing means that the blood is almost turned to water,why else rinse? The footprint as clear as it is would not have appeared after a good rinsing
The whole "guede rinsing' story is very far fetched,BUT you need it,or else you lose the entire debate!
@@mytrip6991 also! If guede's pant leg was completely wet (from top to bottom),he would not have thought about only covering the top half...why bother!
People who think she's guilty show how easily people are manipulated by the media, and make judgements of people who they don't understand, and situations the don't understand. The whole story is heartbreaking, including what she went through.
which media?
The media manipulation of the American people is why she is free today.
So your opinion is all that matters ,how arrogant of you
@@OLDSKOOLRAVER1 Some opinions are based on knowledge of the topic and some are not. The two are not equivalent in value.
"People are entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts."
"“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
― Harlan Ellison
Most people who declare the pairs' guilt demonstrate an abysmal lack of knowledge of the evidence including repeated disproven nonsense like
1. they cleaned up the murder scene (usually with bleach bought by Knox),
2. Kercher's DNA was on the knife,
3. Knox's footprints were in Kercher's blood,
4. Knox lied and lied and lied....
5. An innocent person doesn't accuse someone else,
6. Knox's blood was mixed with Kercher's blood, "
7. Sollecito's bloody footprint was on the rug,
8. Knox was jealous of Kercher,
9. Knox and Sollecito bought drugs from Guede and used cocaine,
10. Knox accused Lumumba to cover for Guede.
And a host of others.
@@levdavid2412 Italian and British tabloids, for two.
Amanda looks broken , tired and old . You can see this whole thing has really taken its toll on her .
She still looks pretty good. Notice she now has freckles though.
Not surprising. She's almost 37 and the mother of two small children.
@@mytrip6991 37 is not old.
@@Capcoor True. But having two small ones to chase around is enough to age anyone! LOL.
Of course it has. She did it and has to live with it. It is of course even though she is a complete psychopath.
The inability of Italian justice is the only reason why this woman is free. She was not a victim of Italian justice: she was saved thanks to it. And I say this as an Italian.
If even most of what the prosecution claimed were true, and what so many people seem to believe is true, then Knox and Sollecito would have had their convictions upheld. Instead, both convictions were annulled.
there was ample motive. The reason she threw her boss under the rug and he was arrested and put in jail for 2 weeks but he finally got out because he had a rock solid alibi by luck a Belgian man happened to see the newspaper article stating that he was arrested and came forward to state that know he was working all night at the bar. Amanda was pissed that she was going to lose hours at her work to meredith. In addition, they couldn't stand each other nor could Filomena. Amanda was a known slob and she never did her signed chores. The reality is, the most damning piece of direct evidence is the fact that Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith blood lit up under luminol in filomena's bedroom. That bedroom is particularly important because that is where the stage breaking occurred and the glass was on the floor from the window being broken. There is no way that Amanda's DNA could have mixed with Meredith blood being found under luminol unless she was actually present during the murder. Never mind the fact that her DNA was also on the handle of the knife that killed Meredith. And funny enough, early morning after the murder Amanda decided to go buy a big bottle of bleach which she attempted to conceal all the blood but thankfully the police had luminol. There are so many other details of circumstantial evidence as well such as her changing her story again and again, when she found out so that Solecito was no longer her alibi then she threw Patrick Lamumba under the bus. There is both strong direct and circumstantial evidence against her. She did it. Read the case details for yourself and stop listening to the pr campaign
And you are foolish to believe that deals don't happen even when somebody is guilty? Happens all the time. Look at the Memphis three. Look into the details of that case. Really look into it don't just watch the movie or listen to Hollywood. They were never exonerated but they were let out of jail on an Alford plea. Roberta glass is a very good source she has several videos on both the Memphis Three and on Amanda knox. The one for the Memphis Three listen to the one with that author that wrote the book on them. He has very comprehensive details of the case. And as for Roberta glass covering Amanda knox, she has several videos on it. You need to look at Filomena's bedroom
@@primalcritters Are you really going to continue to prove how little you know of this case. Meredith was not going to work at Le Chic, and Amanda was very happy with the Tues/Thurs rotation her and Lumumba agreed to. All of the girls in the cottage liked one another, as was testified to by Laura and Filomena. Filomena said neither Amanda or Meredith were doing what they should, cleaning wise, so a rotation was drawn up and everyone was following it. No blood was found in Filomena's room. The kitchen knife was not the murder weapon. And funny enough, Amanda did not buy bleach that morning. Her account of the evening of the murder never changed, except during the interrogation of 5/6 Nov, the one where her rights were violated and the results of which are inadmissible.
Good advice to read the case details, but it's too bad you didn't actually do this or you wouldn't be getting so much wrong. It was also good advice to stop listening to the PR, but unfortunately you're not taking your own advice as you admit you think Roberta Glass is a good source of information when in fact she is a complete hack.
@@TheTruthCalls You are correct on every single point and I have repeatedly quoted and cited testimony from the court records proving those points. Yet, people like primalcritters continue to repeat falsehoods out of ignorance.
Sadly, what I've found is that people rarely have the ability and intellectual honesty to admit they are wrong even when presented with evidence from the court records that they are, in fact, wrong.
@@mytrip6991 So true, though I'm thinking primalcritters just likes to read his/her ramblings. I mean, my God, the same crap how many times? Sometimes I wish copy/paste didn't exist.
Knox is so guilty. Most people know she is guilty. I hope the Italian slander trial will bring some form of justice, as she is still evading the truth and justice.
"Most people know she is guilty." Really? And you know this how? Exactly what evidence convinces you that "Knox is so guilty"? Is it her DNA and fingerprints found in Kercher's bedroom? Her bloody foot-or shoeprints? The credible witnesses placing her outside the cottage that night? The CCTV footage? Buying bleach? Her jealousy of Kercher? Her need for money? None of which existed.
As for the new defamation trial, the ECHR ruled her conviction for defamation "unfair" due to violations of her rights. They fined Italy about $20,000 which has been paid to Knox. The SC of Italy also annulled that conviction and nothing Knox signed during the interrogation could be used as evidence against her due to those violations.
There’s no reason for her to lie, she was a CHILD still, how would you feel if this was your young college kid? This is the age of innocence where we are growing as a person, LEARNING, AND imagine doing this in a foreign country.
what child? she did it, cannot even mention victims name
Oh, she loves and adores herself so much. Amanda, you still can reach to Patrick Lumumba and say "sorry". You will be even more awesome.
Was Patrick the Black Italian guy?
She already apologized to him in court on Dec. 11, 2010.
@@AntiMasonic93 Patrick Lumumba was her boss at the bar she worked at. Rudy Guede is the black guy who killed Kercher and spent 13 years in prison for it. He is also awaiting trial under charges of raping and beating up his former girlfriend after he got out of prison.
@@mytrip6991 Amanda the millionaire must pay him 20k, not say "sorry" in court on lawyer demand
“Uncomfortability”? … What’s uncomfortable is knowing that in the wake of Meredith’s murder, Knox and her boyfriend went on a shopping spree with Meredith’s credit card. More discomfort: Meredith’s DNA On a knife in Raff’s kitchen and his DNA on her bra clasp when ostensibly he didn’t know her…?
1) Where did you get the "shopping spree on Meredith's credit card" nonsense from? Her credit cards were never used and never found. And it was Guede's DNA in Meredith's blood found on her purse.
2) "Meredith’s DNA On a knife in Raff’s kitchen"
Do try and keep up. Conti and Vecchiotti Report regarding the alleged Kercher DNA on the knife blade (sample B):
"The hypotheses formulated by the Technical Consultant [Patrizia Stefanoni] about the nature of the material analyzed [sample 36 B[ are wholly arbitrary in that they are not supported by any scientifically objective confirmation."
"- regarding the nature of the material collected, there is no scientifically
conclusive evidence to support the possible blood nature of sample B (knife blade) in that both the generic blood test and the human species test were negative.
The existence of presumed exfoliated cells on the samples taken from the knife
handle is equally lacking in scientific basis.
Therefore we repeat that the theories formulated by the Technical Consultant
about the nature of the material removed from Exhibit 36 are wholly arbitrary in that they are not supported by any objective confirmation."
IOW: Kercher's DNA was not on the knife.
3) and his DNA on her bra clasp when ostensibly he didn’t know her…?
He had met her a few times at the cottage when he was there with Amanda. Amanda and he had been at the cottage with her the afternoon of the murder when she left to go to her friend's place for a movie and dinner.
From Conti and Vecchiotti's Report:
Relative to Item 165B (bra clasps), we find that the technical analysis is not
reliable for the following reasons:
1. There does not exist evidence which scientifically confirms the presence of
supposed flaking cells on the item;
2. There was an erroneous interpretation of the electrophoretic profile of the
autosomic STRs;
3. There was an erroneous interpretation of the electrophoretic profile
relative to the Y chromosome;
4. The international protocols for inspection, collection, and sampling of the
item were not followed;
5. It cannot be ruled out that the results obtained derive from environmental
contamination and/or contamination in some phase of the collection and/or
handling of the item.
In other words, it was Sollecito's DNA on the bra hook, but it was most likely deposited by contamination and not directly by him.
She isn't guilty fgs
They didn’t go on a shopping spree with MERIDITH’s credit card. Either you are a troll spreading lies or just HIGHLY MISINFORMED.
Amanda used her own money to buy ONE pair of underwear because she home was a crime scene and all she had was what she was wearing. She bought a pair of cotton undies with a cartoon animal on them. Look up the actual court documents instead of repeating rumors and adding falsehoods to them.
@@Lysa622003 I refer you to the documentary The Murder of Meredith Kercher on FreeVee, which asserts that the pair, while under surveillance by LE prior to their arrest did in fact use Meredith’s credit card at a boutique where a number of items of clothing where purchased.
@@marywenzel3199 I suggest you watch it again because it never says that at all. It never says anything about a shopping spree or the credit cards.
The prosecution charged them with stealing two credit cards and Meredith's rent money, but they never claimed the cards were ever used, much less by AK and RS, because they were never found. They were acquitted by the first court in 2009 of stealing the credit cards and the rent money.
You're claim is 100% false.
She continues to talk about the case because she actually feels guilt and is haunted by the murder. She also loves to hear herself talk. After all of these years she has never apologized to the Kersher family in person. Why?
Your first two sentences are nothing but armchair psychology.
She had nothing whatsoever to do with Meredith KerCher's death so she has nothing to apologize for.
@@mytrip6991 i never believed that...she was more involved then she claims to be, i would not be surprised if she knew in advance it was going to happen.
@@mytrip6991wtf is the matter with you are you employed full time to kill any argument that anyone writes against her? get a life, seriously 😅
@@glutamin111 Based on what exactly? You're making claims not based on any evidence.
Your last comment is particularly unsupported by any evidence.
Never once did AK mention Meredith's suffering, or that of her family, it is all about AK. Does she seriously think one is supposed to feel sympathy for her? Meredith lost her life in a brutal and horrific manner, and her family was totally heart-broken. Yet they remained gracious throughout the trial, no small feat considering the grief and pain they were in. Now, both Meredith's parents are dead, and never lived to see justice. Surely, Meredith's siblings deserve closure to enable them to go on with their lives.
This is hard to talk about this. Amanda we got you out. I graduated from Seattle Prep. I want you to know we cared. We were freaking out.
Stop giving her attention.
Amen
Hmmm...and were you forced to seek out and watch this video and then comment on it?
@@mytrip6991 What difference does that make?
@@jodylancaster8706 You say to "stop giving her attention, then you do exactly that.
@@mytrip6991 Blame the media. My commenting to them is not giving attention. Only in your world.
She may not have committed the murder, but she was involved somehow. Way too much circumstantial evidence against her. Sure, it may be circumstantial, but there is so much of it against her - the chances of all that circumstantial evidence to be explained otherwise is very slim. On balance of probability, she was involved in some way. Eventually, with the passage of time, the full story will be revealed, one way or the other.
For those who think Knox "threw her boss under the bus" willingly and deliberately and claim innocent people don't do that, read on:
"A pioneer of the study of false confessions, Sal Kassin, says Knox’s signed statements follow a playbook of false confessions.
'It is empirical fact that most false confessions contain accurate details not yet known to the public and ‘false-fed facts’ that are consistent with the police theory of the crime, but that later prove to be untrue,'Kassin, a psychologist at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, wrote about the case in his book “Duped,” which examines the phenomenon of false confessions.
Kassin said police 'contaminated' Knox’s confession, which aligned with police theory at the time.
'To hold her accountable for a statement in which she also implicated herself is absurd,’ he wrote."
(AP, Amanda Knox will defend herself in an Italian court against a 16-year-old slander charge, June 3, 2024)
Hell is waiting for Amanda, Meredith blood is crying! She killed innocent beautiful student!
What evidence makes you so sure she killed Meredith Kercher? Like I said above, unless you can give that evidence and defend it with facts from the court records, you're just blowing putrid hot air.
I didn't think you would answer.
I agree!
@@ruvolubleSince MVN9 can't, or won't, present any evidence that Knox is guilty of murder, perhaps you can?
You can read all the documentation. You will find it in internet, you can use chat GPT to translate. Before reading it, only basing my opinion on press materias, I also thought she did it. After going through documentation I don't think so anymore.
How do you know she’s lying? Lips are moving. Everything is a story. She lives outside of her mind/body. Weird.
So, tell me: what exactly do you think she's lying about. Specific examples.
Yeah, I didn't think so.
I think A and R got so high and couldn’t remember what happened. Amanda’s other interview with Diane sawyer is not convincing at all.
This woman should be in jail, the only reason she got off was the girl she murdered was black
Meredith wasn't black. She was half Caucasian and half Pakistani and beautiful. Claiming racism in this case is an easy and lazy excuse to use and not founded on any evidence.
@@mytrip6991 in the eyes of everyone else she is black.
@@chrisx1197 So you speak for everyone else? I'd bet you know very little about this case if you have to resort to the race card. What evidence supports guilt?
@@chrisx1197 I didn't think you answer.
@@chrisx1197 So now we get to 'pretend' someone is black so we can 'pretend' an innocent person wasn't convicted because a non-black 'pretend black' person was the victim? Just when I thought I had heard the last of idiotic racial claims in this case, you come along and introduce a whole new level of ignorance.
And I noticed @mytrip6991 asked you what evidence you thought supported guilt and like so many others, the cat went and got your tongue. Incredible how you people can come onto a public discussion board and accuse someone of being a murderer and you can't even cite any evidence that led you to conclude that. How disgraceful!
You did for a totally innocent man, you are STILL guilty.
On what evidence is she guilty? If you can't provide that evidence here, then your opinion she's 'STILL guilty' is irrelevant.
@@mytrip6991 Rudy ha pure lavato il pavimento prima di uscire e Meredith ha chiuso a chiave la porta della sua camera prima di stendersi a terra e morire. La tua teoria è brillante, davvero.
@@Clodovicus I never said either of those happened. In fact, no one washed the floor which is why the prosecution never presented any evidence of it. As for your silly quip about Meredith, it's just plain stupid. Try and stick to the evidence and not to things you've invented in your head.
@@Faust1169 Hi, are you referring to my short comment in Italian or the long one in pseudo-English?
@@mytrip6991 people report murders in the rooms they are eating or staying in immediately when innocent.
This interview proves more than anything just how guilty this girl is.
How?
I didn't think you'd answer.
You say the first dumb thing that pops in your little brain all the time or nah… What proof did you gain from this interview pea brain?
No it doesn't
How so?
Pale face Amanda is around my age. Nice!
She looks so much older. It's kind of off putting...
Well, she IS older. It's been 17 years since Meredith was murdered by Rudy Guede. I beg you look older than you did in 2007, too. But I find you comment that "It's kind of off putting" very odd.
Definitely. She looks older than my mother who is 59.
She did it,she is phathological liar .
Based on what evidence?
Yes, she did.
@@Persefone94 Based on what evidence? Unless you and @agaaga8616 can answer that question, your opinions are irrelevant due to having no evidentiary support.
YES YES YEASSS
The word is pathological, and no she isn't.
She tries to sound so well balanced and reasonable, but it all sounds distant...
Why? What exactly makes it sound 'distant'?
No, it doesn't.
Sociopath
@@kybardi11.11 What evidence can you present that Knox is a 'psychopath' other than your opinion she's guilty?
Throwing that word around is commonly done by those who have very little knowledge of the case. It's a lazy "go to" for the uninformed.
She is a liar
she is the victim.....omg
Well, respectfully, please consider her lies.
She was a SERIAL LIAR..
Here we have not heard some facts. 1) Amenda and her 7 days old boyfriend were drug addicts.
2) She belonged to a broken family and behaved extremely strange at the police station by doing yoga when her friend was murdered and she was being interrogated.
3) She had found her Italian boyfriend within weeks after reaching Italy and was suspected to be a sex addict and was suspected to have had sex with multiple guys.
4) She changed her sentences and kept giving different versions of what happened making everyone wonder whats the truth..
5) The thief still says that he is innocent and blames Amanda ..
6) Amanda DID NOT behave empathetically or like a normal person who would grieve over a death of a roommate.
She did have all the ingredients that would make her a suspect brcause of het Psychopathic personality. ...
TO TOP IT ALL , SHE LIED... She lied by putting the blame on her empliyer, bar owner who was ,100% innocent.. She was a liar for sure if not a murderer as she tried to defame and put the blame on her 100% innocent employer.
What a horrible thing to do.
I feel sorry for what happened and all the suffering but it happened becaUSE OF HER HABIT OF LYING ...
😢
"Well, respectfully, please consider her lies.
She was a SERIAL LIAR.. "
"Here we have not heard some facts."
Let's consider what you claim are lies or facts:
"1) Amenda and her 7 days old boyfriend were drug addicts."
False. Hair tests taken of them both on the day of their arrest showed no traces of narcotics (police records). Unlike blood and urine, hair never loses its trace of narcotics.
"2) She belonged to a broken family"
So? Meredith Kercher's parents were also divorced. Both Knox's parents were involved in her life.
" and behaved extremely strange at the police station by doing yoga when her friend was murdered and she was being interrogated."
False. She was not doing yoga while being interrogated. She did some stretches while waiting for her boyfriend who was being questioned.
"3) She had found her Italian boyfriend within weeks after reaching Italy and was suspected to be a sex addict and was suspected to have had sex with multiple guys. "
LOL! Meredith also "found her Italian boyfriend, Giacomo Silenzi" within weeks of reaching Italy and was sleeping with him.
Knox had intercourse with exactly 3 men in Italy: Ellis (1X), Daniel (1X) and then Raffaele. She was not suspected of being a sex addict; you seem to be the one with a sex hang up.
"4) She changed her sentences and kept giving different versions of what happened making everyone wonder whats the truth.."
False. Her story before and after the interrogation of Nov. 5/6 where she was illegally coerced into making statements with a lawyer were consistent.
"5) The thief still says that he is innocent and blames Amanda .. "
LOL! The 'thief'? He's a convicted murderer and has just been arrested AGAIN for beating up and raping his partner!
"6) Amanda DID NOT behave empathetically or like a normal person who would grieve over a death of a roommate.
She did have all the ingredients that would make her a suspect brcause of het Psychopathic personality. ... "
REALLY? And you make this claim based on what? Your intimate knowledge of how she felt, when she cried, etc? How does one "properly" grieve over a roommate of six weeks? Wear sack cloth? Take to her bed? Thanks for your diagnosis of her psychopathy, Doctor. Exactly where did you get your degree?
"TO TOP IT ALL , SHE LIED... She lied by putting the blame on her empliyer, bar owner who was ,100% innocent.. She was a liar for sure if not a murderer as she tried to defame and put the blame on her 100% innocent employer."
Ah, yes... that go to "fact" by people who obviously get their information not from court records and experts like Saul Kassin on coerced false confessions but from whatever they read on the internet.
@@aurora.andromeda5687 Such ignorance. You know who made up the lie that Meredith invited Guede over that night? RUDY GUEDE. The only people who believe him are people who need to believe he was only convicted because he's black and not because his story was proved to be an outright LIE by the EVIDENCE.
@@aurora.andromeda5687 Get help: 988
All of this is circumstantial. What is her motive to have some dude rape some woman? She just gets her rocks off knowing women get raped and murdered? Seriously what’s her motive.
There’s no motive and no evidence.
@@justinabajian1087 Exactly. No court was able to establish a motive supported by evidence which is why they changed the alleged motive more often than people change their underwear. Nencini even rejected the prosecution's motive and injected their own unsupported motive.