Thank You

Italiano

To everyone who has expressed concern and support for my family and me:

Thank you. Despite this terribly difficult and bewildering time, I’m so comforted by your words of support, by your outcry for justice and search for the truth, by your belief in me.

Please know that, after going through this persecution for years, I’ve developed a store of inner fortitude. It’s a feeling of steadiness despite the storm, kind of like earning your sea-legs. I hold onto that steadiness, but that doesn’t mean I know what to do. I’m still in shock. I don’t know what the future has in store for me, what I will and will not be able to do. It’s hard to even know what I’m up against, what could be motivating this verdict that’s so clearly wrong and unfounded. Because of this, it’s hard to know what I, or anyone, can do. I hope that people who know the case and who know the justice system will step up and testify as to how this is happening and what we can do about it, not just for my sake, but for the sake of other wrongfully convicted, and for our society. I hope journalists will give them the opportunity to voice themselves.

In the meantime, I’m grateful to everyone for the love, compassion, understanding, friendship, support, generosity, and empathy you’ve shown me. It makes a world of difference.

Thank you.

a

This entry was posted in Meredith Kercher Murder, Personal and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

661 Responses to Thank You

  1. Patrick says:

    Happy belated Birthday and congratulations on your graduation!

    Here’s one of my favorite poems:

    If
    by Rudyard Kipling

    If you can keep your head when all about you
    Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
    If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
    But make allowance for their doubting too;
    If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
    Or, being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
    Or, being hated, don’t give way to hating,
    And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise;

    If you can dream – and not make dreams your master;
    If you can think – and not make thoughts your aim;
    If you can meet with triumph and disaster
    And treat those two imposters just the same;
    If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
    Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
    Or watch the things you gave your life to broken,
    And stoop and build ‘em up with wornout tools;

    If you can make one heap of all your winnings
    And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
    And lose, and start again at your beginnings
    And never breath a word about your loss;
    If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
    To serve your turn long after they are gone,
    And so hold on when there is nothing in you
    Except the Will which says to them: “Hold on”;

    If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
    Or walk with kings – nor lose the common touch;
    If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
    If all men count with you, but none too much;
    If you can fill the unforgiving minute
    With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run –
    Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
    And – which is more – you’ll be a Man my son!

  2. viagra says:

    Does codeine and other narcotics show up the same on a drug test?

  3. Gene Sanchez says:

    Dear Amanda,
    I am one of many strangers that quietly admire you in the distance.
    I spent six years at UW, and I have a daughter born in Seattle that is your age :)
    I have followed the facts of your case since the beginning in bewilderment, and I am absolutely confident of your innocence.
    I know the Italian and American cultures, and I see the horrible disconnect in your case.
    I wish you the best, and I hope that these inexplicably evil people that continue to try to harm you are eventually brought to justice.
    I hope it never comes to that, but if it does, I will help you fight any attempt to take you back to that nightmare.
    You have our love,
    Gene

    • Ambrosio says:

      Amanda,

      I’ve followed your case since way back it started years ago.
      I simply believe in your innocence even if thousands don’t.
      Wishing you the best.

  4. Albert Calleros says:

    Amanda:
    Todavia estoy enteramente convencido de tu inocencia. Que Dios te bendiga. Mejores deseos en tu lucha para la exoneracion completa.
    (I am still entirely convinced of your innocence. May God bless you. Best wishes in your fight for complete exoneration.)

  5. ALBERT CALLEROS says:

    I would truly like to purchase the Spanish language edition of ‘Waiting to Be Heard.’ There is absolutely no doubt that Amanda Knox will eventually be exonerated of this legal imbroglio.

    • Albert Calleros says:

      Estoy enteramente convencido de tu inocencia, Amanda. Que Dios te bendiga. Mejores deseos.
      (I am entirely convinced of your innocence, Amanda). May God Bless You. Best Wishes)

      • ALBERT CALLEROS says:

        Estoy enteramente convencido de tu inocencia, Amanda. Que Dios te bendiga, Amanda. Mejores deseos en tu lucha para la exoneracion completa, Amanda.
        (I am entirely convinced of your innocence, Amanada. May God bless you, Amanda. Best wishes in your fight for complete exoneration, Amanda.)

  6. Richard says:

    Amanda,

    I know it must be tough for you living with the uncertainty on a day to day basis. We commentors can just switch channels and move on to something else in our life but I know it is the first thing you think of in the morning and the last thing at night. Logic and reason says this whole thing has gotten out of hand and will come crashing down anytime. I can’t imagine what Judge Nencini is going to write in his explanation for his latest verdict. He has to know that whatever he says is going to be scrutinized in detail a dozen times by millions of people, some of which will experts and actually know what they are talking about. He has to have some pride in himself that he does not want to look like a fool to every other law enforcement professional. The Court of Cassation seems like it virtually ordered a guilty verdict and it is hard to figure why. They can’t merely want to keep Mignini from looking like a fool. I know peers tend to protect each other but he has gone way to far to expect anyone to go down with him. Why would an Italian supreme court care about putting a clueless young girl and her boyfriend in jail for a type of murder that happens all to often in any country you could name. I can’t imagine that judges like those in Italy with their background in law enforcement don’t know that you are innocent and the forensics are out and out manufactured and the scenario is nonsensical, except the one where Guede is the sole killer for which he was originally convicted. There must be some kind of political situation in Italy that would lead to this absured situation. At least you don’t have to worrry about going back to prison in Italy although being labeled as a convicted killer when you are not is a sort of prison in itself in your mind. There are many steps before this case is finished and I can’t imagine it not falling apart and I can’t imagine Italy ever asking for your extradition. That would entail the Americans retrying the case under American rules and that is the last thing any Italian judge wants. Americans are loath to send an innocent citizen to prison just as they are loath to let a guilty person go free. When Americans are aware, and your family has made them aware, they will not let you be imprisoned as an innocent person. Alan Derchowitz has commented that the treaty would require extradition and does not give the US a legal right to challenge the Italian courts. Not having a legal right has not stopped the American government before and it will not here. Besides Derchowitz lost all credibility when he spent a year telling us OJ Simpson was innocent. If it gets that far, which it won’t, your innocence will be so obvious even the Italian judges will be forced to admit they agree. So just hang in there until sanity returns to the world and it will.

  7. Hi Amanda,
    Just wanted to take a moment to express my sadness that the injustice continues on. I remember hearing of your release and return to the US and felt incredibly relieved and happy for you; I was stunned to learn of these irrational developments. I’ve enjoyed reading your posts, it can only be a positive thing for your own words to be heard (and very well-written words, at that). There’s not much I can offer you other than my hope and support, but know that you have these things and that you are not alone – so very many people are rooting for this nightmare to finally end for you. Please don’t hesitate to reach out if there is anything you need – a petition signed (does one exist?) or just a friendly email chat to take your mind off of things. In any case, keep your head up, girl…nothing lasts forever.
    xo,
    Kristy

  8. Alicia says:

    Dear Amanda,

    You are innocent. I fully believe that and I am proud of you for fighting till the end.

    Warmest wishes from California,
    Alicia

  9. Fred Aborn says:

    A list of agreed upon or undeniable facts would be useful.

    I was a jurist on a trial where we were given a book of agreed upon facts before the trial began. The trial was merely to call the witnesses to verify those facts.

    The jurists were all professionals with bachelor degrees, masters degrees, and Phd’s. The case was a development corporation versus a town. We found the town guilty of breech of contract and concluded that their excuse for the breech of contract was not sufficient. We found that they owed the Plaintiff 2 million. The judge added interest to that amount.

    We deliberated over pizza. The whole trial took three days.

    The point: A book of agreed upon facts really makes the case zip along.

  10. Pat says:

    Hello,

    I hope you are doing well, as possible, and that everything turns out ok.

    I have followed your case since ’07, when I read
    about it in a Spanish newspaper while I was sojourning there.

    My reaction to the combination of the photos and words was that it was preposterous-as if some writer had just made up the story;
    Right away, I didn’t believe it. In any case, It was one of those free newspapers
    you get in Spanish cafes, sort of tabloid, so I couldn’t take it seriously.

    When they actually convicted you the first time, it made me queasy and then angry . This second conviction makes me almost sick.

    Travelled in Europe from age 18, and then I went to Europe at 25 with guitar in hand and naive dreams
    and worked there as a teacher for over 10 years in 5 different countries. I know the strange people
    that hang around the periphery of the expat teacher-student-school society: bars,
    shared living spaces,etc., and the ensuing craziness, and those locals in the bar scene and party scene that prey on foreigners.

    I didn’t realize that, as an American, I was immediately culturally “profiled” by non-Americans there. No matter what you do, there will be a bias, and a stereotype of you.

    I trusted everyone and was a rather “Innocent Abroad” ; I idealized and romanticized the experience of being there in Europe. I had read James Michener’s book The Drifters in university and had geared my life around going to Europe.

    Your case hit me hard in the gut, as I could particularly identify with the plight of a young American, a new arrival in Europe. You don’t fully know what is going on, especially if you ease any culture shock in booze and/or pot. ( I also have a theory that people from the west coast of the USA have a harder time adjusting to living in Europe.)

    I watched the film “Midnight Express” several times and then landed my
    first job in Istanbul(not by choice)!! Wanderlust blinds a person, but my overall my experience in Turkey
    was OK.

    You are a victim of the injust political and cultural
    agenda of the prosecution. You were also taken advantage of because you
    were too “nice” and too trusting- but , I would have reacted in exactly the same
    way in your situation- you got manipulated psychologically and you didn’t realize how evil people can be. Good people are targets. I can imagine myself being torn apart by the media, etc.

    Italy is a beautiful country- I have travelled there; but I do believe that
    at least a one -year American tourist and business boycott of that country
    would have effect. I had planned on returning there someday, but I probably will not, for a very long time, if ever, in protest and fear.

    I bought your book and I admire your incredible courage and strength getting through this terrible
    ordeal!! If it had happened to me, I would have had a heart attack and gone crazy!

    My prayers for you ,

    Patrick

  11. MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

    Lamentations 3:58 You, Lord, took up my case;
 you redeemed my life.

    Frankly, Amanda and Raffaele, one simple, but tough lesson your well known case has shown me and perhaps millions in the world, is that trying to prove one’s innocence or one’s case before partial judge(s) in partial court(s) -much the same as a rigged or biased jury- isn’t going to get you far at all or give you the fair trial you both deserve, despite the enormous time, effort and defense resources you both have put in to clear your names. Although you both were forced to mature quickly and learn a lot the hard way, it has often felt to me, at various timess, like a waste of precious time and understandably so, a huge disappointment. Maybe at times, for both of you, too.

    The hard reality is, even though both of you have often expressed high hopes that your innocence would become obvious to the Italian officials, that neither of you committed any crime, it would never really matter to the unreasonable judge(s) or court(s)who obviously consistently behaved, no matter what was presented into evidence, as though they already made up their mind(s). Key facts or lack of evidence, that you and your skilled defense team meticulously presented before these partial judge(s) in this Italian court (which would clearly prove your innocence in a fair trial) was simply irrelevant to them. Your desperate, emotional pleas, in letters or face-to-face talks to these partial Judge(s) would also become irrelevant.

    Luckily, very luckily, THANK GOD, you finally got your first very significant break when a more reasonable or more non-partial Judge, Hellman, miraculously requested a non-partial, independent investigation of key DNA evidence…and finally after carefully admitting and reviewing these new official findings which highly supported your innocent pleas, it was firmly concluded and declared by this non-partial Judge (under severe political pressure) that both of you were not guilty of murder…and both of you were quickly released from prison and permitted to finally go home, free.

    But, that amazing non-guilty verdict was short lived, as it would eventually pan out just recently that even Appellate Judge Hellman’s prior official verdict of non guilty and his explanation for that verdict, would also become irrelevant by higher partial(s) judges and others, who had also seemingly, already made up their minds about both of you back in 2007. He even predicted or knew that would eventually happen.

    All of this controversial guilty or not guilty legal wrangling and the inherent, emotional roller-coaster component to it, going on meanwhile both of you are desperately eager to get vindicated, to stay out of prison now, to be free….only to come back again, each time, to that absurd realization or shocking conclusion that no matter what you say or do or even how you say it or do it, these powerful monsters of injustice are not going to give up on both of you. They just won’t be happy or feel satisfied until both of you are locked up for life, and removed from society forever!

    That’s quite a hateful adversary to have to face as your opponents and quite a tough predicament to repeatedly be in. No matter what the truth is, your non partial judge(s) have declared both of you, guilty! Guilty, guilty, guilty!!! Condemned for life, says your chief accusers.

    It would be easy to imagine now if we were back in the time of the Roman Empire, that both of you could have surely been thrown to the blood-thirsty lions in the old Roman Coliseum in front of a screaming, packed full house, without any trial, by these same accuser types.

    (As was even suggested in one book about your case) that if suddenly today a hidden camera from Meredith’s room was discovered and brought forth as new evidence, containing a raw video of the actual night of the murder in 2007 that clearly showed the horrendous murder act and revealed red-handed, the deranged murderers’ identity, and was entered into evidence as undeniable proof that Amanda and Raffaele were never in Meredith’s room on that awful night… Mignini (who already made up his mind long ago about Amanda, maybe before she was born) would most likely, in his warped logic, only conclude, that brilliant Foxy Knox, with her black satanic powers, planted that camera herself, and doctored the video….anything to get out of the murder…she’s a dangerous serial killer, maybe even connected to the mafia or some terrorist group. Life with no parole, I say!!!

    But fortunately, fortunately, all was not so vain! Although so far the partial judge(s) in Italy firmly rejected the defendant’s evidence, and declared both of you, guilty as charged…many others were keenly watching or listening to the evidence presented or noting the evidence withheld, in the trial, and based on what they saw and heard, many of them came away believing your innocence and eventually became key supporters…so not all is lost!

    Amazingly, considering the numerous obstacles you’ve overcome, and the dirty and unreasonable tactics of the opposition you’ve faced, you’ve both done quite a remarkable job of keeping your composure and head so far.

    But frankly, if I was you, Amanda (Waiting to be heard) or if I was Raffaele, (Honor bound having gone to Hell and Back with Amanda Knox ) and experienced all the trials you two have been through, and experienced all the enormous injustice and confusion and craziness that you two have been up against , due to absolutely no fault of your own, mind you, except for perhaps being in the wrong place at the wrong time or being young and naive, neither which is a crime; and after seeing your own case go world wide, and realizing how both your very own lives and precious freedoms were at stake here….frankly, I think I would have surrendered long ago and given my case up to God….perhaps, you already have, if so I’d like to hear about it…or perhaps you haven’t, why not, what’s stopping you, with so much on the line?

    Some who doubt have heard terrible bad things about God that make them suspicious of him?
    Others, viewing all the injustice in the world, some of which you both have witnessed first-hand , perhaps think God is somehow to blame for the mess?

    But, have they asked God for help? Have they asked God to take up their cases against these powerful monster’s of injustice?
    Perhaps some think that God is far from perfect, or perhaps doesn’t even care?
    Or worse, that God doesn’t even exist?

    But what if that’s just another big, fat lie by God’s chief adversary…what if God, our creator, not only exists but he desperately wants to help both of you. He wants to come into your life and protect you from your powerful adversaries, and bring you to a better place, and heal you, and love you , and renew you, and restore you, place His peace in your hearts, even give you back what your adversary took away, or give you something even better…

    Psalm 46:1
    God is our refuge and strength,
    an ever-present help in trouble

    Psalm 37:39-40
    The salvation of the righteous comes from the Lord;
    he is their stronghold in time of trouble.
    The Lord helps them and delivers them;
    he delivers them from the wicked and saves them,
    because they take refuge in him.

  12. Erika Bullova says:

    Amanda, sending you support from Slovakia, mid Europe, just 800km north from Italy. I read about your case just lately and having remembered it from the past dimly but never having any
    clear opinion about it, I decided to search more. After having studied several days all possible to be found, I became day after day more sure about your innocence. I finished with an absolute conviction. Their version of story lacks everything – the logic and the evidence. I am shocked
    and I never believed before I could face a mid-aged witch process in the 21st century, I was sure they ended in 18th..Be strong Amanda, the truth will finally be revealed to all, even to the inquisitor Mignini. I will spread your innocence to all I can. Hugs!

  13. RandyN says:

    Just for the record…Toto testified that you and RS were in the plaza from 9:27/9:28 PM until just around midnight! It was Massei who changed that to 11:30 which is quite remarkable in itself…except that in this case and in Italy it is apparently normal for judges to make up stuff as they go along…

  14. Susan says:

    Amanda, yes, you have what are called “sea legs.” You will be needing them for long time. We will be needing them for long time until you are declared free. The Lord is with you though all of this. The devil will always be interfering with justice but hang in there. You will be deemed innocent in no time. The Italians will always hang on to their memes and anything that is familiar to them. Their culture is used to seeing sex orgies. They think we do that, too. Our Lord is watching over you!

  15. Mongo from CA says:

    For the guilters to make so much about the false confession about the wrong black man; then, why are these guilters not concerned about the prosecution forces that destroyed 3 out of 4 computer hard drives.
    Why is this not given as more evidence of a prosecution team cover-up about the alibi of Amanda and Raffaele? Perhaps, the computers possibly showed that they were together watching a movie during the possible time of Meridith’s murder. Also, remember the prosecution/police forces lost or didn’t record the 50+ hour interviews with Amanda either.

    • Daphne says:

      Hi, Mongo:
      Yes, why no concern about the corruption of real evidence? As for the recordings, there never were any, which should render the case, along with other reasons, a total mistrial. It would devastate the Kerchers.

      • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

        Daphne,
        What do you mean a mistrial would devastate the Kerchers?
        They were devasted by their daughter’s death. All evidence points toward Rudy G. as the murderer.
        Locking Amanda and Raffaele in prison for a long time:
        (1) Is not going to bring Meredith back.
        (2) Is not going to bring them justice if that’s what their after.
        (3) Is not going to make the streets safer with these two removed.
        (4) Is not going to give them real closure.

        • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

          If the Kerchers, or Mignini and rest of the Italian prosecution team, or the verbal haters of Amanda and Raffaele, become devastated by a resounding verdict which proclaims their total innocence, and frees them to go on with their lives, and finally brings some real closure to this case, and even allows the Kercher family to properly mourn
          Meredith’s death so they can really go on as well…………I’m sorry, but they got a real problem…and frankly, its a little scary. Its almost like they’ve been brainwashed and are out for blood themselves.

          “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster… for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.”
          ― Friedrich Nietzsche

  16. Colleen says:

    Stay strong, Ms. Knox. One day, your innocence and Mr. Sollecito’s innocence will be established (again) and eventually, both of you will be able to put all this horrible nightmare behind you.

    Sending positive thoughts your way.

    • Colleen says:

      Stay strong, Ms. Knox. One day, your innocence and Mr. Sollecito’s innocence will be established (again) and eventually, both of you will be able to put this horrible nightmare behind you.

      Sending positive thoughts your way.

  17. MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

    This saying or words of wisdom, couldn’t ring more true in this particular case from my angle.
    “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster… for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.”― Friedrich Nietzsche

    Up against these numerous “monsters of every kind of injustice” with their flaming arrows full of hatred, deceit and all sorts of poisonous lies, that have from the start directly threatened Amanda’s precious well-being, attacked her God-given, special character, turned full speed after her own loving, devoted family, shot directly at her young, precious heart , threatening her with solitary confinement, and extremely harsh punishment for life in prison……….all for something she was being accused of, but didn’t do. The exact same can be said for Raffaele, all for something he didn’t do. Wow. I’m pain and grieved, just like many are, just following their plight.

    Whatever your beliefs are, this synopsis sure reeks of the work of the Devil himself. Just for one moment, think of the actual ones who are behind this fiasco or whatever you want to call it…how did they become so cold-hearted, so full of pride, so full of themselves, that they lost their sense of what justice is. Did they not become victims of a monster as well?
    In their own fight against their monster, did they themselves also become a monster? Its not that hard to imagine for anyone who has had to go up against the wiles of (d)evil. Even Mignini, in is his own legitimate fight against the crazy Monster of Florence, did he without even fully realizing it then, become like the monster he was fighting against. Think about it.

    But from all I’ve personally seen and heard and read from Amanda in her public fight
    vs these monsters, she clearly hasn’t become one, yet. In fact, she remains
    a great inspiration for all those who fight against this extreme type of injustice.
    She should be commended. My hope is she continues to stay on that track, though it will be a challenge for anyone, afterward we’re only human, there’s only so much we can take.

    (Only for those interested)
    In truth, there is one sure way to fight against evil. One, we can’t really fight it on our own. We certainly can’t fight against evil by going down to evil’s dirty level and fight lies with lies, hate with hate. Just like darkness can’t prevail against the sun’s powerful light, or fire can’t prevail against water, evil can’t prevail against good. Lies are often disproved by simple truth. The Devil himself can’t prevail against God, or the (s)word of God. Not a chance. But yea, the question remains then, what’s going on here, why is this evil happening to me. I think the answer to this is simple but deep.

    Read the story of Joseph in the Bible if you haven’t already, of when he was terribly falsely accused by his own 11 brothers, mind you and sold as a slave for a few silver coins to their enemies.
    He could have or should have become real bitter and revengeful. But here’s what Joseph said when his brothers finally came before him realizing their awful mistake, after many years had gone by. There was a great famine and they were starving, yet they were brought into
    the land where Joseph had risen to power, become the one powerful official in charge of distributing food from a great food supply he had wisely began stocking before the famine even began…

    Geneisis 50:20 “You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives. 21 So then, don’t be afraid. I will provide for you and your children.” And he reassured them and spoke kindly to them.

    • quixotic1 says:

      You have put into example what I have always termed as the human ritual of inheriting the aspects of one’s enemy. I fear that infection coming to these youthful souls. For it infected me and I did not shake it loose until my fifth decade of life. Much time lost into fruitless pursuit.

  18. Christian says:

    In Italian justice we trust! I hope that even English justice will prosecute you. You are officially GUILTY

    • T.C. says:

      What justice are you talking about? I know Amanda and Raffelle have been seeking justice and one judge gave it to them. The judge acquitted them and proclaimed them innocent…Explain that…

    • Luca Cheli says:

      “In Italian justice we trust”?
      Good luck.

      BTW No one is “officially” (the term is improper) guilty until the guilty verdict is confirmed by the Court of Cassation.
      Yes, I know, knowing Cassation one cannot hope for much, but nevertheless you’ll have to wait for a while.

  19. Daphne says:

    “Do you live in Italy Daphne? Maybe some comments are getting misunderstood in translation …” As I said, focus should be related to the blog and discussion, because Amanda and Raffaele need our support. Is nationality the issue here? For me, it is not.

    • Julie Jorgensen says:

      Daphne…why are you trying to take offense when none was given? I don’t care where you come from…I wondered if you might be from another country which can lead to communication errors…..either you are looking for trouble where none exists or there are some huge communication errors going on here. Not really sure which side you are on with your biting replies.

      • Daphne says:

        I am on your side — the supporters’ side. My apology — if it’s still here, should be below. As I tried to explain, I have been a target — the last room I was in had a suggestion for me — to put a gun in my mouth and squeeze the trigger. I don’t know where that person is lurking! I’m trying to stay quiet, hopefully the guilders will too. Take care!

    • Kerry says:

      Daphne
      I haven’t read any of the attacks on you but I’m taking that’s what’s happening ……I was attacked on here a few weeks ago for ( admittedly ) saying a light hearted comment , a few of the dedicated followers of Amanda ….and I mean eat ,sleep and dream her …will take it upon themselves to try and batter you into the ground ! …….there is no reasoning with them , which is ironic as they are on here to do exactly that and discuss this travesty …..so my advice is ( unless you’re me of course ) …ignore them ….if they misunderstand what you say it’s because they have no reasoning and read things just the way they want to read them ….and not the way they were supposed to be read .
      Now you may see who these people are as they respond to this message …..or they will not want to reveal themselves and ignore it …..OR ! ……not reply …believing it could not possible be directed at them .
      So Daphne just keep doing what you’re doing , some of us know you’re sincere .
      I might have just started another argument here if Amanda puts this up :)

      • Daphne says:

        Hi, Kerry. You know what, I don’t get mad, nor do I get even. But the verdict has me in pieces — it is so ludicrous! I cannot seem to avert the attacks that come my way — usually aimed at my horrible typing. (my nails are solo long) And all my game characters are being renamed KNOX. And somebody went through my files. People are just mean.
        The media did this to me. I can only imagine what Amanda and Raffaele are going through. The fact that my comments pop away and then multiply is also unnerving.

        • Kerry says:

          Daphne ,
          You say the media did this to you ! …… Who are you ? ….what’s your story if you don’t mind me asking ?
          :)

  20. Daphne says:

    @Michael:
    You are right about evil, all around, and since dropping my condolences to the Kercher’s, the abuse has almost gotten personal.
    While you claim the incidences surround this huge cover-up were definitely not related to “the stollen wallet,” I believe the very acts of covering up did jeopardize the identities of 2 innocent people, and so in a sense, their good reputations were pretty much stolen. But their innocence is eminent. Rudy Guede’s presence has indeed been the one clear fact evident from the start, but since he has never actually given any other perspective but claim innocence, all I can do is guess at the extent of his participation here; of course, the facts scream guilt. With this cover-up, I hope those of us will continue to support Amanda and Raffaele, despite the hateful intimidation out there, not only to re-assert their innocence, but also to expose the guilty. Surely there are more than one, even if the theory that Guede acted “alone”eventually turns out to be true.

    Your own situation does remind me of an acquaintance who had a similar situation happen to him; it seems to be so common for spiteful or idiotic people to get together and destroy a good name. False records, in my case, has left people with very inaccurate descriptions of my past and who I really am today. Michael you are brave and sensitive to share your experiences here with me and I hope that none of my comments will have offended you.

    • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

      Daphne, I’ve gone through the entire emotional roller-coaster ride and the many attempts to defend myself for something I didn’t do, after I myself had been wrongly, falsely accused, had my character assassinated, had my friends desert me, was forced to change my life, etc…all because of the corruption of one powerful man’s behavior. (It seems in this case that Mignini became that big driving force to
      to punish these two, but he was far from the only)

      Someone did say to me in my own case then, that I unknowingly and naively stumbled into something real big. I thought this man and his ‘church board of judges” where reasonable people. They were everything but. (so on that level I feel I can relate to Amanda’s difficult plight to vindication, and they unkowningly stumbled into something far beyond big….perhaps far beyond our imagination.)

      The saying “It’s not the crime, it’s the cover-up” which originated with Watergate
      holds true in this case as well. There’s a big cover-up going on that started out as a little snowball rolling down a little Perugian hill, now its the size of an avalanche rolling down a big mountain still gathering ice and anything in its path….but we will see what happens.

      • Daphne says:

        I absolutely hear you. I have been breathing cover up for too long, and now Amanda is going through this. Anything government related is fallible. Last week, my employment record stated I have been working in a downtown bar for 10 years! Not true. And my medical chart indicates I was at an emergency room also during the time I was abroad.
        Like you, I think I have stumbled on to many coverups that institutions indulge in to cover errors or fraud related crimes both in my real life experience and in other stories around the city. My city mayor has been sued so many times — it always turns out to be totally false. Thanks for listening. I hope things are better. If not, we should all start a workshop — how to deal with this???

        • Daphne says:

          About character assassination. Lost all my friends, family, and now, recent employers have turned their backs on me — I was usually a model employee. Something is so wrong.

    • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

      Another key example of the powerful tactic and means of diversion(distraction):

      (Excerpt from Honor Bound by Raffaele Sollecito)
      “…For the prosecutor’s office, Amanda was a bonanza they did everything to cash in on. It wasn’t just the thrill of the hunt, the kudos of nailing a fresh-faced, young American and seeing the story endlessly relayed across the world. She also represented a way out, a grand distraction for Giuliano Mignini, our lead prosecutor, who was facing a separate trial of his own on misconduct charges and was fighting for his career and his reputation….”

  21. Ella Bella says:

    I took an interest in this case about a week ago and I have been reading all kinds of documents (enough to make my head spin). The Italian police indicate that they did not interrogate Amanda all night like it has been stated in the media. They said they started questioning Amanda at around 11:30. A translator arrived at 12:30 and at 1:45 they had a time stamped declaration from Amanda. In reading Anna donnino’s testimony (she is the translator) she talks about it as an all night event and that she stayed with Amanda until it was day. She never left her. She talks about offering her food and having coffee. I don’t understand how they could have a timestamped declaration by 1:45. Anna was there translating and acted as a mediator and sharing her own personal experiences. She stated that Amanda was emotionally distraught and covering her ears during the interrogation. If you read Amanda’s confession it is actually very lengthy and would have taken quite some time for her to write it, especially in a distraught state. She would have needed time to construct her thoughts and then write them out. There is no way she would have it completed by 1:45. I believe the interrogation was much longer than the police are admitting. The translator put the idea in Amanda’s head that she could have memory problems and then all of a sudden Amanda’s confession was based on memory problems. The translator works for the police…not for Amanda. The translator should only perform the job of a translator and not the job of a psychologist. Amanda should never have been allowed to make a declaration while in such a distraught state. These are just my thoughts and observations.

    • Nasim says:

      Anna Donnino arrived at 12:30 and by 1:45 Amanda had made the statement implicating herself and Patrick. The statement is very short. It is on this website. It was written down by the police and translated word by word for Amanda before it was typed up and she signed. What happened after that is in dispute. The police say she curled up and went to sleep for a few hours. It’s irrelevant because the first statement is clearly sufficient to justify her arrest.

      • Frank the Tank says:

        Nasim

        What happened to you to cause you to be so obsessed with a woman you’ve (presumably) never met? If you’re just sad and lonely, there are websites where you can meet women (or men, if that’s your preference). Perhaps you ought to think about making some friends or meeting some new people, instead of spending your free time harassing someone on the Internet.

      • Luca Cheli says:

        “I confusedly remember” is sufficient to justify an arrest? Or indeed three?
        The interesting thing is that later Amanda would have been accused of trying to deceive the investigators and sidetrack them, but that night nobody found anything strange in a confused memory, nor anybody thought to ask for instance where did the knife come from, who had staged the break-in and when … in other words the details necessary to assess the reliability of a story.

    • BigDinBoise says:

      Because the police did not record the interrogation, as required by law, even though they recorded everything else, we will never know exactly how long it was or what was said.
      I believe the initial signed statement indicating Amanda was there and implicating Lumumba was very short. Her 2nd statement which she gave to the police the next morning in which she said she could not stand by her previous statement because she was not at the Villa, and retracted her implication of Lumumba, was much longer, and uncoerced.
      The questioning over the 5 day period after the murder was around 50 hours. I believe sleep deprivation, coupled with the stress of the interrogation and the police leading her into implicating Patrick really had a lot to do with Amanda’s false statement. Sleep deprivation is something I’ve experienced quite a bit and invariably results in poorer decision making and diminished cognitive ability.

    • Luara says:

      I seem to remember from Amanda’s book that the police got two statements out of her, one in the small hours of the morning and one about 5 AM. I don’t remember whether she slept between them. I think those were both coerced statements, her retraction was later.

  22. MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

    Just ask yourself…if you were the US Secretary of State, and Amanda Knox was your daughter at this time, and after first speaking with your daughter who firmly proclaimed her innocence, you proceeded to closely follow her case, reviewing the facts and the evidence that most of us have also viewed…providing numerous support throughout though at the end of the line, with all of the legal proceedings exhausted, when Amanda was just about to be extradited back to Italy…you as Secretary of State then, specially appointed, the only one now who has the official power to completely stop this fiasco….what would you do?

    I know what I would do.

  23. just a parent says:

    I read in a story accompanying the Simon Hattenstone interview with Amanda her statement that her “innocence is obvious.” Indeed it is; it has been for some time, and I have been watching the case ever since the aftermath of her first trial. The demonism angle is what first captured my attention. Not long ago in my part of the country three young men (one of them on death row) were released from prison nearly twenty years after their wrongful convictions for the murders of three ten-year old boys as part of a supposed satanic ritual, and on no more evidence than the confession recanted almost as soon as it was signed of a child with an IQ of 70. Amanda is right; not just in Italy, but in this country as well, it happens every day. It happened 20 years ago to the boys convicted in the Central Park jogger case, it happened nearly 30 years ago to a day-care operator in North Carolina, and just in the past month it happened to a kid in Memphis, whose innocence thankfully was proven after a mere 60 days in jail on an indisputably erroneous murder charge, to which he confessed after hours in custody once the cops were able to bluff his mother out of the room. It has happened countless times, and it is happening now to Amanda Knox.

    This knowledge that our society’s criminal justice system commonly shatters the lives of innocents, which Amanda so bravely speaks, is her terror of course, for how in this case can our own system take direction from her certain innocence and continue to operate as it does? Here in Tennessee the police are not even required to videotape interrogations!

    Many years ago one night over dinner with my then-girlfriend (now wife) I stated the belief that “there are more than a few innocent people in prison.” So many people, I complained, think an official accusation always must have some basis in fact absent conclusive proof to the contrary, and how can it be possible to absolutely prove yourself innocent of ANYTHING? It took the era of DNA to teach me just how right I was, and when my son turned 16 I sat him down and instructed him never to respond to any police questioning except to state his name and demand a lawyer and, until 18, his parents; and every time the thought crossed my mind I drilled it in again. ‘Don’t talk to them – not about sports, or music, or girls, or high culture, or low politics, or shabby journalism at the grocery checkout and the witlessness of those who read it, especially in England, or anything else of any kind whatsoever; SAY NOTHING no matter what they say, do, promise, threaten, or withhold; they can and will lie to you; they are not your friend; it is not a debate; you cannot win the discussion; they are out to get you; and you need not convince them of anything.’ Then, when episodes of false confessions and police misconduct made the news, as they regularly do, I would show him the story and drill again. More, he got the same relentless instruction to demand the American consul in the event of any police questioning when he was abroad not long ago. Parents should teach their children to obey the police in every way possible; trusting is another matter entirely. And no, I have never had an encounter with any police officer in an official capacity, except to receive the occasional speeding ticket.

    The Hattenstone interview is hard to view in its last portion. Amanda appears gaunt, haunted. This grinding oppression will not relent, so much has been invested in her destruction.

    I pray for Amanda, and grind my teeth. Amanda, it is unknowable why this is happening to you, but this you can know: every day this ordeal continues, whether free or confined, you are a searing rebuke to slander and the abuse of power, and by speaking out an inspiration to courage. Don’t stop fighting back, no matter what happens. You can do this, and it is a far bigger thing than most of us will ever do. You are not alone.

    Oh, and one other thing, I read that Alan Dershowitz – whose speaking fees no doubt soar every time he injects himself obnoxiously into some controversy or other – says he would not want his son to go out with you. Well, he must not have a very high opinion of his son. My own son is just about your age, a medical researcher in Seattle as it happens, and he should be so lucky. You have been through fire and not consumed, only made brave, and no worthwhile man could ever want better. God your parents must be so proud of you.

    • Luara says:

      SAY NOTHING no matter what they say, do, promise, threaten, or withhold; they can and will lie to you; they are not your friend; it is not a debate; you cannot win the discussion; they are out to get you; and you need not convince them of anything.
      So if one is in a car accident and the police ask what happened, to write down in their accident report, you believe one should refuse to give them info?
      Suppose one is a witness to a crime and has an ethical obligation to tell police about it?
      Your advice doesn’t seem to be workable advice. It’s only seldomly that talking to the police will get you in trouble.

    • Jack says:

      Brilliant, moving and apt. Hits the target as clean and as true as any meditation I’ve ever read on this unseemly set of circumstances.

      Fight on, Amanda.

      • just a parent says:

        Thanks, Jack. I have been called many things but never “brilliant.” Would that it were so!

        A day or two after my posting I realized an appalling neglect. Raffaele. His unyielding confirmation of Amanda’s alibi is the only reason he is before the court at all, and the pressure to turn on her must be almost beyond comprehension. One of two things certainly is true of him – either he was involved in Meredith’s murder and has risked long imprisonment rather than throw Amanda under the bus, or he was not involved in Meredith’s murder and has risked long imprisonment rather than throw Amanda under the bus.

        These alternative truths are immutable; there are no other.

        The former does not pass the stupid test, and until someone can cite another instance when a sex murderer has behaved in such a way I think we can discard it. Thus we are left with the latter – Raffaele was not involved in Meredith’s murder and has chosen to risk long imprisonment rather than throw Amanda under the bus. Why this stance? Well, again, one of two things are true of him – either he is six years bewitched with her, so completely under her control that he will throw his life away to shield her from her own wickedness, or he is a man of such rock-ribbed character that come hell or high water he simply will not bend to what is wrong.

        Take your pick.

        Contemplating the fighter Amanda has shown herself to be, it is not hard to understand what she saw in Raffaele.

        I think this injustice is going to break its teeth on these two.

  24. Nigel Scott says:

    Andrew Gumbel, the journalist who worked with Raffaele on his book, has written a powerful analysis of the Italian justice system. He clearly explains why Amanda and Raffaele never stood a chance. Tragically, this mess is unlikely to be sorted out until it reaches the European Court of Human Rights. http://bit.ly/1jtP35r

    That said, this injustice is so clear and so wrong that the foundations of the Italian system will be shaken by it.

    • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

      Great article Nigel, regarding parts close to my heritage, thanks for sharing.
      (My father’s parents came to the US from Sicily in 1915)

  25. Victoria says:

    Absolutely beside myself in rage that Guede has been allowed to leave prison in the day for a history class. Where is the outrage from the Kercher family as well?! This man RAPED and MURDERED a young woman less than seven years ago and he gets free outings from prison?! Meredith was his first victim, she won’t be his last. When another young woman is raped and killed, will Italy finally admit their mistake?! Or is the lives of two unjustly persecuted innocents PLUS the lives of who knows how many women worth it for the Italian justice system to “save face”?!

  26. Kerry says:

    ” BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT ”
    Isn’t that what a court is supposed to find out !!!!

    Since I had a bit of a do da with a few of your supporters a couple of weeks ago about a light hearted comment I made , I’ve had a bit more interest in finding out what exactly happened that night . Well ….after reading a lot of the so called facts and witness statements and trillion or two views of other people on what happened ……I’ve come to the conclusion that only one bit of FACT is all that is really needed to put doubt into a guilty verdict being thrown out …….. It’s about the DNA found in the room at the murder scene ….only one persons DNA ( except for the bra clasp which so could have been contaminated ) was that of Rudy the convicted murderer …..Amanda said ” how is it possible to remove one persons DNA and yet leave the DNA of another ….it’s not possible ! …..I’ve looked at it from a different angle and thought well they could remove all the DNA and put Rudy’s DNA there after the clean up….but no ! ….because the crime scene would be to disturbed ….and that would have been spotted …..or Amanda wore a full body suit and mask and hair cover …..really ! …No ! …..it would be premeditated then and extremely unlikely because Rudy did not wear any coverings ……
    So …to me this is ” reasonable doubt ” …..any jury should have seen this …why didn’t they ? ….what happened to this crucial fact in the summing up ?
    If I ever speak to anyone about this and they come back with the ” I don’t know really ….did she? ” ……I just come back with this fact and it answers the question …and no more is said .

    Well ! …..I just wanted to get that out of my system before I explode with frustration !
    :(

    • Daphne says:

      Kerry:
      Thanks for posting this. It’s a relief to know I am not the only one — as some suggest — to feel strongly about such an injustice. And the only confusion about Rudy’s DNA is the confusion created by the Italian courts in trying to determine the implications of that presence. Perhaps if the trial had been undertaken in the USA this confusion would have been averted.

    • T.C. says:

      One thing missed in your investigation is how Italy’s justice system works. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Code_of_Criminal_Procedure#Statute_of_limitations

      Here is a couple of snipets……

      “The defendant can be called to the stand, but he may refuse to bear testimony,[19] or he may refuse to answer some questions. He can also lie. Since he does not take an oath and since he is not technically a witness, if a defendant tells a lie, he is not committing perjury.

      A defendant can also choose to make spontaneous statements to the Judge; he can tell whatever he wishes to tell and can choose not to answer any questions. In this case too, a defendant can lie without consequences”

      Now consider Rudy’s Testimony…
      ———————————————————————————–

      “For a defendant to be convicted, the Judge must be internally convinced (Italian law requires the Judge’s intimo convincimento); because of that, there are no rules that predetermine the weight to be attributed to any given piece of evidence, so even credible admissions [of guilt] can do no more than reduce the amount of extrinsic evidence necessary for a finding of guilt”

      Why in the first trial the DNA just didn’t matter…she was convicted in the tabloids..
      ———————————————————————————–

      “Italy does not try anybody by a jury of peers: everyone is judged by professional judges or by a panel of judges (three or five or nine). The only exception to the use of professional judges is in the Corte d’Assise, which is made up of eight judges: two are professional, six are lay (they are called Giudici Popolari or Popular Judges, where ‘popular’ means ‘of the people’). All wear a sash in the national colours. They are not technically jurors, as the term is understood in Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence. In Italian, Giudice (Judge) refers both to the eight of them together as a collective body[22] and to each of them considered separately as a member of that body.

      Since Lay Judges are not jurors, they cannot be excused, unless there are grounds that would justify an objection to a Judge. Also, they are not sequestered, because a trial often lasts too long to restrict travel: an Italian trial, including the preliminary investigations, preliminary hearing, trial and appeals, can last several years. To keep a citizen — who continues to work, while serving as a Popular Judge — sequestered for years would be unfeasible.”
      ———————————————————————————–

      “When a person who is neither an indagato (suspect) nor an imputato (defendant), interrogated by the police or the prosecutor, reveals pieces of information that might lead to his incrimination, the interrogation must be immediately stopped, the person must be invited to nominate a lawyer and be warned that the information disclosed may render necessary an investigation. These self-incriminating statements are inadmissible in court.[12]

      The police or the prosecutor summon the indagato, during the preliminary investigations, and inform him precisely of the actions he is alleged to have committed (not yet technically a charge); they also inform him of the evidence so far gathered against him, if this is not detrimental to the investigations; the indagato is also invited to defend himself, if he so wishes; the police or the prosecutor can also ask him questions, that he may refuse to answer.[13]

      The indagato, when interrogated, must be free of all undue influence, both psychological and physical. He must be willing to provide information (animus confitendi). The police or the prosecutor cannot use on the indagato any methods or techniques that may influence his right to self-determination or alter his memory or his capability to evaluate facts. This prohibition applies even if it was the indagato who asked that these methods or techniques be used. Before the interrogation begins, the indagato must be informed that his statements can be used against him in court; that he can choose not to answer the question, but that the investigations will proceed nonetheless; that, if he provides information concerning someone else’s criminal responsibility, he will assume, as far as this responsibility is concerned, the office of witness.[14]

      If evidence should be gathered in violation of these principles, it would be inadmissible in court.”

      And she was coerced….
      ———————————————————————————–

      You have to understand what she is up against in order to fully understand she didn’t get nothing that we would resemble a fair trial. She was, and is still being persecuted by public opinion, not on facts and evidence…

    • Lince says:

      Yes, it is unbelievable that such a travesty can happen in a civilised country. Essentially, the prosecution presented no even remotely believable motive, no proof of Amanda’s and Raffaelle’s presence at the crime scene (actually, the DNA evidence proves the exactly opposite), no murder weapon (the presented one has been repeatedly scientifically discredited – it turned out it contains traces of bread, no Meredith blood), no explanation how and why they group together with Guede, a virtual stranger for them, and no reliable witnesses (their star witness, a daily heroin user, testified about several wildly varying times on probably even different day when he saw some girl with a gap in her teeth, which immediately excludes Amanda).

      So, what the latest story that was apparently convincing enough to again convict Amanda and Raffaele? At 8pm that day, Amanda got a SMS message from her employer that she does not have to come to work. Since they got a free evening and because they were suffering from boredom, Amanda and Raffaele decided to have some fun by killing Meredith. On their way, they invited Guede, almost a total stranger to them (Amanda only saw him twice in passing, Raffaele never met him at all), to join them. After all, the more, the merrier. After the terrible deed was done and Guede left, Amanda and Raffaele decided to get smart. They selectively cleaned the murder scene from their DNA (the criminals of the whole world will be paying them billions to reveal how they did this), smartly leaving only those that belong to Guede. Then they staged a break-in, so that this would point even more to Guede, a known burglar. They probably knew, that when the police catch Guede, Amanda and Raffaele can rely on his unwavering loyalty to his fellow co-murderers, which he just really met that night, to never betray them. Especially after hearing about the cleaning and the staged break-in. Such was their devious plan, revealed to the shocked world by briliant prosecutors and judges of Perugia.

      I do not what they smoke to come with such theories but it must be a really potent stuff.

      • Katy says:

        And then, after brilliantly arranging everything so that it will point to Guede and only Guede, Amanda signs a confession that puts her and not Guede at the murder scene. She implicates herself and Lumumba, knowing that there is no proof she was in the apartment and that Lumumba has an alibi. She deliberately goes to jail for slander rather than implicate Guede, the guy she just set up to take the fall. How can anyone think this series of events is even remotely possible?

  27. Daphne says:

    Everybody: Excuse the repeated messages. I swear, I don’t know why they are coming through like that.

  28. T.C. says:

    A good primer on extradition can be found here: http://constitution.findlaw.com/article2/annotation10.html#2

    On international treaties Chief Justice Black wrote in Reid v. Covert: ” ”There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution. Nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification of the Constitution which even suggests such a result. These debates as well as the history that surrounds the adoption of the treaty provision in Article VI make it clear that the reason treaties were not limited to those made in ‘pursuance’ of the Constitution was so that agreements made by the United States under the Articles of Confederation, including the important treaties which concluded the Revolutionary War, would remain in effect. It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights–let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition–to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions. In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article ” (Amanda, your lawyers should make note of this)

    So if this remains the case, denial of extradition of Amanda could be founded on American law in the sense that she was acquitted and released. A release is the giving or discharging of a right of action……..It matters not if the Italian courts reinstated the verdict some time later… In the common law tradition, an acquittal formally certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as the criminal law is concerned…..Under the Italian hybrid Inquisitorial system of law, it appears the Judge could have put in place prohibition to leave the country…He did not. Instead the judge found her “innocent” and released her.

    Although people reading the above may conclude that the “double Jeopardy” clause has been violated, it is more than just that. The bill of rights has numerous clauses that pertain to justice and judicial proceedings. International law has as well.

    The simple fact that a Italian judge acquitted her, made a proclamation that she was innocent (which is in accordance with an Inquisitorial system of law) , and he ordered her release without travel prohibitions may have waived Italy’s right to extradition. It will be difficult for the State Department or an American court to overlook these facts and extradite her.

    non colpevole, assoluzione, Perché l’imputato non lo ha commesso

    • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

      “Under the Italian hybrid Inquisitorial system of law, it appears the Judge could have put in place prohibition to leave the country…He did not. Instead the judge found her “innocent” and released her.”

      Certainly T.C., that particular verdict, which really zoomed in on the faulty DNA evidence, and subsequently Amanda was fully released to go home, was a major, major victory for her and her family, etc…Maybe like you also just noted, that even despite yet another negative verdict following, extradition may prove to be unlawful even under Italian law based on that one big verdict…well, lets hope so.

      But at this point, will these Italian courts even follow their own laws, or will they make exceptions to them in Amanda’s case as they go along!? I wouldn’t trust them one bit! I wouldn’t even count on the EU courts. I would put much more faith in the US courts, (after all she is a US citizen) and particularly in the US Secretary of State who has the official power to abort the extradition without giving a reason if it ever comes to that down the road…

      • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

        …even the previous Italian Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellman,
        (the one who wisely and perhaps boldly ordered an independent investigation of the DNA process which uncovered numerous mistakes, which really was the “get free from jail card” in both their cases) who even though he officially announced the verdict of not guilty for murder, (what a unbelievable tense moment that must have been for them after 4 years in the slammer but looking at a possible 26+ more)
        still expressed afterwards that he didn’t really seem quite sure at all if they had something to with the murder or not, but he did add (at least) that the evidence was not there to convict them…

        He is trying to save his face, protect his ass, or what?
        Why didn’t he have the matza balls to say ‘Based on our professional and extremely thorough investigation of the facts in this case by this high court of law, we find these two defendants not guilty of murder!”….and just leave it at that! But no, he was probably afraid for his own life or reputation. He had to give
        the opposition something, right!
        I mean, who really knows what goes on in these parts of Italy, especially behind closed doors at night….

      • T.C. says:

        The point of Justice Black’s ruling is that all treaties have to be in compliance with our constitution which is the supreme law of the land. This is something that has yet been challenged as far as I know and Amanda’s U.S. lawyers may have an action against the Federal government. The extradition treaty itself may be nullified on constitutional grounds. Of course this would set all bilateral extradition treaties with the U.S. in jeopardy something the court may want to avoid. If I was one of Amanda’s U.S. lawyers, I would consider looking into this a little further. I would definitely communicate this “defense” thought to the U.S. State Department in a way that would get them thinking…The State department may not want Amanda’s lawyers to go this route…Just the mention of it it could screw up international relations with all countries that have extradition treaties with the U.S….If she challenged an won, it would be destructive to international relations…Hopefully she has good U.S. lawyers….

  29. MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

    One person, Don Saulo, the godly prison priest, who was unselfishly available and there for Amanda as well as got to know her firsthand, during her 4 years of great suffering, ‘has compared convicted killer Amanda Knox to Nelson Mandela because she is free in “heart and conscience” ‘
    That my friends, is good enough for me. That is the one chief, Italian verdict that I’ll absolutely accept wholeheartedly. That true proclamation from a humble man who has dedicated his life to helping all kinds of prisoners by showing love, mercy and understanding, simply overpowers and overrules all the other outrageous guilty verdicts.

    (Come on the rest of Italy…listen to what even your own humble prison priest says. Let him be your inspiration. Stand up for the rights of those wrongly accused! Don’t be afraid! What if it was your own daughter or son or sister or brother or friend, that had been wrongly accused or framed !?)

    These two people Don Saulo compared, even their names the public most knows them by, are closely in sync: Amanda=Mandela

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/amanda-knox-like-nelson-mandela-3123078

  30. Joel says:

    Amanda,

    The “innocent” home page picture and message is perfect. Your explanations have been a little convoluted in the past. Keep it simple and direct like this. You’re an innocent woman, and you should let the world know it every chance you get.

    • Nasim says:

      I agree. It’s fierce. It screams Believe me or I’ll slit your throat! Katie Crouch wrote the other day that Amanda’s lost her gamine good looks. I beg to differ.

    • Nick says:

      Amanda has never looked anything but innocent, and her explanations have never been “convoluted”.

      It is obvious that you don’t believe she is innocent.

      You do nothing but dream up subtle ways to demean her.

      You are not as smart as you think you are “Joel”.

      • Joel says:

        Nick, you’re absurdly off base, i.e. crazy. I believe Amanda is innocent, and I’ve never demeaned her, much less thought up “subtle ways” to do it. I’ve just felt that at times she hasn’t expressed her innocence simply and concisely. That’s all. I am firmly in her camp based on the facts and logic. Don’t let your support for her turn rabid. Attacking me is fatuous. I am on her side, but supporters like you can seem as unhinged as those on the other side.

    • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

      Agree totally, hold your innocent sign out Amanda, for you and for Rafaelle.

      Don’t ever feel ashamed, no matter what some people say.
      Some people you may never be able to convince. Let them go. Forgive them.
      Forgive even Mignini, and all of the Italian police interrogators, forgive those
      who deeply hurt you, or wrongly thought they knew you and falsely accused you,
      and lastly, try to forgive the Kercher family for not believing in your innocence.

      Having been falsely accused myself, I can really empathize with your plight.
      I know, it hurts right down to the core of one’s heart and soul.
      And though you remarkably and bravely have spoken the truth, in Italian during your trial and then brilliantly in your memoir; the wait for true justice, can seem to take forever.

      But one sweet day, hopefully, you will find vindication and ease your pain.
      And you can go on….the heart must go on.

      • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

        By the way, I have never actually been charged with a crime, or even spent one day in a prison (accept a few hours to visit Alcatraz as a tourist) but I have been falsely accused numerous times, like I’m sure many others have here as well, which has greatly affected my life and hampered my relationships.
        So I can’t say, Amanda, that I know firsthand what its been really like for you to have gone through all you have gone through, though I read your book, and the facts of your case, and have seen your sincere expressions on video.
        But also unlike you, I never ever got my one day in court to face my accusers, nor was I ever really given a decent chance to tell my side, to tell the truth. For the most part, no one really wanted to hear it.
        My cases were closed shut right from the start. That’s really a testament to how powerful and influential my adversaries were.
        It seemed each time I was falsely accused, a quick and comprehensive “rush to judgment” took place. Like you have said in regards to your own persecution, it also didn’t seem to really matter what I did to try and stop it. Perhaps it was fate. Evil was hard at work.
        In one case, I had to leave one town I had worked and lived in for 8 years with my own family, because no one would really talk to me anymore. Even my best friend betrayed me and turned me in to my chief enemy at the time. Why? Because I confronted a very powerful and highly influential man in that town. I somehow unwillingly came to know something about him he didn’t want others to know. Though he initially told me how much he greatly appreciated my coming to him, instead he quickly spread false rumors about me, and pronounced me “demonic” in front of 12 members of the church board and that was the name I was branded with before I left that town. Everyone trusted him.
        Luckily, I still had my wife on my side though she was very confused and understandably shaken at these sudden, unexpected and unexplained events. But, I also without
        a doubt had a God that doesn’t waver. And God more than I, made sure of that.
        We then actually left the country and our old friends.
        But it was hard to go on with so much unresolved…
        Years went by until one day my best friend who had betrayed me,
        wrote me and told me that this same man who had virtually “assassinated my character”, had been fired from his job as pastor of a large church in that town, and was charged and later convicted in court of embezzlement of church funds. Apparently, it wasn’t until the daughter of one of the church board members came forward and admitted that she has had a long affair with this pastor, that the church board began to thoroughly investigate. Though it was sad to see his fall, and all the pain he had put his own family through, other families through, and especially my family through, I did feel, officially, for the first time, gratefully vindicated in that case. There are other cases where I’m still painfully waiting to tell the truth.

        In my own unwanted or undesired experiences of being falsely accused, it seems to me when there is such a prolonged breach or miscarriage of justice, an unfounded crazy witch hunt, or an unduly character assassination, (such as it seems to be on a much greater level in Amanda’s case) in reality…it turned out to be just a clever diversion, to get people off the trail of the real culprit or culprits. That’s been my experience that I’m sharing here. In every one of the cases which I’ve been wrongfully accused it has turned out to just be a great diversion, as
        someone setting fire to a garbage container outside a bank, so the real thief could buy more time undisturbed inside. To fight against evil sometimes we do have to know how evil works.

        Lastly, I wouldn’t be surprised if vindication at some point truly comes from the One, above all.

        • Daphne says:

          @Michael Fortunato: OMG you really sound as though you have been misunderstood. I have typically been leery of the meeting socials, which seem to be the bedrock of evil and connivery. I mentioned earlier on that some of Amanda and Raffaele’s problems could have been attributed to identity theft; in fact, many false reports to the police are vicious in the way that they undermine a victim’s appeals for help and justice and hinder the police from doing other more meaningful investigations. I think some of your difficulties probably were related to evil people doing evil things to your reputation behind your back. Good luck, hopefully you will be doing better from here on.

          • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

            Daphne, doesn’t it seem to you in Amanda’s case that certain people, whether secretly or not, were repeatedly doing evil things?

            Vicious lies, vicious rumors, harmful gossip, false witnesses, character assassinations, pschological abuse,
            coercion, numerous violation of rights, I could go on and on?

            This was absolutely not a case of mistaken identity or identity theft.

          • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

            Daphne, in the previous case I mentioned that pertained just to myself, that man that I confronted at that time was the pastor of a large church, who was:
            (1) having a secret extramarital affair
            (2) secretly embezzling money from church funds
            (3) Very afraid of being discovered
            (4) Afraid of losing his job
            (5) Afraid of the law

            One very illegitimate but highly effective way to keep things covered up when one is doing something really wrong like committing a crime,
            is to blame others, especially by using one’s influential power. One does this very effectively by creating diversions.
            “Get the focus on someone else and off of me” In my particular case it was very successful…until a real investigation took place.

            Obviously in this case, Rudy G. has created a big diversion, by being the only witness who has put Amanda and Raffaelle at that murder scene, and he also accused them of committing the murder, while he was taking a dump at the time…

            Now why some of these judges bought this, I’ll probably never know…but this is only what we have seen and heard publicly.

            There’s plenty more to this case that no one’s really seen or heard, except for, a few.
            Those few for whatever reason, not only went along with Rudy’s diversion
            but threw their own fire on it, and then created their own diversions.
            These people I would say are desperately trying to cover their asses…or someone else’s ass!

  31. Willis Coleman says:

    Have you given any thought to how you’re going to avoid extradition? Typically people claim pregnancy, a physical ailment or suicidality. Some of your supporters have offered to help you hide. You could move to a country where your public support is very high, higher than the 21% in the recent Yougov poll. Too bad West Seattle isn’t a country. Whatever you do don’t listen to the lawyers. They promise the moon and in the end they’re like, sorry it didn’t work out.

    • Sarah H says:

      Here you are again, betraying your ignorance along with your spitefulness. No one with an I.Q. larger than his shoe size would cite a yougov poll.

      • T.C. says:

        In the U.S., polls don’t decide out comes of any trial. They do not matter when it comes to extradition..

        In the U.S., the assumption of innocence until proven guilty is still material when it comes to crimes. Unlike uncivilized country’s, you can’t speculate or fabricate a motive nor can you politically manipulate a jury. Hearsay is not applicable. DNA and all evidence has to be disclosed to the defense. It matters not what tabloid prints a theory. In the U.S. prosecutors are not the investigators. They do not have to save face from their past incompetent performances.

        Fortunately for Amanda and Raffeal, the Italian supreme court can be over ruled by the European Court of Human Rights. That in itself is telling about how many EU member states have unjust judicial systems with Italy just being one of them…

        Willis, you are free to believe whatever you want…But if your relying on polls instead of facts, you are going to be disappointed. The U.S. justice system has its flaws but generally no one in the world would consider it near as corrupt as Italy’s system of justice. The state department will not likely extradite Amanda even if the higher Italian courts uphold the latest guilty verdict again.

        • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

          T.C. –I agree wholeheartedly with your thorough and informative assessment. Its good to point these things out, I’m sure Amanda knows quite a bit more law than she would ever imagined…but the rest of us may not.

        • BigDinBoise says:

          In theory I agree the U.S. justice system is fair and civilized, with the exception of the federal and state death penalties. However, if outcomes are any indication we have a long way to go in addressing the short coming of our system. The West Memphis Three and Ryan Ferguson, to name just a few, are testament to that.
          For one thing, I think it should be easy to mount an appeal; too many innocent people rot in jail because they lack the funds to hire a proper attorney to fight for an appeal. I also think that our prison system leaves much to be desired, and just based off what I’ve read of Raffaele’s and Amanda’s memoir’s, I’d take time in an Italian jail over the U.S.

    • Glenn Thigpen says:

      @Willis Coleman
      I do not think that Amanda has to fear extradition for any number of years. Once the Italian Court of Cassation rubber stamps the guilty verdict, Amanda still has a final appeal to the European Union Court of Human Rights. Her interrogations were a clear violation of Article 6 of the Eurpean Convention on Human Rights. I am not sure what that court’s limitations are or how much power it actually has, it can request a retrial where none of the information illegally coerced from Amanda can be used.
      She ahs already had one appeal accepted by that court, so it is not far fetched to think that it would accept an appeal for a final conviction based upon the same criteria.
      The ECHR can award Amanda “just compensation” if it is found that her rights were violated. That could involve a pretty penny for the italian government to cough up, as well as a lot of egg on their faces.

      Glenn

    • Jack says:

      I wonder, “Willis,” did you ever pause to consider how astonishing it is that Ms. Knox possesses the equanimity and graciousness to afford real estate on her personal website to petty and misguided jesters such as yourself? It is well know that the hate sites you frequent broach no such disagreement with their party line.

      Truly reflective persons must pause to consider, then: Who are the true bad guys in this case? A young woman who was railroaded by a corrupt police force and judiciary when she was barely out of her teens? Or the Italian authorities, with at least one foot stuck in their fascist past, aided and abetted by a pack of baying, impudent fools?

  32. Linas says:

    Dear Amanda,

    I cannot even imagine how you are feeling right now. I just know that it must feel terribly unfair, unbelievably wrong to extend this nightmare, to put this undeserved mark on you. Like the whole world is conspired to make you suffer, to ruin your life. For no reason whatsoever. Just because it can.

    It looks like a losing battle. What can one person do against corruption and vanity of the judicial system of a whole country, sleaziness of yellow press, hatefulness of human nature hiding behind Internet anonymity?

    But you are not alone. You have your family standing beside you, loving and supporting you all the way. You have your stalwart friends. You also have the ever-growing group of people that have actually met and got to know you, or found time to look at so called evidence piled against you, soon recognising blatant, almost incomprehensible injustice directed at you and Raffaele. And they are ready to help you, in whatever small way possible, to weather this storm.

    I believe THEY (the other they) made a big mistake by even initiating this latest process, not to mention coming with this crazy verdict. They should have let it slip away, silently hoping that people would soon forget it, get distracted by new everyday scandals. However, they seem to be too arrogant to realise how dangerous it to draw attention back to this travesty of justice, to this clear indication of their incompetence and corruption.

    The undeniable fact is that the number of people believing into your innocence, realising what is really going on here is growing, and I believe soon this quantity will transform into quality that cannot be ignored or stopped. And I do not envy the other side then. They are in a losing battle after all.

    I hope that some day in near future you will become just Amanda Knox, happily living your own life.

  33. Debbie Wilcox says:

    My last comment was copy and pasted from a newspaper and needs a little further editing – but I thing it is a really good article! Good luck Amanda x

  34. Debbie Wilcox says:

    ARTICLE IN THE BRITISH DAILY EXPRESS NEWSPAPER

    By Author Frederick Forsyth

    Amanda Knox trial was just a farce

    Following the bizarre decision of an Italian court to reverse the Appeal Court’s ruling of three years ago and pronounce Amanda Knox guilty after all of the murder of Meredith Kercher in 2007, sections of our media have launched another tidal wave of hate against the American girl.
    ho is right? Who is mistaken? A first-class test is this. Ask whether, had Miss Kercher been murdered in Portsmouth instead of Perugia, would the American and Italian students have been convicted on identical evidence in a British court?

    Not in a month of Sundays.

    After the discovery of the brutally slain British girl on November 1 (the morning after night-long Halloween parties) the Perugia police trampled all over the crime scene like a herd of wild boar. Not a trace of reliable DNA evidence had a chance of surviving.

    They ran round in muddy boots instead of sterile overshoes and handled everything with bare hands.

    The appeal four years later succeeded because real DNA experts simply trashed the prosecution evidence.

    Then the American student, newly arrived and with a dozen words of Italian, was arrested and interrogated.

    She was never read her rights – probably because in Italy she didn’t have any.

    She was interrogated for hours through the night without an interpreter and (according to her but denied by the police who were the only other ones present) cuffed around the head.

    The first trial was a shambles, a churning media circus in which the paparazzi practically shoved the lenses up the noses of the accused, clambering around the court like the PG Tips chimpanzees
    No defence lawyer was present. Eventually, bewildered and confused about the night of the murder, she uttered a form of confession, later retracted.

    In Britain a judge would have thrown the whole lot out before empanelling the jury and roasted the police interrogators involved.

    We have PACE (police and criminal evidence) rules for a reason. She was entitled to a defence lawyer and an interpreter from the start.

    The first trial was a shambles, a churning media circus in which the paparazzi practically shoved the lenses up the noses of the accused, clambering around the court like the PG Tips chimpanzees.

    A British judge could never have permitted his courtroom to be turned into a scene of anarchy.

    The Italian judges just preened themselves and posed for better portraits.

    They accepted thoroughly flawed forensic evidence and produced a guilty verdict.

    Related articles
    GUILTY: Amanda Knox DID murder Meredith Kercher
    Amanda Knox’s ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito ‘detained at border’
    World reaction to Amanda Knox verdict
    Amanda Knox: Verdict ‘hit me like a train’
    Amanda Knox prison guard: ‘We used to call her the Ice Maiden’
    Two years later, after an African drifter had made a full confession that he did it, the Appeal Court listened to real forensic scientists, discounted the only real evidence, the DNA traces, and reversed the verdict. Now a third trial has turned even that on its head and declared two guilty verdicts after all.

    British judges of appeal do indeed reverse verdicts but only on the production of compelling new evidence. In this case there was not one jot of fresh finding, just an arbitrary decision by a new judge.

    There are two conclusions the detached British observer can safely make. We will now never really know what happened on that awful night of October 31 to November 1 in a cottage on the outskirts of Perugia.

    The only safe verdict is the Scottish one: not proven. But in England that means doubt, and the accused has the benefit.

    The other is, if you want to be accused of a crime you did not commit choose the six nations of the Anglo-sphere – Britain, Ireland, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand – or Scandinavia.

    Avoid like the plague all countries whose jurisprudence is based on the Code Napoleon: no habeas corpus, no prisoner rights, no presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

  35. Chris Frait says:

    Hi Amanda and friends,

    I just wrote my second letter on your behalf to Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois. It is identical to the one I wrote to Senator Mark Kirk below. That covers both my senators here in Illinois. Now I will start focusing on my Congressmen. :)

    God bless you and stay well, Amanda! Don’t worry. You will never be extradited back to those bastards in Italy. The American people won’t allow it and won’t stand for it. We are all behind you. :)

    Chris Frait

    • Kenneth Janeway says:

      Yes Chris Frait, we are all behind Amanda Knox. I will be contacting the State Department soon on her behalf. Thanks for your great letters in your state of Illinois.
      I will also be starting an organization to centralize my own efforts on behalf of Amanda, let’s not forget that Raffaele Sollecito is also innocent – he also needs our help as well. – Best, Ken

      • Chris Frait says:

        I’m glad I can help, Ken. I have total confidence in what I say. I am convinced that any attempts at extradition by Italy will be met with complete failure. Our Constitution trumps any foreign treaties we have. If it didn’t, we would have lost our 2nd Amendment rights right after the latest U.N. small arms treaty was signed. But we didn’t. They are still here. Likewise, I am convinced our constitutional protections against double jeopardy will still trump all foreign treaties. My point is that, when push comes to shove, our government, despite all it’s shortcomings, is going to put the rights of the American people first. Any politican or political party supporting an extradition would thus be commiting political suicide and they all know it.

        All that being said, if Amanda and her family still needed to escape to a third country somewhere, I would still support that, such that I could, as well. No American should ever be betrayed or sold out by other Americans. In a way, this is no longer just about her now. It is about all of us and the rights as Americans we will continue to have in the future. We can’t just turn our backs when one us is stripped of those rights because it is ultimately going to impact us all. I honestly don’t believe it will come to that though. Italy, if it has any brain at all, won’t even ask for her extradition and quitely let the whole thing just go away. Their public image in the United States is badly damaged and getting worse every day because of what they have done.

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          Chris,
          These are excellent words that you wrote…I think these would be great words to add to any letter or email sent to a politician.

          “In a way, this is no longer just about her now. It is about all of us and the rights as Americans we will continue to have in the future. We can’t just turn our backs when one (of) us is stripped of those rights because it is ultimately going to impact us all.”

          • Chris Frait says:

            Thank you, Julie. I just can’t believe this insanity has gone on as long as it has. Looking at the lunacy of Italy, I have never been more glad to be an American.

          • Kai says:

            Well said Julie. I’m not American but having grown up in Scandi-Europe I find it quite shocking that all the rights I was brought up with and that I thought applied to all of Europe means nothing in this case. I would have expected the international society to step in and correct this error. But that just shows how naive I am. Human and civil rights mean very little to an international society it seems. The least they could do is to take the case up on international ground, give everyone a fair trial. I don’t see how this thing will ever be resolved in Italy. Julie, you may not agree with me (I don’t know) but I still think what you said is spot on. This is about all of us. I don’t see how it doesn’t affect my rights too (and now I wish I’d studied law instead of Arts; I have no idea how this whole thing works and it makes me angry that unless you know ‘the system’ you are not protected)

  36. Amanda Knox and the politics of extradition
    http://www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk/amanda-knox-and-the-politics-of-extradition/

    When or where will this dirty, political snowball end?

    • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

      The extradition process, if it ever begins, I would find it absolutely appalling if the US ever allows it. I do not care if the US and Italy have a Ext. treaty since 1984.
      This is a bizarre case, under highly extraordinary circumstances, with numerous questions of judicial misconduct from the very start.
      I can not imagine than any high ranking US official who reviews the various unusual elements and enormous discrepancies in this case would not come away thinking, “there’s something rotten in the country of Italy”.
      US has got to stand up for its citizens against such judicial misconduct and the threat of undue punishment, and I believe in Amanda’s case, that they will. Regardless, of whether that will detrimentally affect their diplomatic relations with Italy. So be it. If some person or group with an unhealthy, nasty vengeance harms one of our citizens…they harm the whole country.

  37. Daphne says:

    Amanda:
    Courage! Hopefully, you have had time to distance yourself from tensions. Negative publicity is to be expected, but I am confident that in the future your appeals for justice will be met with the attention they truly deserve. Nobody should have to be used as a “political pawn,” and I’m sure someone out there will also find a way to make such abusive politics universally illegal.

  38. Daphne says:

    Amanda:
    Courage! I have been trying to avert the hateful messages coming my way and hope you have had a chance to distance yourself from some of the negative comments hidden behind other people’s false aliases to dash your confidence. Hopefully you will be able to recognize your true supporters for who they really are, and the others for who they really are. Unfortunately, as all of my comments are being deleted, I hope I didn’t say anything to offend; if I did, it was not intentional.

    The recent verdict has been bound to attract some negative publicity, but don’t get discouraged. I have every confidence that your appeals to the public will eventually get the attention they truly deserve. I read your interview article with the Guardian, posted on this site, and it was painful to hear how much hate and abuse you must put up with. All the best.

    • Julie Jorgensen says:

      Try not to worry Daphne. Amanda must have a lot on her plate right at this moment. She’s trying to take in everything that happened to her…again, and I’m sure she has been bombarded with media and information…even from supporters…but still it would cause sensory and emotional overload. I wish she could unplug everything and take off for the mountains for a month…but alas, Amanda is trying to finish her last semester of college on top of all of this. She really just needs some space to chill, be with family and friends and concentrate on school I would suspect.

      It may not even be Amanda who is moderating this blog right at this moment. It may be friends or family. Also, Amanda receives way more comments than she can possibly post…so try not to feel offended if every comment isn’t posted.

      I understand your feelings. I recently “unfriended” myself from her personal FB page. I totally get why Amanda asked people to “unfriend” themselves unless they had actually met her or were her friends and family. She deserves to have a personal life that is not invaded by hundreds of people she doesn’t even know. Yet, I have to admit…it wasn’t easy. It felt weird. Sort of like a loss of some sort.

      So, it’s not always easy to be someone’s supporter. You want to help so badly and you have good intentions…but it doesn’t always end up being helpful. I’ve had to bite my own pride at times and think…what is really best for Amanda? What really is the most helpful thing for her? So, hang in there.

      As supporters, though…we can support each other as well as support Amanda. That’s my goal right now until I know what else is needed. It’s also important as a supporter, to pace yourself. It’s really easy to get burned out or offended. The best thing to do is to do what you can…but don’t make this your whole life. I teach English so it’s good to have time away from this for much of my day. I need breaks from it all sometimes, even for days. Then I’m ready to hit it again with a fresh perspective. This is going to be a long process so we need to be wise in our committment and the time we spend supporting Amanda and Raffaele.

      I don’t know if my comments make any sense but know I understand your feelings. So, don’t give up. Each one of you that believe in Amanda is so important and you each have a unique and important voice that needs to be heard. Thanks for all you’ve done to help get the word out.

      • Daphne says:

        Julie:
        It does seem my responses to you get eaten up. I am more concerned about the evil concerning Amanda’s negative press than I am about the recent verdict because I feel it was contrived. However, I am fuming about the impersonators here, deleting supportive comments, and just being childish. I do not tweet or “like” and so would have advised others about such abusive online activities. They often do not help.
        As for giving up, I am in a much less situation than Amanda and can only hope that if she ever does need moral support in Italy, we can be there for her and her family.
        I am sure your other comments were intended to be helpful, but actually don’t understand some of what you are talking about. I think we should keep this blog about Amanda and Raffaele and try to leave the supporters to themselves.

        • Daphne says:

          I mean, I am in a much less precarious situation than Amanda is.

          • Julie Jorgensen says:

            Do you live in Italy Daphne? Maybe some comments are getting misunderstood in translation from one language to another. I was only trying to offer you support as fellow person who is doing their best to be supportive.

          • Daphne says:

            Thank you. At this point, I think all of us are in shock. I have been following many weird trials like this for upcoming research (I would need Amanda’s permission to use her data) the sky has figuratively turned inside out for me. But am so leery of haters — like my ex — who will do anything to make me look foolish — like my duplicated responses, that I don’t want to create any unnecessary tension. I am Italian, but it is a third language for me.
            I want to concentrate on Amanda’s conflict, and do not mean to appear cold, so thank you for the considerate remark.

  39. Daphne says:

    Amanda:
    Courage! I have been fending off a few negative people who hide behind other peoples’ aliases who want to dash your confidence and give your supporters an image of falsity. Hopefully, you have had time to distance yourself from offensive people and see your supporters as they really are, and see others as they really are. Abusive comments are aimed in my direction and I am finding some of my comments deleted, so if I offended you, I didn’t intend to. Negative publicity is to be expected, but I am confident that in the future your appeals for justice will be met with the attention they truly deserve. Nobody should have to be used as a “political pawn,” and I’m sure someone out there will also find a way to make such abusive politics universally illegal.

  40. Mark Saha says:

    Amanda,

    Ponder this over your morning coffee… .

    Yet another novel about the murder in Perugia, but with a unique difference that sets it apart from the rest.

    “Abroad” by Katie Crouch takes a stand on guilt or innocence — and points the finger at Rudy Guede as the sole killer.

    Do not know what is going on but fear Ms. Crouch is going to be buried in lawsuits .

    :)

    http://www.salon.com/2014/02/09/amanda_knox_what_really_happened_writing_toward_the_actual_story/

  41. Mark Saha says:

    Amanda,

    Looks to me like Candace Dempsey thinks you should sue too:

    HOLLYWOOD REPORTER:

    “Winterbottom wants to have it both ways,” says Dempsey. “The film’s not about Amanda, but it is about Amanda. It’s not about guilt or innocence, but it makes Amanda look at guilty as possible.”

    In the trailer, one character says, “She had sex with some random guy she met on a train,” and Bruhl’s character replies, “None of that makes her a killer.”

    But Dempsey notes that 22 seconds into the trailer, after a gory murder scene, the Knox-inspired character flashes a lurid, deranged look as a character (apparently the prosecutor) calls her “sexual, dominant.” Says Dempsey, “Tell me this actress isn’t trying to look crazy, or that Winterbottom isn’t doing a Fatal Attraction on Amanda. He couldn’t have picked a nastier pic. The trailer is like a bad Saturday Night Live skit. Clueless Yanks, exceptional Brits, phony Italian accents, slut shaming, pervy shots of young girls, whore/Madonna framing and salacious gossip dressed up as fact.

    The Lolita-faced ‘Amanda’ looks guilty in every frame. At 20, she ‘dominates’ in bed. The British victim, who was also sexually active, is shown as ‘quiet,’ nun-like. Amanda was actually a U.S. honor student but she dared to like sex. And we all know that sex is a gateway crime to murder.”

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/amanda-knox-author-blasts-salacious-677647

  42. Elena Costa says:

    I think it’s normal that you don’t want to go back to Italy and that if the USA prevents your extradition is the best for you. But I think in that case many people will still think you are guilty and the Kercher’s family will still be thinking that and fighting for proving again you are guilty…(and many people will think you are a convicted murderer set free, grrr).

    I know it’s easy to say that you should be strong and face Italian Justice because it’s not…I can imagine your suffering, anxiety and paranoia of imagining that everybody is against you…( as I have read more of your interviews in your website, the interview for the guardian in youtube, the forensic evidence, Rudy’s history,…although I was strongly convinced at the beginning that you were guilty now I’m 100% sure you are innocent and I empathize with your suffering…).

    As I have said before in this blog, I have never been in such a situation (worlwide-society) of missunderstanding, manipulation and hate against me…but I have experienced those things in another type of experiences in my life in a more interpersonal-group context, and I could imagine how this suffering multiplied for a billion times can be…I know you don’t believe in God, and so I’m not sure that I do, but I do believe in the power of the mind (like is explained in “The Secret”), and once I did something created by me which made THE TRUTH come to the surface (but what is more important is that you strongly believe and have no doubt while doing it)…I could send it to you in private if I know how or write me to the e-mail that is above. Well, I just want to tell you I support you and you have a friend here in Barcelona (Spain)!

    Best regards,

    Elena

    • Sarah H says:

      Elena, there is no point in Amanda going back to “face Italian Justice” when “Italian Justice” has already falsely convicted her twice. She is doing exactly the right thing by staying here. Ignorant people will think whatever they think. It doesn’t matter.

      • Elena Costa says:

        Yeah. Of course, she is. But I mean she should be set free of any judgement. On the one hand she should not be caring about what people think, but on the other hand they have marked her as a public persona for something she didn’t do, so that’s the point. She should fight, something that she has alredy done for long I imagine…

  43. MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

    I will say that I think it’s about time that the prosecution in this case begin to face an inquiry
    into their behaviour from Italy’s justice minister. Hopefully this will lead to a more comprehensive investigation, as well as a more thorough examination of the laws, and the law process in Italy. I mean, those concerned leaders in the Italian government should form a special committee, much like we do in America, to get to the bottom of this matter. It seems this case has exposed low and high levels of political injustice, corruption, incompetence, etc…They should do all they can to clean out their system, in the same way they have successfully fought against the mafia in various places.
    Amanda and Rafaelle without any forewarning really, stumbled unknowingly into a corrupt system of justice who inadequately and negligently investigated a crime of rape and murder, and they numerous times got “hit like a freight train” as Amanda reported.
    While Amanda may be legally branded now as a convicted murderer, or a “marked woman” as she says, I think she will one day come to be known as the very brave woman who stood up against a swarm of Italian injustice, much like many brave women heroines of the past have who also stood up against evil in the world and prevailed.
    I hope Amanda that you will come to fully and humbly accept your new identity as a heroine and inspiration to many, and not as a “marked woman”, much like Elizabeth had to accept, despite her insecurities, that she was born into a royal family and would become a famous Queen one day.
    —–Michael

    • Jamie says:

      I completely agree. I think the tide will ultimately change in this case, hopefully sooner rather than later. And I think that history will be very kind to Amanda and Raffaele when this case is studied in decades to come. I hope this provides some consolation to them both.

    • Elena Costa says:

      haha, I’m with you!, Michael Fortunato (the last two paragraphs), but she should think so, she should be SURE that she will be remembered as a warrior who fighted against injustice and not as a “marked person” which always will be a doubt of she is a murderer or not…I think, it’s her karma, to become a warrior for groups/society/future, as I have studied her natal chart

      Elena

      • Elena Costa says:

        Many people say there’s a lot of corruption in Italy, even in very small villages (really worse than Spain, here we don’t have that…it’s a “mafia”-country)…And this prosecutor Mignini is well known as corrupted with other cases as I have read…I also think it’s a problem with him, to imagine always this sadistic orgy sex things…(it’s all in his sick head…).

        • Kenneth Janeway says:

          I met an older woman yesterday at work who has a friend who went to law school in Italy then joined a prosecutor’s office in a town near Perugia. She said her friend became so disgusted with the corruption there that she quit law altogether and is now going to business school to get an MBA degree. I think Amanda was focused on so hard because she was a “convenient” target and perhaps because some of her personality rubbed them the wrong way but I also think some of this mess is political and tied into the in-fighting of various political parties there. We need Judge Hellmann again to find and speak the Truth so these two innocent co-defendants can be Acquitted once and for all. I would just ask Amanda to stay strong today and not to let the recent “verdict” control her behavior because although it is clearly wrong it is still just the mis-guided judicial opinion of the persons on this most recent jury. Since she has been Acquitted once, and convicted now twice, this should fall into Article VI of the Extradition Treaty to allow Secretary Kerry to deny her Extradition back to Italy from what I can tell, but like Amanda, I want a complete Acquittal to come from the Italian Supreme Court clearing her name and Raffaele’s name as well and granting their Freedom. I am bombarding Heaven with Prayers for both of them daily – getting the Lord’s attention for sure. Please do the same for them so that a favorable decision comes in next. Our Faith is being tested because the church is being shaken now…as a test of Faith. – Best, Ken

        • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

          Migini and other prosecutors like him in various places in Italy could have built a culture of fear where certain people may have been afraid to freely speak up less they receive his wrath of indignation.
          I can honestly say I would not want him and his cohorts coming after me.
          But one day these type of people too will have to face the Almighty Righteous Judge.

          • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

            You know there really are people out there in high places who are haters of the truth, but lovers of injustice.
            I have met them…they are ruthless.
            But they fear being exposed much like a light would do shining in a dark place.

          • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

            Correction—
            wrath of injustice, not indignation

        • Daphne says:

          Elena: Here we don’t have that? It’s everywhere, some places, more than others. But it’s all in how you look at things, I guess.

      • Daphne says:

        Elena Costa: Interesting comment. Personally, I don’t see Amanda as a marked person. But she is a warrior in the sense that she has, as Raffaele, has been fighting such injustice for years now. It is fascinating that you are studying her natal chart; my birthday is just 2 days away from Amanda’s.

  44. S says:

    To be completely honest, three weeks ago, I didn’t know who you were. If I had passed you on the street, I wouldn’t have recognized you. I vaguely recognized your name, but I couldn’t have placed why if someone had questioned me about it. Though some may call it a lack of awareness of the world around me, I mostly steer clear of watching/reading the news because it generally depicts the world as being a callous, defeating, morally inept place. Definitely not what I would consider to be a mood enhancer, but lately, for some reason or another, I’ve been mindlessly browsing news sites during lunch. Thus, the other week, it was nearly impossible not to stumble upon articles concerning your retrial. It seemed to be the attention-grabbing story everyone wanted to report and talk about, which is why it wasn’t long before a friend asked me if I thought you were innocent, and without knowing any of the facts involving your case, my response was that it didn’t matter to me if you were or weren’t because I truly believe that a person is innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and your prior acquittal certainly constitutes reasonable doubt in my mind regardless of my not knowing any facts involving your prior trials.

    Curiosity of your case thus plagued me, so I did some more digging online and read more articles concerning your case and watched interviews of you conducted by different media outlets, and it completely baffles me that you’ve been convicted a second time for a crime in which your DNA evidence was not found in the room where the crime was committed. I’ve always seemed to place reliance on facts and logic first and on emotion second, and logically, the facts don’t point to your involvement. Emotionally, though, I believe that no one can really fully know someone else without truly knowing them, and I don’t truly know you. We’ve never met or spoken; therefore, I realized that different articles I read had the ability to sway my feelings one way or the other based solely on the convictions of the author alone. In other words, I recognized that when tossing all logic and facts aside it was easy to allow different painters to paint different pictures, and this I feel is how we as humans sometimes detrimentally err. We allow our emotions to trump logic and fact, and we let society paint a picture they deem acceptable, and if we don’t ever step back and take control of the brush ourselves, we tend to believe the picture that’s been painted for us. Therefore, for you, I pray that in your upcoming appeal the individuals deciding your fate make their decisions based solely on logic and evidence alone…that they won’t simply allow the prosecutors/media/society to paint a picture for them without ever taking control of the brush themselves.

    In the meantime, “Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer (Romans 12:12).” For Jesus has said, “Yet I am not alone, for the Father is with me. I have said these things to you, that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world (John 16:32-33).”

  45. Kerry says:

    It amazes me how there is pretty much a 50/50 split on believers in your guilt or not . I have read many responses in the online tabloids and you are able to give a thumbs up or down depending on your opinion on the question and it’s always half believe in you and half believe you are guilty .
    It angers me when I read some of the responses and cruel and harsh replies .
    Amanda , how do you cope with this ?
    It would tear me apart personally as I always have to prove my point to the very end and rarely let anyone have the last word .
    For you to let people put there negative and positive opinions side by side on your blog shows a very thick skin …..something that I wish I had .
    Stay strong girl :)

    • Alex K. says:

      “It amazes me how there is pretty much a 50/50 split on believers in your guilt or not.”

      Bear in mind that there is a rather aggressive anti-Knox online movement (active since 2008-9!) whose members, typically anonymous, use multiple identities (“sock puppets”) on internet forums and in comments sections. It’s not hard to see -with some experience – that there is only a handful of them, but they are extremely active.

    • Greg T says:

      the 50/ 50 split if there is one, is simply a poll of people who never bothered to research or investigate, and basically just spout off their ignorance. The whole point of the justice system is to prevent trial by media, yet here we are. Gradually the media may loose their interest milking the lies….NOT. But their opinions are worthless to fact, so are all the popular opinions of people both sides, who are clueless and too lazy to investigate or use common sense. There is a reason for the creation of USA..it was to get away from the outrageous laws of the British. There is a reason for our justice system, it is to protect the innocent from Holy Grail style witch hunts. (“She is a witch!…I am not a witch! …She looks like a witch!…This is not my real nose, its a fake one they put on me!) Why didn’t the Florence trial just put her on a scale with a duck for comparison?

      • Phil B says:

        I presume you’re talking about historic laws as this case would have been thrown out long ago in the UK!

        I know there’s been a lot of hostility from the UK tabloids but I think most British people (indeed, most people in general), when presented with the full facts, would see the absurdity of the case and that Amanda and Rafaelle are innocent.

      • Ahem! says:

        For starters the trial is in Italy not the UK, so I dont know what your point is. Second, you do realise that the USA incarcerates 716 people per 100,000 and is the world leader in incarceration rates. The UK only incarcerates 148 per 100,000 and Italy a mere 108.

        Based on that, which country would you say is carrying out the most witch hunts, or is there just a higher criminal element in the USA than anywhere else or more innocent people in jail in the USA?

        • Sarah H says:

          How many cases in the US modern history (say, the last 300 years) can you site in which the prosecutor or other attorney was able to call the female defendant a “diabolical she-devil”? Or an “enchanting witch”? Or a “Luciferina”?

          None. Italy wins that award.

  46. quixotic1 says:

    The simple solution for you is to turn your back on Italy and get on with your life. Seize any opportunity to change this insanity to your 2nd priority, then your 3rd and so on. I know fully that what I suggest is seemingly impossible. What you have now may be what winning looks like when it is at the turn of the tide. I believe you are winning.

    You may not have noticed but last weekend the page hit counter of google was over a billion hits for your name. The discussion boards on the major network sites were on fire with a ideological food fight in response to some of the most ignorant articles I’ve ever seen on the subject of double jeopardy. These articles were authored by high profile American news commentators. I believe you are winning.

    On the subject of double jeopardy I’m fine with the food fight. It slowly educates or reminds Americans of why we are not Italians. When and if the day comes for a national decision of sending you back the subject doesn’t need to be only about double jeopardy. It can also be about the prior acquittal. The powers in charge will need to demonstrate why when an Italian court finds you “innocent”, then removes the handcuffs that you have been wearing for four years through two long trials, then practically escorts you to a plane to go where ever you choose and reestablishes your full rights of self determination… then suggest this act was not an acquittal because they thought about it for 18 months and changed their mind. I don’t think any (many) people no matter what their nationality is are going to be OK with that. You were acquitted in the eyes of the rank and file of humanity and regardless of any unique precept Italy wants apply just to get their way the fact remains that laws were written for people not for jurist. I believe you are winning.

    My worry is for Raffaele.

    • Daphne says:

      “Winning?”
      What a fresh new perspective — that terminology sounds familiar. I agree one thing Amanda and Raffaele can do is consider alternatives and appeal for assistance in a government that does not have any extradition treaties with Italy, if that is what it will come down to. I am shocked to hear that (what I always suspected) Rudy does admit to his presence which Meredith as she lay dying, but had nothing to do with her murder. Its so macabre.

      • Daphne says:

        “with” not which

        • Sarah H says:

          If you are shocked to hear that admission from Rudy, then you have clearly been ignorant of key facts in the case. Spending a lot of time on the hate sites will do that to you.

          • Daphne says:

            @Sarah H: Hate sites? What do you know about hate sites? I was referring to the recent article that I read about the Kerchers sharing 20 million with Rudy when he gets out.

    • Wayne says:

      I find it absolutely absurd that so many commentators in many news-sites continue to say that the Hellmann court ruling was not an acquittal. The translated ruling uses that exact word. “Acquits”. Then the Italian court system claims that “no” we don’t acquit until we review it over and over.

      Give me a break. Besides being counter to the concept of double jeopardy even more importantly its contrary to the concept of proving a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. No new incriminating evidence was introduced in the Florence trial. They tried with the knife but only finding the new DNA sample belonging to Amanda not Meredith, which confirmed what the Hellmann court had already said and what the defense had already said, “the knife was a cooking knife, Amanda’s DNA would be on it”. So with no new evidence, there was simply a dispute in judgment between the Florence and the Hellmann court.

      So how can anyone claim “no reasonable doubt” when a court in Italy actually acquitted her? You can’t.

      • Willis Coleman says:

        Let’s not get hung up on semantics. At least 100 countries around the world allow prosecutors to appeal an acquittal, which they did successfully in this case because Hellmann did not consider the evidence holistically. Note that these are defense appeals. The burden is on the defense to introduce compelling new evidence or arguments. The prosecution can simply repeat the same evidence they presented to Massei.

        • quixotic1 says:

          (fast fingers) I meant your point is mute. We are United States and we don’t abide by other whatever at least 100 other countries decides for themselves. We are American.

        • quixotic1 says:

          Your{ point is mute. We are in the United States and do not abide by whatever 100+ other nations decides for themselves. We are American.

        • Nick says:

          You make an absurd theory and try to back it up with a piece of ginned-up “evidence”.

          I prove that the “evidence” is false or completely unreliable and discard it.

          You agree—only to produce another absurd theory and another piece of worthless “evidence”, which I also completely discredit and toss down with the first one.

          This process is repeated a thousand times—each time I prove my case and each time you agree—until we are standing before a giant pile of what we have mutually agreed is garbage.

          At last, I have the very last piece of quasi-evidence in my hand. I prove to you that it is also worthless.

          You completely agree that it is indeed worthless. Then you point back to the pile and say “but what about all that?”

          That is your idea of a “holistic” argument.

        • Nick says:

          If the defense presents evidence that renders the prosecution’s evidence worthless, the prosecution MUST present new evidence to rebut it. They didn’t, and that’s why the Hellmann jury ruled to acquit.

          The Supreme Court overturned the acquittal for the simple reason that the Massei report was so impenetrably inane that it was impossible to tell what he was actually arguing, and therefore impossible to offer a logical argument against it except to say that it was complete nonsense, which is what Hellmann said.

          The case made in Florence, while it is still completely absurd, is at least decipherable. The Supreme Court will now have something they can actually work with, which was their object in sending the case back to appeals.

        • Sarah H says:

          Considering the evidence “holistically” means they did not use the standard of “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” which is the standard in Italy and in the European Union.

          As to your other points, the defense was prevented from entering new evidence, or even from examining the raw data files from the prosecution’s DNA “experts.” The prosecution, on the other hand, imagined a whole new motive and a new theory of the crime. It was no longer a sex-game-gone-wrong theory, but a Meredith-upset-about-poop-causing-everyone-else-to-murder-her theory. The judge also decided to include new evidence in the trial. This was a new trial with new evidence, a new motive, and a new crime theory. It is precisely the kind of trial that our double jeopardy law prohibits.

        • David Barneby says:

          William Coleman
          Effectively , what you are saying , or implying , would confirm my long held opinion , that in Italy
          You are Guilty until Proven Innocent .
          My Italian lawyer friends all deny that , but the results of a number of trials still confirm my belief that that is so .

        • Wayne says:

          I doubt your claim of “100 countries”. but lets look at the logic of the Italian system. They “ACQUIT” two people for murder. Then release them to travel the world without restriction. Then say that they are not really acquitted and that their trial is still in progress. Then find guilty and want them back.

          Whats wrong with this picture? What possible logic is there that a country would have an accused murderer supposedly in the middle of their trial system go free wherever they want to any country they want? Not the slightest concern for public safety? Clearly Amanda was acquitted.

          Saying that Hellmann didn’t consider the evidence, means a disagreement in judgment. No new evidence was introduced by the prosecution, just a disagreement in how the evidence was judged.

          If that isn’t double jeopardy and more importantly reasonable doubt, then nothing is.

          • Luara says:

            I have often thought, for all the accusations and smearing of Amanda and Raffaele – what have they done since they were released?
            There have been no murders in drug-crazed sex games around them, so far as I know. Neither of them have been accused of a criminal offense since, so far as I know.
            It must be awfully tough for these so-called psychopaths to keep their criminal urges under wraps :(

      • Tom Mininger says:

        Willis-
        Holistically? Here’s what we’ve gotten “holistically” because the authorities can’t face up to a burglary gone bad:

        Mignini and Commodi:
        Sex game gone wrong
        Satanic sex cult murder ritual one night behind schedule
        Jealousy
        Robbery
        No motive

        Massei:
        Amanda and Raffaele saw Guede forcing himself on Meredith and instead of helping her, they joined Guede who they didn’t know. Then Amanda grabbed Raffaele’s huge kitchen knife. Wait… How did that get to the cottage? Oh, yes Raffaele must have given it to Amanda for protection. She must have stored it in her handbag without it being torn to shreds.

        Mignini to reporter during 2nd trial:
        Maybe Amanda directed it from another room

        Italian Supreme Court:
        That sex game gone wrong sounded good.

        Crini:
        Meredith and Amanda had a fatal argument over Guede’s unflushed turd in Filomena/Laura’s bathroom at the other end of the flat, not even in Meredith/Amanda’s bathroom.

        Nencini’s “theory” will have to be different. Willis, we’re still waiting for your theory.

        This judicial farce is an insult to Meredith’s memory.

        Here’s the list of credible evidence on this case:
        Guede’s bloody palm prints are on the murder bedroom wall and under the pillow he positioned Meredith with. The authorities refuse to test the pillow stain that looks like semen.

        Guede’s bloody shoeprints are in the bedroom and leading out into the hallway.

        Guede’s DNA is on Meredith’s clothes, inside her. Her blood and his DNA are on her handbag.

        Guede’s knife hand fingers are cut (like OJs) which tends to happen to the perp when the hand slides forward from the handle over the blade when the knife meets resistance, especially when lubricated by spattered blood.

        Guede admits throwing out his bloody clothes and going dancing. He was spending Meredith’s rent money.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          Zero blood transfer evidence against Amanda and Raffaele from that messy crime scene. Zero credible DNA evidence against them. Meredith attained over 40 bruises in a valiant fight for her life. Zero cuts and bruises on A and R. No one in the world can remove their invisible DNA and leave Guede’s invisible DNA behind.

          Seasoned murder investigators describe how straightforward it is to solve this resident surprises burglar murder:
          http://www.amazon.com/The-Forgotten-Killer-Meredith-Kercher-ebook/dp/B00I3QZ7G0/ref=pd_rhf_cr_p_d_4

        • Willis Coleman says:

          As you know motive does not need to be established. The most depraved crimes often have no rational motive. May I suggest to everyone that if you are going to repeat the same unresponsive arguments over and over you simply say, “see my post from 2/9/14 at 2:26.” It would make the board much easier to read.

          • Wayne says:

            If it doesn’t need to be established then why is the Italian court system twisting itself into a pretzel trying to establish one. Why doesn’t it say “we don’t know”. Instead of a quest for the truth, their continual assertion of one motive after another looks more like a quest to concoct any story they feel might stick with the public. Criminal convictions are supposed to be justice while pursuing the truth. Not “anything goes” just to get a conviction.

          • Luara says:

            Of course having a motive is important, as part of the whole picture. See Steve Moore’s page The Mountain of Missing Evidence for the evidence that should be there if they were guilty.
            Then consider the quality of the prosecution’s actual evidence.

          • Sarah H says:

            A motive may not be necessary in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt, but this is the opposite situation. In this case, there wasn’t a speck of evidence putting Amanda in the crime room; and there wasn’t any of Meredith’s blood or DNA on Amanda’s clothing; and there was no witness to the crime. In this case a motive is CRITICAL.

        • Cinnamon says:

          We’ve already got Nencini’s theory: it was a “boy’s night out”. Rudy and Raffaele (who hadn’t ever met) got bored and decided to engage in violence, and Amanda joined in. So not the sex game, not the unflushed toilet, not money, but pure boredom.

        • Daphne says:

          @Tom Mininger: But OJ’s presence has never been ascertained.

    • Kenneth Janeway says:

      Dear Amanda: I am starting to see a real change in the stories coming out of America regarding your case and obvious innocence. I think this will start to make a difference over time. I also saw, and read, your interview with Simon in the Guardian a few days ago and I read the text of it just now tonight. I think Article VI in the Extradition Treaty may help you more than anything else to keep you in the United States. I want to meet you one day, I want you to be happy, you are not a “marked” person to me in any sense of the word. More and more Americans are starting to take an interview in your case and know you are innocent. Please stay strong, just focus on school and not on having a bad self-image just because 7 mis-guided people in Italy think you are guilty – they are WRONG. You are a wonderful woman and are so talented and gifted and I will continue to champion your innocence, and Raffaele’s, for as long as it takes to help clear your names. I pray for you both – every single day. I know you are completely innocent. – Best, Ken

      • Kenneth Janeway says:

        Hi Amanda: Correction in prior post: Change the 8th sentence down to read: “More and more Americans are starting to take an interest in your case” – Best, Ken

  47. Kai says:

    Lovely and honest portrayal of Amanda in the Guardian today, for those who haven’t seen it yet:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/08/who-is-amanda-knox-interview

    All the best, Amanda! I’m waiting for your book to arrive and can’t wait to read it. I read the few pages available on Amazon and thought it was a really well put together beginning..

    • Chan says:

      I just read that. Amanda Knox is such a lovely person with a wonderful family and great friends. So many people forget that the real Amanda Knox bears no relation to the fake one the media created. And it is still impossible to remove all traces of two people from a crime scene while leaving those of a third undisturbed. All of the other purported evidence amounts to a school of red herrings designed to distract people from that one, stubborn fact.

      Amanda, if you are reading this, my wife and I KNOW you are innocent. besides that one stubborn fact, I remember quite clearly that story of you at the gallery opening when you comforted that child. I’m so, so, so sorry that all this is happening to such a lovely person. The media storm and these cynical prosecutors have nothing to do with who you are.

  48. Julie Jorgensen says:

    It was great to read these comments from Don Saulo the Catholic Chaplain from Capanne prison.

    Father Saulo, who ran study classes with (Amanda) and let her play his guitar in jail, insisted she was “incapable of murder”. He said: “I spent a lot of time alone with her talking very deeply.

    “From what I know of her I can say Amanda is incapable of murder.

    “All I will say is I’m convinced she did not murder Meredith….She isn’t a bad person. She has a good heart and when she was in prison she reached out to the other girls. I have never seen Amanda full of hate or nastiness.”

    (Amanda) credited Father Saulo with helping her with chats about religion and politics.

    He said: “Amanda and I talk every week – she’s like my granddaughter.

    • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

      Yes,
      Don Saulo was like a godsend in that prison to Amanda and I’m sure other prisoners.
      Even ones who were guilty. A light in a dark place…a friendly smile in a foreign land.
      I know Amanda in her book, really credited him with being a great comforter.

      I think God was looking out for her, extending his comforting hand through Don Saulo.

      • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

        Psalm 34:18
        The Lord is close to the brokenhearted
        and saves those who are crushed in spirit.

      • Julie Jorgensen says:

        I agree Michael. Every time doors were slammed shut in Amanda’s life…windows were opened in their place. I hope Amanda can always find those open windows and realize their significance. They are purposeful gifts from a loving God and not coincidences. I hope that gives her some comfort and encouragement when her spirits are down.

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          It might sound crazy at this particular moment in time…but I do have one suggestion for Amanda, and in fact for any of us who are struggling with discouragement at this time in our lives.

          Take a few minutes and write down all the good things happening in your life. Include family, friends, school, people who support you in your life, health, shelter, food, etc. Push away anything negative.

          If you can think about all the great blessings in your life…than maybe you can see the positive out of all the negative. It is my great hope that your spirit will be lifted and your discouragement will diminish.

    • Hi Julie: I want to meet Don Saulo one day because he has been so kind to Amanda Knox. Amanda did nothing wrong in Italy re: the crime committed against Meredith Kercher. Amanda and Raffaele should never have been arrested or even taken into custody. Amanda was simply being herself which is all she knows how to do. She actually does that better than anyone else when you stop to think about it because God created her to be Amanda Knox – and no one else – so like all of us, she is UNIQUE. And in that “uniqueness” she is also innocent. I am very disappointed in Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, going on CNN saying she is guilty. He is clearly wrong in making this statement in the American media but hopefully his view of her will change over time to where he, too, realizes that she and Raffaele were simply set-up. I also hope that the media in both England and Italy start to view Amanda and Raffaele in a different light, the American media is turning around as we speak. CBS has a new web article they have written on the possibility that Amanda was used as a “political pawn.” The Link is at: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/was-amanda-knox-a-political-pawn-in-italian-politics/. Have a good day. Please pray about this case for the Italian Supreme Court to find the truth in their coming decision which will finally exonerate Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. – Best, Ken

      • Julie Jorgensen says:

        Kenneth,
        I’d love to meet Don Saulo too one day. He seems like a very loving and kind man and just the person Amanda needed at that significant time in her life. I hope throughout her life there will be “Don Saulo’s” along the way to lighten the path and lift her burdens.

    • Daphne says:

      Don Saulo gave Amanda the gift of courage and showed her that when all was negative, she could appeal to a higher spirituality and pray. Amanda’s chapter admits he helped her.

  49. Ella Bella says:

    Amanda,
    I just started to read the massei report. It mentions that Meredith’s two cell phones were found in someone’s yard. It also mentions that same family also received a bomb threat. Did the police take fingerprints from the cell phones or investigate who might have called the family with a bomb threat. The phones must have been stolen the night of the murder. If the bomb threat call was made using one of the cell phones that would mean the person who stole them knew the family and their phone number. Did the police follow up on any other potential leads or crimes in the area. Do they have proof of following up on other leads? Also, the report makes reference to the email you wrote to 25 friends and family. It does not mention any other emails or messages you would have sent your family before you were arrested.If there are other emails or messages could they prove your innocence? Why wouldn’t the prosecutor show those emails in court.
    I believe you are innocent…otherwise why would you try to call Meredith on your cell phone the next morning.
    I also read that the police questioned you about the night of the murder but they did not do this until November 5th…5 days later. Do they really expect someone to remember specific details like if they woke up in the middle of the night 5 nights earlier. I can’t remember little details like that with certainty.
    If you had committed the crime why would you want to go back to the apartment by yourself the next morning…I know I wouldn’t have.
    With regard to the condition of the washroom…I recently visited my 20 year old daughter at university. She lives in an apartment with two roommates…they do not leave the washroom in a spotless condition. I don’t think many young girls do but I would never suspect a crime had been committed.
    Also, if the prosecutors believed that Guede did not act alone then why didn’t he squeal on who helped him. If you and Raffaele were involved why would he protect you?…that doesn’t make sense.
    I think the prosecutors needed to find someone to charge to keep peace in the town. They produced limited evidence but I am more curious about possible evidence they have in their possession that they did not produce that could help your case.
    I would never willingly go back to Italy either!!

    • Nasim says:

      It’s refreshing to read someone who is actually new to the case rather than just pretending. The prank call was traced to someone in Rome. It may have been a bizarre coincidence or the police presence may have spooked whoever had the phones into thinking they were being traced. The phones had no usable prints.

    • Daphne says:

      Ella:
      Hi. Sometimes foreigners are pretty vulnerable to dangers, as we have the misfortune of learning for ourselves. Her youth made her a target; everyone was horrified at what had happened to Meredith. Amanda sometimes said that she thought it could have been her who was murdered. Amanda didn’t really know anyone as well as Raffaele, as she had only arrived a few weeks earlier and knew little of the language. He was protective of her in the sense that she was at risk — and Mignini very soon proved to be her biggest challenge.

      That is pretty weird about the cellphones. Maybe the homeowner ruined the prints, or the police mishandled them. I have never heard it tackled, and will go through court documents. Good question.

    • MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

      Obviously Ella,
      The investigators and the prosecution team didn’t really seem interested at all in investigating real clues, real facts or real evidence that might proof Amanda’s innocence. Instead they based their murder accusations and their final verdict on mind-baffling theories, absurd opinions, and wrong assumptions based on inconclusive facts. That vaguely summarizes a typical corrupt system of justice.

      Typically, I would say this usually how most “coverups” operate. This farce
      of a trial stinks of a political coverup…at Amanda’s and Raffaele terrible expense.

      I guess I’m still surprised that the Kercher family still thinks this farce of a trial is justice.

      • Daphne says:

        Michael:
        I feel for the Kerchers. They themselves admit that the truth is still not known to them. As for the coverup, you are definitely right. I believe the true instigators of this crime are at large; the Italian justice system is, in some way, protecting those who are guilty.

    • Luara says:

      Do they really expect someone to remember specific details like if they woke up in the middle of the night 5 nights earlier.
      However if you give inconsistent accounts that becomes evidence of guilt in many people’s minds. And something the police use to pressure people – “you contradicted yourself, so you’re guilty”

      • Sarah H says:

        Yes. Which is why no one should ever try to “help” the police in a murder investigation (in which they could possibly be considered a suspect) by answering questions without an attorney present. Their favorite tactic is to confuse their suspects and get them to contradict themselves, and then to portray that confusion as guilt.

  50. T.C. says:

    Senator Feinstein,
    We learned last week that the presiding judge in the Amanda Knox trial is being investigated.

    ” Italy’s Justice Minister Annamaria Cancellieri has begun a preliminary inquiry into Judge Nencini’s behavior in the Kercher case vis-à-vis Italy’s code of ethics. It has left, what one Italian commentator calls, “a sinister picture of the Italian justice system.”

    “One thing the trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have always lacked is a verifiable motive for the murder of Knox’s British roommate. So police and prosecutors have thrown handfuls of motives against various courtroom walls in the hopes that one sticks. It has become a prosecutor’s user manual for creative but baseless arguments. So the past motives for the crime are: it was a sex-game gone bad; it was a ritual killing; it was a robbery; it was mean girls; it was because Amanda Knox is a “she-devil.””

    “Quite unexpectedly, Judge Nencini has added yet another motive: a boys night out. Over the course of 30 meetings, Judge Nencini said that he and the jury had developed “a line of reasoning.” Their “reasoning” is that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito “had nothing to do” the night of November 1, 2007 in Perugia. And the idea to kill Meredith Kercher, who was stabbed multiple times, “was born in an evening with the guys” according to Nencini. The Judge did tell the reporters that he was “aware” that this was “most controversial.” Nencini also conceded he has no idea what actually happened the night Meredith Kercher was killed.” See: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/italian-judge-who-sentenced-amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito-under-fire-for-remarks/

    Now we learn that Amanda Knox is being used as a political pawn.

    “In April 2013, the Italian Supreme Court threw out judge Claudio Hellmann’s 2011 acquittal of Knox and Sollecito. Now retired, Hellmann told La Stampa newspaper that he “foresaw” the reversal. Hellman said “the party of the prosecutor is very strong in the judiciary” and that political party had “influenced” the Italian Supreme Court, according to La Stampa.” See: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/was-amanda-knox-a-political-pawn-in-italian-politics/

    We also know there was absolutely zero DNA evidence that would put Amanda Knox at the scene of the crime.

    We also know the lead investigator was tried and convicted of abuse of power.

    So, how long are you, the U.S. Senate, or our government as a whole going to remain silent on this issue? Why isn’t there any Senate hearings? I am in dismay at the silence…The U.S. runs around the world protecting U.S. business interests with military action yet it can’t speak out for a citizen that is being railroad by a corrupt foreign government? This young woman’s life is at stake. This farce as been going on long enough. She can’t move on with her life which in essence is ” cruel and unusual punishment.” If you and this government can’t take a stand, it shouldn’t be F**K the EU…It should be F**k the U.S.

    I suggest you investigate this case. I also suggest you and the Senate speak as one and preempt any thought of extradition. To sit there and do nothing is an injustice. Amanda Knox and her family are suffering. It is mental torture. This case needs closure regardless of what the corrupt Italian courts do.

    T.C.

    I will continue to write every week………..I suggest others who believe in Amanda Knox’s innocence do the same…

    • Tom Mininger says:

      It’s very good but I’d leave out the cursing. It does not impress hardened politicians or their staff.
      Thanks.

      • T.C. says:

        Generally I would agree however, the reality is a staffer is reading this not the Senator. It is the staffer that will brief the politician if there is enough people writing on the subject so anger gets noticed and conveyed more than niceties.

        Politicians care only about one thing, reelections. If the constituents are angry they are likely losing votes and are more apt to take action. I sent it exactly how I pasted it here, with **. So in essence I censored myself which is very difficult coming from this former U.S. Marine. I prefer action and would like to put my boot in places the sun doesn’t shine when inaction is the political course of the day. I am not a diplomat but I did convey my point.

        I didn’t serve this country so a politician can throw a fellow citizen under a bus all the while using the military to protect business and other political interest abroad. The governments number one obligation should be to its citizen and if injustice is occurring it needs to be dealt with.

        Why do we have a extradition treaty with Italy when its justice system is obviously corrupt? Politics, that’s why. I am getting pretty tired of the politics and the politicians…aren’t you?

        Read: ” Sometimes Diplomacy Needs the F-Word”
        http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-07/sometimes-diplomacy-needs-the-f-word.html

    • Julie Jorgensen says:

      Your desire to help Amanda is admirable…I would just recommend leaving out swearing in future letters to elected officials…that doesn’t really warm them up to what you are saying and it’s also disrespectful. Just my 2 cents.

      • James Moninger says:

        Concerns about this case would more appropriately be directed to the US Department of State; not to Congress. There is little or nothing the legislative branch of the government can do to affect treaties that are already in place. (Senate hearings, etc. are not the way the federal process works.) Using profanity with senior members of Congress can never be helpful.

        I am hopeful that the State Department is watching this case carefully and is prepared to choose the correct path, whatever that may eventually entail, to protect a US citizen from any further violations of human and legal rights.

        • T.C. says:

          The point is, and I have made it clear in previous posts, a extradition treaty with Italy is insane. The State Department cannot write, cancel, or approve such treaties. This is now political and U.S. Senator’s can put pressure on the State Department. They can do this by commenting on the case. They can have hearings on the treaty and they can cancel it if they choose to do so. The State Department can either say yes or no to an extradition. They would likely say no if the Senate suggests they do so. Extradition treaties are as much political as they are legal and politicians and the state department can trump the legalities of it. There is wiggle room.

      • T.C. says:

        It has now been a couple of weeks since the latest “verdict” and the only politician to my knowledge that has commented was Washington State’s Senator Cantwell. The White House and the State Department have dodged the issue. This may be for diplomatic / political reasons, what do I know?. However, elected politicians need to voice an opinion. They need to act. Being silent on the issue serves no one. I will continue to write and if I offend a politician or there staff, too bad. The longer they remain silent, the more I will ramp up the anger and I won’t be so nice in the future….

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          It feels like a couple of weeks T.C…but it’s actually just been a week and two days. I believe it’s good to keep this in the public eye and let the politicians know how most American’s feel. In that regard, you are right on target. It will take patience though as the politicians wait to see how Italy responds with this verdict. Politicians don’t want to even comment on this (as we saw in the interview with our Secretary of State Kerry) until the legal process in Italy is complete.

    • S. Michael Scadron says:

      I made a remarkably similar case that Amanda and Raff are pawns in Italy’s political games in the following piece I published last summer: http://wrongfulconvictionnews.com/why-the-italian-judicial-circus-wont-let-go-of-amanda-knox/

  51. Som Nathan says:

    Dear Amanda, I saw this interview script at the US State Department website. Just thought to bring it to your attention.
    =================================
    Interview With Jake Tapper of CNN’s The Lead

    Interview
    John Kerry
    Secretary of State
    Department of State
    Washington, DC
    February 5, 2014
    QUESTION: Kerry may soon find himself in the middle of an extraordinary extradition request. The tabloid nature of some of the coverage notwithstanding, the saga of Amanda Knox could pose a serious diplomatic crisis. Knox was recently retried in Italy for the murder of her roommate. The Italian court found her guilty. Now back in the States, Knox could one day face extradition back to Italy to serve a prison sentence.
    It may come that the Italians come to you and say we really would like Amanda Knox to come back to this country to serve a sentence. It certainly looks like the justice system is going in that direction. Would you entertain that request?
    SECRETARY KERRY: Well, we’ll see, Jake, what happens. It’s an ongoing legal process. There’s nothing in front of us now, and I don’t have to comment on it now and I’m not going to. We’ll let the legal process work out, and if and when the time comes that there’s a reason that I have to comment, I’ll do my duty.
    =================================
    This tells us that Secretary John Kerry is aware of your situation.
    I urge you to prepare yourself well in advance for any eventuality. You are an American Girl and needs to be protected from Italian Justice System and British media, for you are INNOCENT of the crime they are accusing you of, the second time after being exonerated in an earlier appeals court. Your did not commit this crime. You and Raffelle were not there at the crime scene, when Rudy Guede broke-in, attacked, raped, robbed, left Meredith dying, cleaned-up, went dancing and then fled to Germany. For some reason he is being protected by the Italian Justice System, and not being allowed to be cross examined by your defence team. The fantasy and theory of multiple attackers is OUTRAGEOUS, and must be condemned in a very forcefull way.

    I urge Amanda supporters to being writing, emailing, contacting the Congressmen and Senators in their respective areas and making them aware of this gross injustice being committed against this honest, intellegent, fun loving American Girl Amanda Knox. Her Human Rights were voilated during her detention in Perugian police questra.

    The author of all this mess is Perugian prosecutor Guilino Mignini, and he must be brought to books for prosecutorial misconduct.

    Alright, I stop here. You see how upset and angry I am. Sometimes, thinking about your fate, I can’t sleep at night for hours.

    On the other hand I urge you to stay calm, strong and above all stay healthy.
    Wishing all the Best for you. Som

  52. Elena says:

    I had never before known about your case since one week ago. First I thought you and Sollecito were guilty (the media, what they said about your behaviour, the so many changes in your stories which are not common in innocent people and lies in the interrogations, what they say that they found DNA in a knife suposed to be the killer-knife… and the fact that your words in the interviews seemed deceptive to me…), but finally after seeing that there’s no DNA evidence of you and Sollecito in the crime scene and reading Rudy Guede’s history I think you are innocent (he is famous about lying a lot about his life in the past, he has commited burglaries with knifes and his changes in stories and the fact that he said twice to others that you and Sollecito weren’t in the house the night of the crime, and also the fact that says that you stealed Meredith seems a lie to me because you had money and he had many times stealed and his DNA was found in Meredith’s purse, he also says that another man killed her and he said to him to take the money and run away, that’s simply too surreal to believe!!…).

    I think that several things went against you…
    1) The theory that Mignini supposed of the three of you in a satanic sex-orgy ritual…Which, even when I believe in the occult, seems surreal to me…(I don’t think most of the people do those things, even when a crime is concerned…). And what is more surreal and not cientific or serious at all is supposing that theory before having any evidence (he didn’t see satanic symbols in the crime scene, for example…), the first theory should always be the simpliest and related to the forensic evidence, I think…(I’m not a criminologist, but I’m a psychologist who has studyed some subjects related to criminology…).

    2)Your strange behaviour after the crime, which seemed deatached as I read. First I thought it was like a psycopath, but maybe it was just because you were different and inmature (but it seemed so to me, because I thought I would never act that way, but it’s true I have never been in such a experience in my life…).

    3) The parallel judgement of the media, and they distorsion of the facts (as I have read, for example, the store where you bought the “lingerie” wasn’t actually a lingerie shop, it was a regular store and you bought it because you didn’t have…). I think the media should never make part on this thinks (it also happens in Spain, which I think is very similar to Italy in some things, there are TV-programms where called “programas del corazón” where they like to talk and critisize the famous people and they are very agressive and rude, and when there are gruesome crimes like this one they comment and make judgement like the italian press did to you…My mother, which is a lawyer, always says this shouldn’t happen because this things are too serious and is Justice’s issue to judge and not their’s. I think the media shouldn’t speak or judge about these thinks, but we know that sex and morbidity sells…

    4) The fact that Sollecito collected knifes and hat a photo of him with knife and bleach (is maybe a coincidence, but made you suspects…).

    5) Your change in your stories and lies, and the false accusation of your boss made also that people thought you are not reliable or guilty, and also Sollecito’s changes…

    Well, now think you are innocent, but I’m no-one to judge you…But I still have some questions in my mind:

    1)Why didn’t they find any blood in the doorknob from outside Meredith’s room ? (and yes in the inside, it’s just strange that someone closed the door and didn’t leave any evidence).

    2)Why in the door’s bathroom there’s a long piece of blood in strange place but not infront?that’s so strange…

    3) Why Guede didn’t leave any more blood in the house if he was full of blood? did he take a shower?

    4) If Guede was famous for attacking with knifes why didn’t they search his knifes????(this is unbelievable to me…)

    Well, if you are innocent, I think, as I have lived some experiences of missunderstandings, lies and injuries against me (but I know not like this…), this is a very heavy karmic experience for you which has and will teach you many things about defending yourself and being strong and fighting for your dignity and justice…The only think I can say to you is that you fight and decrete for the Truth to come to the surface.

    • Mark Saha says:

      For Amanda and others researching this case — if you don’t know of it — here is a research link I’ve discovered called ITN:

      The link as I’m posting it shows 50 results of a search for the key words “don saulo” — some 50 citations, many of which give Ms. Knox a glowing character endorsement:

      http://www.itnsource.com/en/shotlist/ITN/2011/10/02/T02101135/?s=don%20AND%20saulo%20AND%20%22don%20saulo%22

    • BigDinBoise says:

      If you really care about learning the facts about this case, and I hope you would if you are commenting on either the guilt or innocence of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, then check out the following pro-innocence and pro-guilt web sites and at the least make an informed opinion. Obviously the sites are biased one way or the other but there is a lot of the actual case evidence, including crime scene photos, video, translated court documents, expert analysis, as well as various other information that has not been discussed much in the popular press. I’m confident that any reasonable thinking person would tend to see the obviousness of their innocence after seeing the details of the case.
      http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/
      http://www.truejustice.org

      • Elena says:

        Yes, I know those pages…I actually already did read most of all the staff in those two pages…

        Thank you. And I believe she is innocent.

    • Luara says:

      I don’t think Amanda and Raffaele actually changed their stories much. Most of the “changed stories” probably come from mis-translations in the tabloids or are otherwise not fairly represented.
      They both changed their stories somewhat while being interrogated, under intense pressure and traumatized. Amanda had a dreamlike picture of herself being at the murder, hearing Meredith scream. Raffaele got confused about which evening they were talking about and said something about Amanda maybe going out.
      I don’t think they have been inconsistent otherwise – they’ve said they spent the night together at Raffaele’s apartment.

      • DW says:

        I think when they say Raffaele said she “might have gone out,” it’s a bit of a spin on what happened. Questioned repeatedly about whether there was any conceivable way she could possibly have left the apartment at some point that night, without telling him and without him even noticing, he replied that that was possible. Hardly the same thing … Obviously he was trying to give a truthful answer – of course it’s always *possible* that something happened while we were sleeping that we didn’t know about. We cannot truthfully say we don’t know if someone left the house while we were sleeping. He was trying to answer honestly as to whether this was even theoretically possible. If one is being interrogated one gets frightened and wants to be sure to answer questions accurately. So by my reading he told the truth and has paid a hell of a price for it.

        • Philippe says:

          Very good point there..
          Most of what is, still to this day, held against either Amanda or Rafaele comes from these ‘unrecorded”,no lawyer present interrogations, and was obtain thru trick questions like this one. It is one of the many very upsetting things about reading the closing arguments from the prosecutor etc, he was allowed to present some things as evidence that were either obtain “illegally” (by other standards at least) which have been contested since the next morning since by Amanda, and also other evidences basically pulverized by the defense on appeal 1! Since there is no real argument for guiltyness ( is there such a word) and now obviously serious concerns on what brought such case against two young people , thru them to the vopindict of the whole world while not only having the guilty person in their custody , but all the evidences only pointing at this person, why on earth aren’t we aloud to investigate and prosecute these that have committed such acts. In delivering their verdict the court of Florence ‘s wall behind the judges seems to be stating : the law is equal for everyone. .. Well , obviously not everyone.. What about stefanoni withholding blood results etc.. what about picking a random knife, calling it the murder weapon, first convicting the accused with it, refusing to answer how they tested it, then made to concede that it wasn’t blood but .. Bread.. Then finally turning around that a knife used in one’s kitchen , having none of the victim’s blood on it, can still be called the murder weapon… when is that statement going to be investigated..?

      • Meg says:

        Amanda, I recognize how demoralizing things look right now, so feel free to ignore me if the time’s not right.

        But, I have wanted to ask you:

        Have you ever stepped back and reflected on how flawed it seems your worldview may have been, with respect to traveling and integrating abroad? I studied in France for awhile in college, and would never have thought to immerse myself so completely in a foreign culture without at least some allies or contacts who might be available to guide me though some crisis – like what happened to you. Most exchange students aren’t nearly so trusting and assuming that they’ll be safe and always fairly treated in a foreign country.

        Looking back, I did not know at 20 that most people are murdered by people they know, so it would not have occurred to me to even contemplate that I could come under suspicion for one I didn’t commit in the context of my friends, roommates, etc. But I think it may have dawned on me that the language barrier would obstruct communication too much in a murder case no less, and that the cops might pressure me to implicate someone just because I knew cops weren’t always right, much less perfectly moral.

        I’ve just wondered this, and hope it’s not presumptuous or untimely to ask you. I think Seattle is a city built on sort of a mirage in a way, in that it doesn’t have the establishment history of places like the east coast, where different people, groups, ethnicities, etc. have battled and not always got along. And corruption isn’t something totally uncommon.

        Anyway, as someone who has recognized your total innocence with regard to the murder I’ve always been sort of affronted (not offended necessarily) by your inability to sense how much potential risk there is to putting yourself in such a precarious position.

        I’m sure you, your mother, your father, have all spend sleepless nights wishing you could go back and do it all over. How often I’ve wished this for you and your mother as well. I’ve often felt maternal towards you myself; I have almost 20 years on you.

        So perhaps looking back is not so fruitful, at the end of it all. Looking forward, do you integrate the common sense wisdom you’ve gained from this unimaginable nightmare at all, or is it still too raw and ongoing?

        You asked what your role in society is, and I went through an incredibly painful and disorienting phase in my young adulthood just like you, and felt similar displacement. Your role is to keep standing by your truth, without giving up on your dreams and your right to pursue a normal, fulfilling life.

        Just my two cents.

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          Meg,

          I like what you said in the last paragraph of your preceding comment.. “You asked what your role in society is,…… Your role is to keep standing by your truth, without giving up on your dreams and your right to pursue a normal, fulfilling life.”

          I second that.
          Very well said.

        • Ken says:

          I went to Italy as a student on september 2007 , stayed there for couple of years till I finished my degree. I always imagined the same story could have happened to me, that is either being killed or being incriminated. During the first year, I had cheerful roomates and lots of poeple coming in and out of the house. One of my roomates smoked weed too sometimes. I had a collection of strange manga ( just like Raffaele), and guess what, a collection of satanic books too, posters of Marilyn Manson all over the walls. I used to bother everyone with playing electric guitar and I argued heatedly with my roomates over noise, cleanning and house matters, typical for roomates.
          All this does not mean I could kill someone.
          I was 20 at the time, and yes, I believe you could be naive and stupid at 20. I did not know anyone in Italy prior to going there. I remember my mother worrying to death if I didn’t pick up the phone. I remember fearing for my life for being stalked one time, but nonetheless trusting strange poeple to give them my phone number, address, or personal information. I only learned with time and with bad experiences too. Fortunately for me they were not as bad as being falsely incriminated . But I was stalked, threatened with death one time, and had two legal causes with two different employers.

          • Meg says:

            Interesting to hear another person’s perspective on studying abroad. I didn’t know anyone back then who dared go it all alone; everyone seemed to study as part of a pre-set program, whether it was their own university’s or someone else’s. You really chose to design your own program and had no advisers on hand in Italy? I don’t even think my university would have allowed that even if anyone had tried, but am not sure as no one I knew did.

          • Meg says:

            Also, are you italian? Because I could see maybe venturing out alone in a country your people came to the US from, especially if you had some family somewhere in the area.

            Although as an undergrad I still would have wanted some kind of contact within the culture in my own people’s homeland.

        • Luara says:

          Very young people often have a lot of daring and no sense of the precariousness of health and safety. It’s one reason why many smokers started when they were children. I did things at 16 that make me shudder to think of, now.

          • Ken says:

            I am not Italian. I barely knew the language when I went to Italy and it was my first time staying away from home. I was promised a scholarship once in Italy, but was denied that after enrolling (long story!!!!) so I either had to quit University or find a job to pay for everything. I made a lot of bad decisions back then, but then I felt so young free and invincible, and these kinds of behavior seemed a good risk to take. Having said that, I know that I could have never killed anyone even if I might have seemed, to the others, a bit weird or even a little psycho ( and this is why Amanda seems to me way too normal compared to how I was). I am not generalising here, but through my experience, whether during the stalking story or the legal issues, I felt that if one is young+goodlooking+ a girl +alone+ in a foreign land, that it could be a lethal combination. It is as if people start seeing you like an easy prey, and I felt sometimes as if I had vultures surrounding me. Fortunately for me, I was blessed with the fact that things did not go that bad, and I can be a hypocrite and say “that’s because I did not have many sexual partners” or ” yea that’s because I did not smoke weed”, but it won’t be because of that. We all sometimes take risks and we all sometimes make mistakes. I think we all have lived on the edge of misfortune, this is why I find it sad when people point their fingers at the misfortune of others. It could have been one wrong person, one burglar, one stalker, me, or one of my roomates, that everything could have turned dramatically.
            This case is insane because they based the whole thing on a simple theory and on psychological interpretations of the characters. I studied it carefully and there are lots of non incriminating elements in the experts transcripts. Besides, sticking to science, the most likely explanation could be the most simple, and not some inimaginable orgy or something way too absurb like killing out of boredom, the boredom you feel when you’ve just met someone new and is in love
            -_O!!!

    • Hi Alena: The large kitchen knife taken at random from Raffaele’s kitchen drawer is not the murder weapon. Meredith was killed with a small pocket knife whose imprint, or outline, was found on her bedsheets. I also now believe that another person was with Rudy Guede during the assault but it absolutely was not Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito because THEY WERE NOT THERE at Amanda’s residence. The prosecution has therefore, since the beginning of this absurd case, entered the wrong knife into “evidence” as the murder weapon. Brilliant of them, huh? I am on my way now to study the Extradition Treaty between Italy and the United States. Keep up the good Blogging you are doing on this site…The Perugian Police are about to find out that even though they didn’t like Amanda, WE DO…Her supporters are growing daily here. She is simply innocent and Raffaele is completely innocent, as well of any involvement in the death of Meredith Kercher. I have been interested in this case since June 2011. – Best, Ken

      • Hi again Elena (correction): Here is a Link to a good CBS webpage article discussing the Politics that may be involved in the indictment of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. See Link at: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/was-amanda-knox-a-political-pawn-in-italian-politics/ . Have a good day. – Best, Ken

      • Here is the Link for International Extradition Treaties off the Wikipedia webpage. The International Extradition Treaty between Italy and the United States was signed on October 13, 1983 and went into force on September 24, 1984. It can be cited as TIAS 10837 and is a downloadable PDF file off the Wikipedia page. (I hope the PDF file isn’t corrupted yet). – Best, Ken

        • James Moninger says:

          Ken, you should be more concerned about the data on Wikipedia being corrupt than your PDF file. Anyone can update Wikipedia with their own version of “facts,” and only peer review keeps the site honest — sometimes.

          • Kenneth Janeway says:

            Hi James…The Treaties on Wikipedia are not regular articles written by those who use the Internet. There is a Table with every International Treaty signed by the United States with the full-text of each original Treaty itself, so I am confident to suggest them for reference to others including Amanda. These documents have nothing to do with “peer review”. – I will be getting copies of the Treaty I suggested from the State Department, soon, as well to double-check it also, but thanks for your comment anyway. – Best, Ken

      • Elena says:

        They “entered” that knife into evidence because they wanted the two of them to suit in their supposed crazy orgy of satanic sex theory…It should have been the opposite I think…

      • KennethJaneway says:

        The Extradition Treaty between Italy and the United States is 14 pages long as a PDF file. It can be cited as TIAS 10837 and was signed on October 13, 1983 and went into force on September 24, 1984. Everyone on Amanda’s site have a very good day…Keep the Faith…Stay strong, especially Amanda…Best, Ken

        • Dear Amanda: There is a large brown manila envelope coming your way (to Edda’s) – look at Article VI in the document that is enclosed, closely. This section may be the answer for you re: not being sent back to Italy in case the Italian Supreme Court holds against you in the next Appeal because you have once been both a) Convicted and b) Acquitted. This envelope was mailed from Phoenix today for you – it should arrive on Monday. – Best, Ken

          • Elena says:

            Kenneth Janeway, But as you sayed before…I think in this crime there are things which are still unsolved…And maybe is true that there was another man there.I don’t understand what’s the motive of the crime, if commited by Rudy Guede, to assest 46 stabs to Meredith…It seems like a passional crime…I think this type of crime could only been commited by a angry-agressive lover, a psychotic or a saddistic psychopath, but Guede doesn’t seem to me to be neither of the three…And the burglary is not a reason to stab 46 times a person…The robbery seemed fake and they didn’t steal very valous thinks…
            If she had a boyfriend, why the boyfriend wasn’t cosindered a suspect?

          • Julie Jorgensen says:

            Elena…Rudy did not stab Meredith 46 times. This is one of the lies that the media keeps telling so people will believe it was more than one murderer. He stabbed her 3 times. The other 43 or 44 wounds were bruises, cuts, etc.

            Rudy hit Meredith very forcefully in the face and mouth, he pulled out a big hunk of her hair, he grabbed her face and forced her to the ground which caused a great deal of bruising on her face and arms.

            After Meredith was dead, he sexually assaulted her and that probably left even more wounds. All the wounds did not occur while she was alive most likely.

            To finish off his horror, Rudy went through her purse (his finger prints are there) and he stole her money, cell phones and credit card. We do not know beyond a doubt that some other person didn’t help him do this atrocious thing…but if someone did help…where is their DNA, fingerprints, or footprints?

          • Kenneth Janeway says:

            From what I can tell, Meredith may have been assaulted by two people, meaning that someone was with Rudy Guede during the sexual assault. It definitely was not Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito because they were not even there. Whoever attacked Meredith was worried that she could identify them later in court as a witness that is the reason for so many stab wounds. She also resisted being sexually assaulted and had studied martial arts, herself. She may have really punched her attacker(s) hard and they simply lost their tempers and finished her off. She obviously fought very hard to stay alive, wouldn’t you, and I do the same? Amanda and Raffaele have both had to not only fight to clear their names and be heard but they also lost a new friend and Amanda lost a friend and roommate and had Amanda been home that night she may have become a victim of the burglars as well. I just want to concentrate on getting these innocent co-defendants a final Acquittal from the Italian Supreme Court and if that fails then blocking Amanda’s Extradition and continue to proclaim their innocence until Italy “listens.” – Best, Ken

    • DW says:

      Attaching “detached” after a trauma is not unusual behavior and certainly not psychopathic. It’s normal. I don’t think there anything even slightly unusual about her doing cartwheels at the police station. She was a normal twenty year old, off in a foreign country having a big adventure. Her roommate’s murder was horrible, but it didn’t suddenly make her into a different person. Doing cartwheels seems like a perfectly reasonable way to stay focused and cheerful during a long and draining session at the police station. If she had had the slightest idea her every move was being scrutinized, she no doubt would have realized cartwheels – or whatever it was, I think she has said there weren’t any actual cartwheels, just splits – anyway if someone had said “Pssssst you’re looking like a suspect” no doubt she’d have restrained the impulse to do exercises or stretches or whatever they were. The fact that she went on acting just like herself suggests innocence, not guilt. A guilty person, in her circumstances – at the police station in the hours following the murder – *would* have realized cartwheels would create the wrong impression if they were shown on TV around the world.

      • Julie Jorgensen says:

        A very good point DW. A guilty person would have fled like Rudy did and they wouldn’t have been nonchalant and going about their normal lives (as much as possible under the circumstances) the way Amanda and Raffaele did for those 5 days. Their phones were also tapped (unknown to them) and they never said anything incriminating during those 5 days or we would have heard all about it.

      • Luara says:

        I think Amanda said a police officer actually asked her to demonstrate her flexibility, while chatting with her. Many people would take this to mean that it was OK to do splits.

        • Elena says:

          DW I sayed “detached” because it’s what I read in many places, I wasn’t there…Like most of the people my opinion came from what the media said…(not from my own perception).

      • Elias says:

        She NEVER did “cartwheels” at the Questura. She did the “splits,” once, because a police officer asked her about her flexibility and they were talking gymnastics and yoga.

        Myths and slander, get out of the way!

    • Chan says:

      There is only one fact that matters: It is not possible to remove all forensic evidence of two attackers from a crime scene, including microscopic particles of DNA that are invisible to the naked eye, while leaving the forensic evidence of a third attacker in place undisturbed. Unless you have magical powers, of course.

      Do you believe in magic? I do not.

      If Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were not in Meredith Kercher’s room, no other piece of purported evidence matters. No aspect of Amanda Knox’s or Raffaele’s behavior matters. Nothing. Because if they were not in the room, they were not involved in the crime. Period. Case closed. End of story. Finito.

  53. MICHAEL FORTUNATO says:

    “(Florence judge Alessandro Nencini) also commented on the difficulty of reaching a verdict…and acknowledged that assigning a motive for the 2007 murder of British student Meredith Kercher was one of the most “controversial” aspects of the case….”

    Hi Amanda,
    I can clearly see how very difficult it would be to assign a motive for this murder, if in fact there was no motive (in your case), or as has been plainly presented in court, that there was also no “real” evidence that you were even at the murder scene that awful night.
    How does the Judge get around that? Did he just start improvising? How did he go about assigning a motive when there was no motive, and what evidence did he use to convict you of murder, when there was no evidence?

    As you said Amanda, its hard to know what was motivating these Italian officials. Pride perhaps?
    Despite their incredible breach, it’s been easy for many to see what your motivation is, and that’s pure justice. And I commend you for that…one day I hope you will find complete vindication by
    the Almighty Judge.
    ——Michael

  54. David Wistey says:

    Will someone please explain how civil attorneys are allowed to prosecute in a criminal case? Is this just an Italian thing?

    • BigDinBoise says:

      Yes – the civil case runs concurrent with the criminal trial.
      In this case there were actually four legal teams presenting evidence against Knox and Sollecito; the prosecutor (Mignini), the Kercher’s civil attorney (Maresca), Lambada’s civil attorney, as well as Rudy’s lawyer who was able to get a lesser sentence for Rudy by implicating the other two and making the case that Rudy played a minor part in the murder.
      I’m not an expert on the Italian judicial system but from what I understand, I believe civil damages are not ultimately assessed until the final verdict and if guilty then there would be a final civil trial to award damages. In the fist trail the judge awarded damaged to the Kercher’s of approximately $4 million euros, and I believe about $40 thousand to Lambada, as well as attorney fees. It’s been reported that the Kercher’s lawyer in the last trial asked for $20 million euros for the family, but nothing will be set in stone until after the final Supreme Court decision.

      • Kokomo Joe says:

        I have often wondered about this – hopefully someone knows the answer – if Amanda had paid off the original judgment to Lumumba prior to the appeal, would he and his lawyers still have been allowed to participate in the court proceedings?

    • Willis Coleman says:

      As I understand it, the reason most civil suits are piggybacked onto the criminal trial is that in Italy standalone civil suits are too expensive and too protracted for the average person to undertake. The drawback for the civil party is that the standard of proof is effectively beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas otherwise it would be balance of probabilities.

      • Nick says:

        You are misinformed.

        It doesn’t matter if the civil case is tried together with a criminal case; it still carries with it a lower threshold of proof and a lower standard for admissibility of evidence.

        That is why Italian prosecutors like to do it. It allows them to introduce evidence (e.g. illegally obtained, coerced confessions) to the jury that would otherwise be inadmissible in a criminal case.

        • Willis Coleman says:

          You’re talking about the fact that Amanda’s 1:45 confession was admitted into evidence to support the (criminal) calunnia charge. That has nothing to do with the burden of proof in a civil suit. But as far as the confession, it’s worthwhile to remember that in most common law countries there is no doubt that her statement would be fully admissible.

      • BigDinBoise says:

        What a bunch of bullshit. It is double, and in this case triple teaming with the prosecution. It is grossly unfair and another point for Amanda’s lawyers to try and block her extradition, if it is in fact every requested.

    • Alex K. says:

      In some countries with a criminal justice system based on the Napoleonic code, victims and/or their families are allowed to effectively co-prosecute the case together with the state. They can ask the court for a guilty verdict and an order for damages.

      In the case against Amanda and Raffaele, both the Kercher family and Patrick Lumumba had their lawyers argue for her guilt, the former in the murder case and the latter in the calumny case since they were merged into one trial.

      I believe this is a serious flaw in the system. It gives victims a strong incentive to side with dishonest prosecutors. In the Anglo-Saxon system, victims are allowed to speak only in the punishment phase. It also places an unfairly heavy burden on the defendant, who has to respond to arguments not only from the prosecution. In the Knox-Sollecito case, the Kerchers’ lawyer Maresca has been one of the most contemptible persons involved.

  55. Daphne says:

    Amanda:
    It’s typical of me to put my foot in my mouth, figuratively speaking. Earlier I made a comment that I had previously been wondering if you and Raffaele would ever get together again. I apologize. First, it’s none of my business. Second, you had already luckily found someone who obviously cares very deeply for you. That was so insensitive of me — sorry.

  56. Mark (aka Supernaut) says:

    Amanda – if you haven’t done already, check out Caro Emerald. She and her fellow musicians will uplift you.

    You and your closest companion love the guitar, yes?

    Well, Caro’s accompanying guitarist, Wieger Hoogendorp, is something special.

  57. Mark Saha says:

    Amanda,

    Apparently your interrogation is proof positive should you ever need it that you are 100% normal. I pass along his comments –

    Strategypage poster:

    It’s really not even a trade secret, anymore, but the truth is that Interrogation 101 is that you can often get someone to say almost anything if they are untrained and scared and, preferably, tired.

    If you scare someone badly enough, they tend to want to placate you and they are often willing to confess to anything, at all. In that setting, the admission is not even what the party being questioned is trying to communicate. It’s just a tool to try to stop the attack, rather like the person who confronts a burglar or robber and tells them that they can have whatever they want if they just leave the victim alone.

    If someone is tired enough, they lose control of what they say, at least on the fine level, and they can wind up doing odd things. They may babble incoherently. They may lose track of the conversation and miss the important part, but pick up on the questioner wanting them to agree with something, and just agree. They may just agree with whatever is being said because they’re too tired to disagree. Or, they may become so tired and want rest that they will say whatever they think will end the questioning so they can get get out.

    And, anyone, at all, no matter how experienced at speaking, will simply mess up a sentence or two now and then. Get someone talking long enough and error will creep it. It’s virtually inevitable.

    These fact, plus the permanent bureaucratic urge to wind things up quickly to make public officials look good goes a long way to explain the running argument in legal circles over matters like the reliability of confessions, the Miranda Warning, and such.

    TWIMC, if you ever find yourself being questioned by police/government agents, etc., and you aren’t active duty service with extra obligations, the rule of thumb if you are willing to talk is to answer all questions. Once. Anything after the first go-around begins to raise the probability that you will contradict yourself and that is like a crowbar and an enema for police questioning. Once they have you in a contradiction, they can go, variously, for your throat and balls, calling you a liar, saying that you have virtually confessed your guilt, etc..

    Allowing detectives to make you repeat questions time and again over an extended time is a time tested way to create at least the beginnings of a case against you.

    At that point, you become dependent on the honesty, integrity of the investigators and the bureaucracy to scrupulously observe your rights, the integrity of the investigation, not take the easy way and give up the harder inquiry to focus on the easy mark who just handed them reason to bring the hammer down on him.

    If you believe that there are no innocent people in prison, just stick around as long as they want you and keep answering the same questions time and again.

    Real life is not like a television series. Real criminal investigations do not always come with detailed plots, with certainty, with an omniscient viewpoint to tell everyone exactly what happened, who did what, etc.. Police and prosecutors live in a world of uncertainties, and use logic and prejudice to do their jobs. Knowing to a metaphysical certitude that you did not do something is not a guarantee that you can’t be convicted of doing it. A good citizen cooperates with legitimate authority, but is under no obligation to expose themselves to prosecution to satisfy the government or further careers of police and prosecutors.

    That really is one of the main things the Constitution was about.

    • Mark Saha says:

      BTW, forgot to add, the above comments were made after a review of the circumstances of your confession. He was commenting on it.

      • Sarah H says:

        I think the best advice is if there’s ANY chance you are a suspect in a criminal investigation, you shouldn’t speak AT ALL without an attorney. Once is too much. That’s what the ACLU says and I agree with them.

        • Mike Wiesner (Smith) says:

          Sarah, ever since I started following the ordeal of Amanda & Raffaele, I have been sharing this with all my students:

          NEVER TALK TO POLICE WITHOUT AN ATTORNEY! NEVER, NEVER, NEVER!

          This is more important than learning the MLA – really! While teaching students to be cynical seems wrong, Amanda paid a terrible price for being too helpful, honest and trusting.

          • Mark Saha says:

            You’re right, and easy to say, but in the real world that’s also easy to forget. Most people want to be helpful to a police officer if they can. And so…

            “If you believe that there are no innocent people in prison, just stick around as long as they want you and keep answering the same questions time and again.”

          • Luara says:

            NEVER TALK TO POLICE WITHOUT AN ATTORNEY! NEVER, NEVER, NEVER!
            Trouble with that is, in reality if you are a witness or a victim, the police will need to talk with you. In reality most of us aren’t going to pay hundreds of dollars to have an attorney present. Almost all the time, it will be OK and the police are doing the job we need them to do.
            The advice to answer any given question only once, is good advice.
            So is the “I do not consent to searches” mantra.

          • Sarah H says:

            Luara, if a person can’t afford an attorney they can get one appointed. That attorney might not be the greatest, but will be much better than NO attorney. Too many people talk to the police without attorneys; that makes their attorneys job much, much harder.

            In the real world, it’s best to act like Paul and Patti Ramsey, whose 6 year old JonBenet was murdered. They immediately hired an attorney and followed his advice not to submit themselves for questioning. They knew they and their 12 year old son were the primary suspects. And so, even thought the prosecution tried to smear them in the media, they never had to spend a day in jail. And years later the prosecutor completely exonerated them based on newly developed DNA evidence.

            Thank goodness they refused to help the prosecutor build a case against them by submitting themselves to an “interview.” As agonizing as it must have been for them not to try to help the prosecutor, they did exactly the right thing.

          • Luara says:

            Sarah,
            But when the police want to talk to someone as a witness or as a victim or for some other reason than being a suspect, hardly anyone would hire an attorney. A free attorney would not be appointed for them, and even if they could afford to pay for an attorney, they would be unlikely to – because it’s so unlikely an attorney would be needed. Who’s going to shell out $500 after a car accident to have an attorney there while the police are taking the accident report, for example.
            That’s why the dictum “never talk to the police” doesn’t work in practice.
            Yes if there’s a likelihood one might be a suspect, it might be better to have an attorney present.

    • Daphne says:

      @Mark:
      Everything you say about interrogations makes total sense. After receiving a face to face death threat and assault from 2 total strangers, verbal abuse, and stalkings from a man whose face was on a police wanted list, I went to a police station to file a report. What they told me:
      i) it didn’t happen that way because I perpetuated it and therefore no report would be filed
      ii) it’s typical and every citizen goes through this daily — no report will be filed
      iii) I was a liar — no report will be filed
      I was involved in a spur of the moment interrogation which last approximately 20 minutes. This ultimately led to a discovery about previous incidences concerning identity theft.
      When I came out of there I realized that police usually act on false reports about an intended victim that permanently mark credit profiles and other data bases. Also, criminals have steadfast ties to authority, which make it impossible to defend yourself and clear a bad reputation. They will take the word of a friend over your own. By the same token, many interrogators should be highly commended for their astute observations, leading to massive arrests, convictions, and feeing of falsely imprisoned citizens. Amanda and supporters, I hope this helps you.

    • rosemary says:

      http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/frederick-forsyth/458391/Amanda-Knox-trial-was-just-a-farce

      I hope many more well known and respected names will follow his example and speak out.

      • BigDinBoise says:

        While agree with the general sentiment of this article, it does contain many inaccuracies.

        I cannot understand why it is so difficult for journalist to research the actual facts of this case, or any story, and report them in an honest objective fashion. Isn’t this what they are supposed to do? Why, as a society do we accept sloppy journalism and put any stock in sensationalistic tabloid style articles? The pen is a powerful weapon and can destroy lives if wielded unwisely. Unfortunately I guess there will always be a market for lazy journalism and publications like the UK Daily Mail and NY Daily News that report hearsay and innuendo.

  58. T.C. says:

    JUST IN: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/italian-judge-who-sentenced-amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito-under-fire-for-remarks/

    in part………………

    “Last week, when Knox and Sollecito were convicted of the 2007 Kercher murder, it was the duo’s third trial on the same charges since 2009. They are batting one for three in those trials; one acquittal and two guilty verdicts. Judge Nencini delivered last Thursday’s guilty verdict sentencing Knox to 28-and-a-half years in prison and Sollecito to 25 years behind bars.

    Following the Kercher verdict, four members of Italy’s center-right political party, Forza Italia, formally called into question Judge Nencini’s ability to be unbiased. The four – Nicolo Zanon, Alberto Albertoni, Filiberto Palumbo, Bartolomeo Romano – have asked a judicial oversight body to investigate “a serious lack of impartiality” by Nencini in the Kercher case.

    One Italian publication described “clouds are gathering” over Nencini. The most serious lightning bolt in those “clouds” could be Italy’s Justice Minister Annamaria Cancellieri. She has begun a preliminary inquiry into Judge Nencini’s behavior in the Kercher case vis-à-vis Italy’s code of ethics. It has left, what one Italian commentator calls, “a sinister picture of the Italian justice system.”

    Judge Nencini’s situation isn’t helped by the fact the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France has raised questions about the impartiality of Italian justices, in general. Being a member of the European Union, Italy has ceded final authority over its judicial proceedings to the Court of Human Rights. It can throw out any Italian judge’s ruling.

    So what did Judge Nencini do that got him in so much hot water?

    For one thing, he broke character. By his own estimate, the Judge had not given an interview to the media in 30 years. But the tumult following the Kercher verdict shattered Nencini’s silence. The judge spoke to a few newspaper reporters about the case. It’s complicated, but the Italian judicial code of ethics essentially prohibits comment from the bench in the days and weeks following a verdict.

    But that rule seems way inside Italian baseball to anybody not living in Italy. For many others, what was shocking about Judge Nencini was not only what he said but also what he revealed about his thinking in the Kercher trial.

    One thing the trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have always lacked is a verifiable motive for the murder of Knox’s British roommate. So police and prosecutors have thrown handfuls of motives against various courtroom walls in the hopes that one sticks. It has become a prosecutor’s user manual for creative but baseless arguments. So the past motives for the crime are: it was a sex-game gone bad; it was a ritual killing; it was a robbery; it was mean girls; it was because Amanda Knox is a “she-devil.”

    Quite unexpectedly, Judge Nencini has added yet another motive: a boys night out. Over the course of 30 meetings, Judge Nencini said that he and the jury had developed “a line of reasoning.” Their “reasoning” is that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito “had nothing to do” the night of November 1, 2007 in Perugia. And the idea to kill Meredith Kercher, who was stabbed multiple times, “was born in an evening with the guys” according to Nencini. The Judge did tell the reporters that he was “aware” that this was “most controversial.” Nencini also conceded he has no idea what actually happened the night Meredith Kercher was killed.

    The sound you should be hearing is the Italian Justice Minister’s lightning bolt, figuratively of course, striking Judge Nencini and restoring his common sense. But that isn’t happening. So the wait is on to see what, if anything, happens to the Judge. And in the meantime, the trial of Amanda Knox and Raffealle Sollecito will continue to resemble Lewis Carroll’s White Queen’s approach to jurisprudence (Sentence first, verdict afterwards).

    Judge Nencini has apologized for stepping out of line and speaking his mind to the media, saying, “My words have generated misunderstanding.” So, too, has his thinking. Raffaele Sollecito’s lawyers have asked a judicial oversight committee to consider whether the guilty verdict against their client should be thrown out.

    Knox defense lawyer Carlo Dalla Vedova said in an emailed statement that the interviews by Nencini were “not appropriate,” but he reserved comment on any action until the court’s reasoning for the verdict is issued, expected within 90 days of the sentence. The American’s defense team also is planning to appeal the verdict. “

    • Chan says:

      I think the above post violates “fair use.” Copywright law doesn’t allow you to cut and paste an entire article.

  59. Gia says:

    Amanda,

    I’m so glad I found your site and glad you have a DONATE button. One request – I know how busy and very likely emotionally exhausted you are but have you or your family or family reps ever thought about doing a public fund raising event? I also think perhaps if it included a portion going to Raffaele, it would ignite more participation and media and give you a chance to speak with them because I and a lot of other people think that MORE face time with you and your family in public with ONLY FRIENDLY media outlets (NOT Chris Cuomo! <—-his last name alone was reason enough NOT to do that interview) might be a good thing. I don't know…we are all just outsiders looking in so we only have a slight sense of the delicate nuances with which one must proceed in this situation. Thank you ~ Gia in WA.

    • Willis Coleman says:

      Amanda asked Chris Cuomo to be tough on her, and afterward she contacted him to thank him. In any case I would characterize Chris Cuomo as tough in style rather than substance. The “tough” factual questions (they should be easy for someone who is totally open and honest) still weren’t asked.

    • Daphne says:

      This is a wonderful idea. I would definitely participate in this.

    • Elias says:

      This is an excellent suggestion, let’s not demonize Mr. Coumo though out of one’s own political bias.

      I want to joke about holding the fund raiser at the King Dome, but there are plenty of places in Seattle it could be held.

  60. Daphne says:

    Earlier back there I made an observation about an video showing Amanda in court, making her appear a dancing figure. It was a recent video, and I provided a link. It no longer works. I don’t know if that comment was deleted, but hopefully that hideous YouTube video was.

  61. Tracy says:

    Hi,

    just wanted to say I have been following this case and I am totally shocked at the latest ‘verdict’ seriously. I mean, casting everything else aside, how does any court think you can be an accessory to a scene like that and not leave a scrap of DNA? I have no doubt in my heart that you are innocent and I am sure you will get through this.
    I am also British, seeing the way this trial has played out in the press, and the almost witch hunt of yourself by the British media, makes me embarrassed to be British.

    I would however, like to add, in response to a few comments above that the Kerchers are just ‘after you for your money’ and ‘using you as their own personal piggy bank’. This family lost their daughter/sister in a horrific way, no amount of money will change that. Also if you are a grieving family I can believe it be very easy to be manipulated to believe anything the police tell you and it is more than a little insulting to insinuate they are trying to profit from the horrific murder of their daughter/sister.

    What is also very distressing, is that the man convicted (due to overwhelming evidence), can get his sentence reduced simply by ‘offering you up’. The whole thing has been a farce.

    Sending you strength and wishing you all the best for your future endeavours.

    • Willis Coleman says:

      Hear, hear on the incredibly offensive ‘piggy bank’ comment. But Tracy, please read the extensive discussion on these pages explaining why the failure to find Amanda’s DNA in Meredith’s room is not surprising. Ask instead why Rudy, with Meredith’s blood as well as a cut on his hand, left no blood below Meredith’s waist or on her underpants. Lastly, Rudy did not get anything for ‘offering up’ Amanda and Raffaele. He chose a fast-track trial, giving up some rights to challenge the evidence in exchange for an automatic one-third reduction in his sentence. Amanda and Raffaele could have done the same, and most likely wish they had.

      • Tom Mininger says:

        I’m sorry for the pain of this description, but Willis keeps trying to pull a fast one.

        Picture of bloody jacket Meredith was wearing when she was attacked. Ron Hendry’s “Single Attacker Theory” Location 638 of 1059

        Picture of aspirated blood on Meredith’s bra after Guede pulled the jacket up after the mortal wound was inflicted. Location 647 of 1059 There’s aspirated blood on her breasts after Guede forcibly removed the bra.

        There’s blood on the waistband of Meredith’s pants where Guede yanked them down. Guede’s bloody palm print is under the pillow he positioned Meredith with. His DNA was found inside her. The authorities refuse to test the stain that looks like semen on the pillow.

        Murder investigators and a forensic engineer describe Guede’s crime:
        http://www.amazon.com/The-Forgotten-Killer-Meredith-Kercher-ebook/dp/B00I3QZ7G0/ref=pd_rhf_cr_p_d_4

        http://www.amazon.com/Single-Attacker-Theory-Meredith-Kercher-ebook/dp/B00EAQT2VS/ref=pd_sim_kstore_1

      • Rob H says:

        No there has not been “extensive discussion on these pages” explaining why the absence of Amanda Knox’s DNA in Meredith Kercher’s bedroom “is not surprising!

        Rather the opposite – Many here – in particular, Tom Mininger have pushed the point that it is entirely surprising that not only was her DNA not found in the bedroom, but that no physical evidence was found at all. We go on to point out that there is no transfer evidence on Ms Knox’s clothes, from this crime scene and no transfer evidence in Raffaele Sollecito’s apartment either.

        “Willis Coleman” has a particular habit of dismissing evidence contrary to his position and yet at the same time failing to provide a comprehensive rationale countering the position we take, let alone providing good quality sources.

        For Ms Knox to have committed this crime without leaving evidence of herself or taking it away, wold place her in the realms of the supernatural. It is simply not possible.

        If “Coleman” wants to disagree, then he or she should put up or shut up.

        There is no physical evidence, “Willis” against Ms Knox in Ms Kercher’s bedroom – explain how this is possible, with reference to the size of the space in question, the nature of the crime, the copious exsanguination and the considerable physical evidence against Guede and only Guede.

        Can you do it “Willis”?

        How many challenges will it take? Or will you carry on being wilfully dishonest.

      • Lucinda P. says:

        If you believe this why do you come and post here? The truth about this case is that any rational human being can see she is innocent. At worst you might not be entirely sure but there is no way a rational human being can be convinced she is guilty. No way! So he fact that you have so much hatred that you waste your time coming here to right awful things shows there is something wrong with you. You are filled with issues and need to start looking at yourself. Even if she were guilty, you would still be sick for taunting her like this. I have heard of real murderers, I do not go taunt them. I say a prayer for their souls and focus on good people. But Amanda is clearly innocent which makes your actions worse.

    • Daphne says:

      You are so right. Grief can do a number on family and friends, especially in such a horrific crime. Money is one of the things courts must rely on to establish values and limitations — impossible in this case. I empathize with Amanda’s family in this respect, as the financial drain was obviously severe. If just one person will have gained anything in this situation, I wish it could be Rudy, who probably has the potential to be a productive person in society, given all the right chances.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Thank you Tracy.

      FBI murder investigators John Douglas and Steve Moore had to deal with the anguish of victim’s families countless times throughout their careers.

      They speak of a family placing its faith in a lead detective or prosecutor when their world has fallen apart. They fixate on the same suspect the authorities fixate on and it is hard to break this imprint no matter how wrong it clearly becomes later on.
      http://www.gmancasefile.com/1/post/2014/01/-investigations-and-the-families-of-victims.html

      http://mindhuntersinc.com/the-craziness-continues/

      It’s frustrating that the Kercher, Sollecito and Knox/Mellas families are not even Mignini’s first victims. He tormented 20 innocent people plus journalists on the Dr. Narducci suicice case, which in his mind is linked to The Monster of Florence case by a satanic sex cult dating back to the middle ages. Then he’s allowed to create this fiasco.

      • Willis Coleman says:

        If Mignini’s arrest of 20 innocent people was so idiotic why did Judge Micheli have to write a 900 page explanation why he was acquitting them? Nina Burleigh, who I assume you respect, has said it wouldn’t surprise her if satanic cults were active in Italy. I have no idea and chances are neither do you.

        • Luara says:

          Indeed there are satanic cults around. Just the existence of satanism and the appeal of it to some people, is enough to tell you that. Some of those satanic cults may even victimize people, rather than just getting together, looking wicked and taking drugs.
          But the problem with Mignini is that he prefers such explanations rather than the more mundane ones. If a robbery-murder occurs on Nov 1st, the prosaic explanation is that the burglar was after rent money (which was indeed stolen), and was surprised when the victim came home. The colorful explanation is that Nov 1st is the day after Halloween so it involved a satanic sex ritual, and the burglary was staged.
          Mignini needs to shave with Occam’s razor.

        • Eric_B says:

          if it takes 120 pages to acquit 2 people then 900 pages to acquit 20 seems like a bargain :)

        • Daphne says:

          This is a surprise.

    • Sarah H says:

      I think it is attorney Maresca — not the Kerchers — who is in this for his payday.

      • Nasim says:

        Only one person involved in this case has actually gotten a mega-payday. That’s Amanda. The Kerchers do not pay Maresca and he may or may not have some contingency agreement, but neither of them likely to ever see a dime from her. If the Kerchers get their civil claim approved by a US court, which is by no means certain, they’ll need to hire collections attorneys. These bounty hunters keep most of anything they find.

        • Rob H says:

          Do the maths on Ms Knox’s “mega payday” (sic). It doesn’t exist.

          Please also explain how the plaintiffs’ desired “quest for the truth” is consistent with the hiring of an attorney to pursue a civil claim against mere defendants who, from the start of the process, declared them guilty – thus rendering any “quest for the truth” utterly meaningless – and who, during the course of the 1st and 2nd appellate trials dismissed out of hand the evidence of the only court appointed forensic scientists to testify in the case and who has merely shadowed the prosecution consistently mis-representing evidence by the spade full along the way. What was the point of Maresca being in court other than to “double-team” Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito? Two prosecutions – one defence; include Lumumba’s attorney and it is three to one.

          John Kercher also wrote a book; his money went, we are told, to the same place as Ms Knox’s – towards legal and other expenses. If “Nasim” is correct in stating that “The Kerchers do not pay Maresca”, then the Meredith Kercher Fund should be investigated by Britain’s Serious Fraud Office, since its website clearly states that monies donated to it are to be applied in part to the cost of “legal fees”. I would be grateful to “Nasim” if he will kindly let me have what evidence is in his possession
          proving that the Kerchers are in fact defrauding those donating to the fund and I will ask the SFO to investigate the family.

          Alternatively, perhaps he would like to clarify his remarks.

          Incidentally, what are “collections attorneys”?

        • Sarah H says:

          Amanda spent her book advance on paying bills for 6 years worth of a false prosecution.

          Of course the Kerchers WILL pay Maresca, if he manages to get them an award from Amanda and Raffaele. He’s not working for them out of the goodness of his heart.

          But Amanda doesn’t owe them one thin dime because she didn’t kill Meredith.

  62. Chris Frait says:

    Dear Amanda and friends,

    I have written the following letter to Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois to ask him to order the U.S. State Department to refuse any and all attempts at extradition by the Italian government of Amanda Knox. I have posted the text below for anyone who wishes to read it. I will also be sending out identical letters to every member of the Senate:

    Senator Mark Kirk
    607 E. Adams
    Suite 1520
    Springfield, IL 62701

    Dear Sen. Mark Kirk,

    I am writing you today in regard to the case of Amanda Knox. No doubt, like everyone else in the world, you are familiar with the horrible ordeal this young American woman and her family are going through. As you know, she was convicted of murder in Italy in regard to the death of her roommate, Meredith Kercher. Her “confession” was extorted by the Italian police through a night of physical beatings, denial of an attorney during questioning, denials of food, water, or the opportunity to even use the bathroom when she needed to do so. She subsequently spent four years of hell in an Italian prison where she was repeatedly sexually harassed by members of the prison staff. Her case was reviews by an Italian appeals court two years ago, her guilty verdict was reversed and she was allowed to return home to Seattle, Washington.

    Now, in an unbelievable act of insanity on the part of the Italian “legal” system, she has been retried by a new Italian court and her conviction and sentence reinstated! This is insane! It is a mockery of all human justice and every liberty we believe in as Americans. One of the most basic liberties we enjoy as Americans is the right against Double Jeopardy. Furthermore, it is also my opinion that the both the prosecutor and the judge her recent retrial are completely corrupt and anti-American liars who deceived and continue to attempt to deceive the rest of the world about the nature of the evidence against her. None of the evidence, nor the improper way in which it was collected would have been allowed in an American courtroom.

    Amanda and her poor family have suffered horrifically as a result of this maliciousness. I have learned much about Italy since this recent “retrial” and I do not like what I have learned. I am shocked to see the vile comments about Amanda in the Italian press and from ordinary Italians on various blogs. Their comments are fully of venom, personal insults, sexual perversion, and a hatred of everyone American. I used to have a good opinion of Italy and its people. That is destroyed now. As far as I am concerned, they are no better than Iran. Please note I do not include Americans of Italian descent in my opinion. They have repeatedly proven themselves good and loyal Americans. I refer specifically to the people and government of Italy itself. As far as I am concerned, I will never do business with Italy again. I will purchase none of their products, take no vacations there, and refuse to assist them in any way until they drastically change their attitude towards us. I wouldn’t even buy a stick of chewing gum from them. I will also encourage all others I meet to do the same. In short, I now consider them personal enemies as well as enemies of my country.

    Amanda’s new sentence is now 28 years in prison for a murder she didn’t commit. My guess is the Italians want her back so they can take a horrific revenge on her for telling the truth about how horrible and corrupt they and their system are. Therefore, I write to you to ask you to order the U.S. State Department to flatly rebuff all Italian attempts to extradite Amanda Knox. We can deny any requested extradition on the grounds that to retry Amanda or any other American constitutes a violation of our Constitutional protections against double jeopardy. From my research this is fully consistent with our extradition treaty with Italy. Our Constitutional protections also automatically and inherently trump any foreign treaties we have. Add to that the fact that Amanda’s confession was extracted through torture and abuse and we have a clear case to deny any and all extradition attempts of Amanda Knox.

    This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an American issue. We must all stand together united and strong for one of our own who is being attacked and persecuted by a malicious and unjust foreign enemy. She and her family are suffering emotionally and financially like none of us can imagine. Please stand up now and say to the Italian government we will absolutely not hand over an innocent and very frightened, emotionally shattered 26 year old American girl as a human sacrifice for them to vent their anti-American sickness upon now or ever.

    Thank you so much for all your help in this matter.

    Sincerely,

    Chris Frait

    • Daphne says:

      This sounds like one powerful letter. It’s so sincere that you took this initiative. I am wondering if anyone has thought to write the Vatican, because they likely are already involved in some of the decision-making processes. Or is it proper to wait out the 90 days? In any case, this letter to the senator is a great step.

      • Chris Frait says:

        Thank you, Daphne! :)

      • Pigsticker says:

        I’m not American, so I don’t have a senator to write to. I will, however, sign any petitions against extraditing Amanda and I have definitely plans on writing to the Italian Ministry of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Remember that there is more than one family who’s rights have been violated by the recent verdict.

    • T.C. says:

      Amanda needs more citizens like you to write their Senators. Good Job.

      I wrote a letter and will continue to do so every week until this issue is resolved.

      Senator Dianne Feinstein,

      The State Department issues a Travel Warning when they want you to consider very carefully whether you should go to a country at all. Examples of reasons for issuing a Travel Warning might include unstable government, civil war, ongoing intense crime or violence, or frequent terrorist attacks.

      I suggest the State department include corrupt judicial systems, corrupt police / prosecutors, and corrupt governments as well. Italy comes to mind when thinking of this new improved category of travel warnings.

      The recent guilty verdict of Amanda Knox clearly justifies a travel advisory warning to be issued to Americans going to, or living in Italy.

      If you look at the facts and evidence, clearly Amanda Knox is innocent. Senator Cantwell agrees with my assessment and has even made statements to the press regarding Amanda which is something I would like you to do as well. I would like your opinion on this matter and I would encourage you to solicit Senator Boxer’s views.

      Senator Cantwell stated about the first trial “I am saddened by the verdict and I have serious questions about the Italian justice system and whether anti-Americanism tainted this trial. The prosecution did not present enough evidence for an impartial jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Knox was guilty. Italian jurors were not sequestered and were allowed to view highly negative news coverage about Ms. Knox. Other flaws in the Italian justice system on display in this case included the harsh treatment of Ms. Knox following her arrest; negligent handling of evidence by investigators; and pending charges of misconduct against one of the prosecutors stemming from another murder trial.

      I am in contact with the U.S. Ambassador to Italy and have been since the time of Ms. Knox’s arrest. I will be conveying my concerns to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. I have also been in touch with the Embassy of Italy in Washington, DC.”

      Amanda Knox had since been found “innocent” by an appeals court however, a higher court reversed the appeals court and a new hearing took place which found her guilty again.

      January 30, 2014 after the second miscarriage of justice, Senator Cantwell stated ““I am very concerned and disappointed by this verdict,” said Cantwell. “I am confident there will be an appeal to closely re-examine today’s decision. It is very troubling that Amanda and her family have had to endure this process for so many years. I will continue to closely monitor this case as it moves forward through the Italian legal system.”

      I guess what appalls me even more is the history of Italy’s police and judicial system. One reporter described it as “The Italian judiciary, a holdover to a great extent from the Mussolini era, when Italy was a police state, acts with no checks and balances, in which prosecutors and police wield enormous power.”

      He went on to say “If you are arrested for a crime and have no alibi, you are in very serious trouble. The de facto burden of proof is on you to prove your innocence, despite lip service in the Italian constitution to the idea of innocent until proven guilty.

      The Italian justice system often seems more concerned with preserving the honour and reputations of powerful individuals than with finding the truth. This, in a nutshell, explains why Knox and Sollecito were not released when Guede was identified, why dubious DNA and forensic lab work was relied upon, why prosecutors and police leaked so much damaging and salacious information to the press, and why these two innocent young people spent 1,450 days in prison for murder they did not commit. It was all about honour, reputation, and the saving of face.””

      Full article here: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/04/knox-acquittal-only-possible-verdict

      Why this disturbs me is that there is no official warning from the state department regarding Italy. Italy is also considered favored nation status when it comes to trade and we have an extradition treaty with them.

      Does this disturb you at all? Shouldn’t the U.S. government warn citizens of the treatment they could encounter should they find themselves caught up in police and judicial fraud? Should we encourage this corruption with trade?

      The U.S. needs to send a clear message to Italy and I expect you to act. The Senate needs to reexamine its extradition treaty with Italy. It also needs to reexamine trade with Italy. The State Department needs to address this issue in terms of a travel warning.

      Further, I would strongly suggest that through diplomatic channels you tell Italy to get its act together and start acting like a civilized nation not some police state Mussolini holdover from the past. You might communicate that honesty and truth is more respected in this world than dishonesty and saving face.

      If the Italian courts uphold this latest miscarriage of justice and a extradition request is made, I will expect the State Department to deny it. Further, If Italy attempts to issue an international warrant for her arrest the U.S. government should use its full force to quash it. This should include trade and diplomatic ties be cut off with any nation that chooses to honor such warrant. The U.S. should encourage others to isolate Italy until its justice system is restructured and reformed. Accusing, prosecuting, and convicting a innocent person of a crime to save face is beyond bizarre, it is criminal.
      T.C.

      • Chris Frait says:

        Very well written! :)

      • Daphne says:

        Well, it does disturb us very much. But the fact remains such justice is becoming commonplace before very long if something does not change. One of the best ways to start tackling this is to abolish legal executions because as long as wrongful convictions exists, this will seriously undermine the assured security of innocent people everywhere.

    • Julie Jorgensen says:

      This is wonderful Chris. I hope everyone will take the time to write to their respective Senator or Representative. My only suggestion, as they receive many letters, is to possibly shorten the letter sticking to the most important points. Great work though…kudos to you!

    • Stephanie Jacobs says:

      Wow! Excellently written with the only exception, or part I don’t completely agree with, is that regarding the entirety of Italian people being as you described in such a negative light. I agree that there is definitely some very serious corruption going on there and some very mean/angry citizens making viscous and cruel statements, but just like here in America when some of us are evil, etc., it doesn’t characterise all of us as a whole right? Anyway, it is a beautifully sincere letter that should stir the hearts of anyone reading or hearing it. Great job – you’ve definitely got my support and AMANDA KNOX, you’ve got my love, support, and prayers as well. May God Bless you, keep you strong and draw you closer and closer to Him everyday!!! XOXOXO
      Sincerely,
      Stephanie Jacobs

    • Kenneth Janeway says:

      Dear Chris: Fantastic letter to Sen. Kirk asking that the Extradition of Amanda Knox be denied. This must be done ultimately by whomever is the U.S. Secretary of State at the time the request is filed by Italy (Federal complaint) in Federal District Court in Seattle. A Federal District judge makes a recommendation to the U.S. Secretary of State and his decision is “completely discretionary”. I started the legal research on her Extradition today and will be taking actions of my own as well to keep her in this country and to bring attention to her, and Raffaele’s innocence. There are other developments which must remain secret because I have a certain destiny of my own that I can’t share at this time. In other words, if it’s ever up to me Amanda isn’t going anywhere in terms of an Extradition. Promise. I hope she soon gets to lead her life again without any worry once this legal nightmare is finally over. Thanks for posting this much needed letter. We’re on the same page. – Best, Ken

      • Kenneth [email protected] says:

        I am watching the video of Judge Heavey’s presentation from the Seattle Rotary Club outlining the many reasons why Amanda Knox is innocent and is not the person depicted by the world media since 2007. Rudy Guede should have been given the death penalty for this crime. Alan Dershowitz is seriously mis-guided in his thoughts regarding this crime or any involvement by Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito.
        Amanda and Raffaele will be exonerated (found innocent). – Best, KJ

        • Kenneth [email protected] says:

          It is obvious that noted law professor Alan Dershowitz lacks a background in forensics. There is no evidence against Amanda Knox – period – other than a “false confession” obtained through great duress. Amanda does not act like someone who is guilty of such a crime as well. It is obvious to me that she is, once again, innocent and so is Raffaele Sollecito. Judge Hellmann recognized this in the first Appeal in 2011 which resulted in the co-defendants proper and well-deserved Acquittals. – Best, Ken

    • Rose Marie says:

      Hello Chris,
      I think the letter is good, but you exaggerate what happened to Amanda during her interrogation. That is not helpful. She was not beaten nor did she ever claim to have been. She did say she was slapped on the back of the head.

      The important points are that she was traumatized and frightened by the murder of her friend. She had spent several days helping the police. She did not have a lawyer or an objective interpreter. She was young, far from home and didn’t speak the language except for a few words. She foolishly tried to help police and to speak in Italian. The police knew her mother would arrive the next day and it was their last chance with her. They coerced a confession which Amanda retracted as soon as she was given an English translation of the notice to be jailed. She realized she wasn’t helping them – that she was the suspect – and she had been during her entire interrogation. She had been asked to imagine what might have happened and she was pressured and threatened with going to jail for 30 years if she didn’t talk. She did talk and it was nonsense.

      Anyone who had any humanity would see it was nonsense -but they wanted to close the case and blame it on the two young people who were behaving strangely. Odd behavior is not an indicator of guilt. And much of the “odd behavior” was a distortion created by the media or by the police or by the English girls who didn’t like Amanda.

      • Daphne says:

        You are right in many respects except in saying Amanda was “foolish.” Americans are encouraged to be honest and forth giving and so I think it was the interrogators who were actually
        foolish to coerce inaccurate statements. But the media — (British? Italian? American?) absolutely violated every legally applicable standard. Given that this is an international case, I think there should be strict procedures about media contact with respect to trials. Some of these independent YouTube blurbs are as ridiculous as those suggesting that MJ is still alive and orchestrating the trials associated with his death!

  63. Chris Frait says:

    Dear Amanda and Friends,

    I have just completed a letter in your defense again any extradition attempts by Italy. I will be mailing it to my Senator, Mark Kirk of Illinois today and soon to very other member of the U.S. Senate. I thought you might like to read the text:

    Dear Hon. Mark Kirk,

    I am writing you today in regard to the case of Amanda Knox. No doubt, like everyone else in the world, you are familiar with the horrible ordeal this young American woman and her family are going through. As you know, she was convicted of murder in Italy in regard to the death of her roommate, Meredith Kercher. Her “confession” was extorted by the Italian police through a night of physical beatings, denial of an attorney during questioning, denials of food, water, or the opportunity to even use the bathroom when she needed to do so. She subsequently spent four years of hell in an Italian prison where she was repeatedly sexually harassed by members of the prison staff. Her case was reviews by an Italian appeals court two years ago, her guilty verdict was reversed and she was allowed to return home to Seattle, Washington.

    Now, in an unbelievable act of insanity on the part of the Italian “legal” system, she has been retried by a new Italian court and her conviction and sentence reinstated! This is insane! It is a mockery of all human justice and every liberty we believe in as Americans. One of the most basic liberties we enjoy as Americans is the right against Double Jeopardy. Furthermore, it is also my opinion that the both the prosecutor and the judge her recent retrial are completely corrupt and anti-American liars who deceived and continue to attempt to deceive the rest of the world about the nature of the evidence against her. None of the evidence, nor the improper way in which it was collected would have been allowed in an American courtroom.

    Amanda and her poor family have suffered horrifically as a result of this maliciousness. I have learned much about Italy since this recent “retrial” and I do not like what I have learned. I am shocked to see the vile comments about Amanda in the Italian press and from ordinary Italians on various blogs. Their comments are fully of venom, personal insults, sexual perversion, and a hatred of everyone American. I used to have a good opinion of Italy and it’s people. That is destroyed now. As far as I am concerned, they are no better than Iran. Please note I do not include Americans of Italian descent in my opinion. They have repeatedly proven themselves good and loyal Americans. I refer specifically to the people and government of Italy itself. As far as I am concerned, I will never do business with Italy again. I will purchase none of their products, take no vacations there, and refuse to assist them in any way until they drastically change their attitude towards us. I wouldn’t even buy a stick of chewing gum from them. I will also encourage all others I meet to do the same. In short, I now consider them personal enemies as well as enemies of my country.

    Amanda’s new sentence is now 28 years in prison for a murder she didn’t commit. My guess is the Italians want her back so they can take a horrific revenge on her for telling the truth about how horrible and corrupt they and their system are. Therefore, I write to you to ask you to order the U.S. State Department to flatly rebuff all Italian attempts to extradite Amanda Knox. We can deny any requested extradition on the grounds that to retry Amanda or any other American constitutes a violation of our Constitutional protections against double jeopardy. From my research this is fully consistent with our extradition treaty with Italy. Our Constitutional protections also automatically and inherently trump any foreign treaties we have. Add to that the fact that Amanda’s confession was extracted through torture and abuse and we have a clear case to deny any and all extradition attempts of Amanda Knox.

    This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an American issue. We must all stand together united and strong for one of our own who is being attacked and persecuted by a malicious and unjust foreign enemy. She and her family are suffering emotionally and financially like none of us can imagine. Please stand up now and say to the Italian government we will absolutely not hand over an innocent and very frightened, emotionally shattered 26 year old American girl as a human sacrifice for them to vent their anti-American sickness upon now or ever.

    Thank you so much for all your help in this matter.

    Chris Frait

  64. The illegal interrogation using sleep deprivation techniques allowed the Italian police to get Amanda to “theorize” what may have happened at the residence and once she implicated Patrick Lumumba falsely, this one wrong turn allowed the Perugian police to implicate her in the murder itself – but Amanda was not there at the crime scene and did not have anything to do with Meredith Kercher’s death. They were simply roommates and friends. The police also got Amanda to sign a false confession which certainly didn’t help matters. This illegal interrogation also allowed the police to indict Raffaele for a crime that he, too, did not commit. Amanda and Raffaele should have only been viewed as witnesses to certain events dealing with the condition of the residence due to the burglary and not as suspects because they weren’t at Meredith’s residence, or in her bedroom, at the time the crime occurred. I also agree with former FBI Agent Steve Moore that Rudy Guede must have been a police informant who got “special treatment” in this case but Guede said on SKYPE to a friend that Amanda Knox was not even there. I agree…She wasn’t and she is INNOCENT, and Raffaele is also INNOCENT. I certainly hope the Italian Supreme Court will finally figure out what the truth is about this case and turn these wrongfully convicted defendants FREE. Amanda is a fine person and so is Raffaele Sollecito. The Judiciary of Italy has it wrong at this point. Everyone – have a good day – especially Amanda and Raffaele, too. – Best, Ken

    • Kenneth Janeway says:

      Hi Amanda: Just read an excellent article by Robert Anello in Forbes magazine entitled “Extradition Italian Style” regarding your case (2-5-2014). I am currently studying International Extradition cases (U.S. Federal cases in Federal District court jurisdictions), U.S. Code statutes, etc. (my first session today). The Amanda Knox case may have a big effect on International Extradition law after it is all said and done. This Forbes article goes into great detail regarding our Extradition Treaty with Italy but I plan to study the Extradition Treaty between the United States and Italy itself — for myself. A great deal of discretion is given to the U.S. Secretary of State regarding Extradition requests. Should any U.S. Secretary of State deny a future request by Italy for your return, they will have one heck of a time fighting it. “Complete discretion” is given to the U.S. Secretary of State when a final Extradition decision is made regarding the return of someone on our soil. I will be watching your Appeal to the Italian Supreme Court closely over the next several months, and am watching closely the increase in your supporters at home and what is reported in the media. Please stay strong in all of this, I know it must be very hard at times to do so but there is much water left to go under the bridge. – I am Praying about your case (to the Lord) every day. I know you are innocent, I know Raffaele is also innocent. – Best, Ken

      • Kenneth [email protected] says:

        I am quickly finding out that most of the people who think Amanda had anything to do with this crime haven’t studied her case, or her whereabouts, on the night of the crime – it doesn’t take a genius to 1) know where she was at the time of the murder, and 2) to see that there is no real forensic evidence from Meredith’s bedroom to link Raffaele and Amanda to the crime-scene itself. I am disappointed in Dershowitz for doubting her innocence. – Best, Ken

        • Kenneth [email protected] says:

          And I like Amanda’s new hair style, too, easier for her to take care of when she is very busy. – Best, Ken

          • Kenneth [email protected] says:

            Hi Amanda: I just watched your recent Guardian interview from Seattle. I think this interview will go a long way to help change the world’s perception of you – As you are speaking out, you are progressing in terms of projecting your innocence and other injustices of your own case. I am very proud of you – for becoming the person you are becoming. Your days must be fairly exhausting – please try to get enough sleep when you can. I will be researching Extradition again soon at the law library. I am very grateful to your parents and sisters, Madison, and James for taking good care of you and I expect that many more people will start speaking out re: your obvious innocence. You may have felt a great aloneness in Italy but you are not alone now and you won’t be forgotten anytime, soon. Try to enjoy Seattle and UW as best as you can in the meantime. – Best, Ken

          • Kenneth [email protected] says:

            Alan Dershowitz couldn’t be more wrong about Amanda Knox in his comments on CNN recently. She is innocent and there is no forensic evidence to place her in Meredith’s room during an attack and no evidence of her having participated in any sort of “sex game” that led to Meredith’s death or any involvement in any sort of attack, and no motive for any involvement, either. Where is the evidence, Mr. Dershowitz I want to know? – Best, Ken

          • Julie Jorgensen says:

            That was a great interview in the Guardian wasn’t it? I especially enjoyed watching Amanda interact with her good friend Madison. Glad to have people like you helping and caring so much for Amanda.

  65. Rob H says:

    “Rob” (not me), is posting here, claiming to be from the UK.

    He has stated:

    “Thankfully my own government (the British) appear to be pointing out to the US authority’s (sic) that there is no reason you should not be extradited to serve your term.”

    and

    …”as for the British government, they have made their position clear”

    I can find no source for any of these claims. Nor would I expect to. In the matter of Italy versus Amanda Knox, it is not for the British government to intercede in ANY way in the legal process. It is not a matter for the competence of the British government.

    It is true to say, however, that “consular assistance”, in the form of an accompanying member of the British embassy in Italy, was provided to the Kercher family, for the reading of the latest verdict and other, mandatory, minimum assistance was also provided in the immediate aftermath of Meredith Kercher’s murder – for basic humanitarian reason. This should NOT be viewed as the British government taking sides in the case. Indeed, in his book, John Kercher explains that he discovered that his own government was not able to offer him any financial assistance in association with his legal and other expenses.

    The aforementioned poster, “Rob” as also taken a stance on extradition in this case – suggesting there is “no legal reason” for Ms Knox not to be extradited to Italy. Firstly, this must necessarily be untrue. Any attempt to extradite Ms Knox will clearly be met with a challenge from Ms Knox’s attorneys and there are a number of arguments they will be able to advance. Whether these would be successful, and which side will prevail would be a matter for the US State Department, Justice Department and courts.

    Secondly, no question of extradition is yet relevant as the Italian legal process has not concluded. Ms Knox has rights – even in Italian law and the appeal process is not exhausted. Only if the Nencini court’s verdict is upheld should any question of extradition apply and then only if the Italian government makes such a request to the US State Department. If that were to happen, a further process would then endure within the United States.

    I repeat – this is not a matter for the British Government.

  66. Nick Green (UK) says:

    Has anyone else ever notice how, if you ever come close to persuading someone of Amanda and Raffaele’s innocence – through sheer overwhelming weight of logic and common sense and proven fact – they then play the card: “Ah! But aren’t we forgetting who the REAL victim is?”

    They use it like a reset button, as if to imply that all arguments are rendered null because of the sheer horror of the original crime. As if – by some whacky moon-man logic – Amanda and Raffaele cannot be innocent purely because the crime itself was so bad. Or as if to defend their innocence is to betray Meredith, *even if one accepts their innocence*!

    Yes, Meredith is the worst victim by far. But she is not the only real victim.

    • Som Nathan says:

      And, Amanda has said repeatedly, and I quote, “Justice for me doesn’t mean injustice for Meredith.” But prosecutors are not there to seek justice. There are biased against Amanda, Amanda from USA, that is. The author of this mess Axxxhole Mignini is to be blamed for all this. Railroading a 20 year old young, intellegent, naive girl who didn’t know the language very well then, and was ready to help Perugian police and prosecutor solve this murder. And, look what they have done to her and Raffelle. Shame on Italian Justice system. My family has vowed to never visit Italy, buy italian products because of this gross INJUSTICE.

      • Daphne says:

        Yes, but I imagine Mignini did not personally carry out the forensics or tamper with evidence, although the shameful connivery behind Amanda’s “list” was a pathetic tactic. Imagine the tough situation he was put in. Not good, no matter how you look at it.

        • Pigsticker says:

          The cops definitely played a huge role, no doubt, but Pignini was directing everything from behind the scenes, so he bears the most responsibility. Plus he was the one who came up with the satanic sex ritual theory.

          • Daphne says:

            That was extreme propaganda. Very very weird. It think the verdict came down to politics, and nationality played against Amanda’s favour. It really should have been about Meredith, and that is not Amanda’s fault.

          • Pigsticker says:

            In a way, Mignini reminds me of Joseph Goebbels. He used the same general approach – to poison public opinion against the intended target, thereby justifying any atrocities committed against the accused. Goebbels did it to entire ethnic groups, while Mignini singled out individuals, but otherwise they both acted on the same principles.

    • Julie Jorgensen says:

      Yes Nick…you bring up a very good point and one that needs to stop. We, supporters of Amanda and Raffaele, do care about Meredith and the Kercher family and are upset that they have suffered. Meredith died long before her life even started and that was and is a terrible tragedy.

      But we also know Amanda and Raffaele, did not cause Meredith’s death and supporting them and helping expose the injustice they have suffered does not negate our feelings about Meredith and her family. It doesn’t have to be one or the other as the tabloids and persecutors try to claim.

  67. Mike says:

    Amanda, you speak well. I saw the Guardian interview. Give speeches and interviews. You need to campaign a little. Also mention one fact: Your relationship with Rafaela saved your life. If you weren’t with him, you would have been there and ……. He saved your life.

    • Gia says:

      Yes, I agreee. More public speaking, more face time and take control of any and all interviews you do. Yes, Raffaele was what saved HER life. We also owe it to him to fight hard for Amanda and in doing so WE do NOT forget about him nor to support him in every way possible. I’ve already donated to him and will continue to do so and to Amanda.

  68. Jennifer in Canada says:

    Just to let you know that kind thoughts are with you tonight Amanda. I just came back from a meditation group where a candle was lit for you and all wrongly convicted people. Take heart and know that the more the Italian justice system prolongs things going around in circles from guilt to innocence and back again, the more they lose credibility in the eyes of the world. In the long run, that may work in your favour. I already see a shift in the media from a few years ago, the Guardian and BBC leaning more and more in your direction. It’s the smart media and the smart people who see the truth and are on your side. Hang in there, fellow Cascadian!

  69. Kate says:

    Dear Amanda:
    I’m so terribly sorry for what is happening to you. I’ve been following your case and couldn’t imagine how anyone could think you or Rafael were involved. But then I spoke to a British friend of mine. Despite the lack of evidence, she thought you were guilty just because you were found guilty. I reminded her of the facts of the case, that the “evidence” was crap, but she thought you should be in jail just because the police even looked at you. What does that tell you? That there are super-crazy people out there who’ll believe anything. They’ll believe that Elvis is living on the moon and that Houdini is just waiting to make his comeback. Because they want to. Please remember the Italians also convicted Galileo. A few centuries later, they exonerated him.
    Keep up the good fight. Lots of people are pulling for you. Just to remind you: there are sane people out there.
    God bless.
    Kate

    • Julie Jorgensen says:

      Hopefully Amanda’s exoneration will be a little faster than Galileo’s…. :)

      • Pigsticker says:

        And the Guildford Four’s. It took 15 years to get THEM out of jail, and another five to exonerate Paul Hill of Brian Shaw’s murder. Another six before Brian’s brother was willing to meet him on a talk show. Total = 26 years. A long time to wrongly believe someone is guilty.

  70. BigDinBoise says:

    Here’s a great story detailing the record number of Americans who were set free in 2013 after being wrongfully convicted of a crime, please read and share. I find the Nicole Harris story particularly troubling. Italy might have a messed up judicial system, but the police and prosecutorial misconduct that allows innocent people to get locked up is a huge problem in the U.S., and all over the world. People need to start realizing that this stuff happens and the only way to do anything about it is to stand up to the bureaucratic machinations that allow it to continue without the police and prosecutors being punished for abuse of power.

    Record number of Americans exonerated in 2013 – http://rt.com/usa/record-number-americans-exonerated-649/

    • Luara says:

      Of course it isn’t just because of misconduct that people get falsely convicted.
      New DNA technology has solved many cold cases and exonerated people who were wrongly convicted.

      • Pigsticker says:

        True, but corruption among the police and prosecutors has played a major role in the majority of wrongful convictions. Sometimes the judges are in on it too. In Amanda & Raffaele’s case, I would say we’ve witnessed misconduct by all three parties – the police, with their sloppy investigation and brutal interrogation tactics, the prosecutors with their ever-changing crime theories and the judges who rubber-stamped everything just because “the prosecution says so”. In some cases (like Massei and Nencini) the judge would even come up with his own theory about what happened, adding further to the confusion. One would think it would be easier to just admit they had the wrong suspects and allow Amanda & Raffaele to get on with their lives, but that would mean holding the police and all the earlier judges, prosecutors and civil lawyers accountable, which I imagine is not sitting very well with them. Hence the need to convict Amanda & Raffaele regardless of the truth.

        Whether or not any official political parties are involved, it still comes down to politics in my mind – judicial politics. That’s where judges and prosecutors try to win public favour by condemning easy scapegoats.

        Hope I’m not rambling too much…

  71. Zalman says:

    After following this case extremity closely for the past couple of years and having read many books on this case, I am yet to hear anyone who believes in Amanda Raffaele guilt explain the following questions. Amanda and Raffaelle did not behave as guilty people behave. Their behavior in the first couple of days makes absolutely no sense if they are guilty. They had plenty of time to get lawyers and/or leave Perugia, yet they chose to willingly attend to police interviews without any lawyer, day after day, after day, after day. All told they spoke to police willingly for more than 50 hours as witnesses. As they were not officially suspects in the first couple of days they were not required to talk to the police. They could have left Perguia – as the other roommates did. They could have at least hired lawyers – as the other roommates did. Yet for some unfathomable reason – if they are truly guilty – they did not leave town they did not get lawyers and they chose to attend separate police interviews day after day after day. Why were they not worried – if they are truly guilty – that prolonged police questioning will uncover their alleged guilt? Why were they not worried that the other might be coerced to testify against them? They were in a relationship of only 9 days old. Was their relationship so powerful that they could trust their boyfriend / girlfriend of 9 days not to turn on them? If they are truly guilty their behavior makes absolutely no sense. All these questions fall away if you assume that they are innocent and had no reason to suspect they were potential suspects.

    • Brian says:

      This makes a great deal of sense and corroborates what I’ve been saying since the beginning. They behaved in ways that clearly demonstrated a “consciousness of innocence” as opposed to a “consciousness of guilt.” IF they had been involved in any way, they could have (and would have) gotten into Raffaele’s car and been out of Italy before the crime was even discovered.

    • Nasim says:

      How do you know how guilty people would behave? You say that a guilty person would have fled. But Laura and Filomena fled and they are innocent. You say that a guilty person would have lawyered up but Giacomo lawyered up and he was innocent (Filomena and Laura, having no family in the area, sought the advice of their bosses at the law studio where they worked.) Amanda was told the first time the police interviewed her that she should stick around Perugia, and sticking around was arguably her best move anyway. She could keep abreast of the police investigation and try to steer it onto the wrong track. She says she and Raffael went to the Questura together because she was afraid of being alone, but more likely she was afraid that he was going to destroy their alibi, as in fact he did with Kate Mansey and again on November 5th.

      • Frank the Tank says:

        How do you know Filomena and Laura are innocent? There’s as much evidence of their presence in Meredith Kercher’s room as there is of Amanda Knox.

        How do we know that YOU are innocent? Perhaps you are a friend of Rudy Guede, and you and some other pervert are Guede’s conspirators.

        • Som Nathan says:

          Nasim (appears to be half bro of Rudy Guede), behaves likes a court jester. Comes in does some stupid manuveurs and then leave. Never participates in any intellegent conversation. He needs to be ignored.

          • Daphne says:

            Well, I would hate to think Rudy had no moral support whatsoever, despite his alleged act of violence.

      • Sarah H says:

        Your understanding of basic logic is flawed, Nasim. The fact that almost all guilty people flee does not lead to the conclusion that all people who flee are therefore guilty. It does lead to the conclusion that very few guilty people would stay and try to help the police.

        The only difference between Amanda and the English girls who fled and the Italians who lawyered up is that Amanda, based on her life experiences at the age of 20, was far too trusting of authority figures. She and Raffaele thought they were protected by their absolute innocence, and that was their terrible mistake.

        • Daphne says:

          Also, the cultural differences clearly weighed in the Europeans’ favour. They all had a good head start, with alibis and families who provided lawyers instantly; any American would have been alienated in a situation like that, because the justice systems work in diverse ways.

      • Luca Cheli says:

        Yes, that is a good question for you and your kindred souls: how do you know how guilty people would behave?

        They have made a trial based on the assumption they indeed knew.

        Mansey and Sollecito simply misunderstood each other about what they were talking about: go figure if Raffaele having just said one thing to the police was going to say another to a journalist…Mansey’s interview was never used by the prosecution (which quoted another tabloid article in one of their appeals) because they realized it could only backfire.

        About the night interrogation it is useless to speak with people like you.

        • Nasim says:

          How do you know Raffaele previously told the police something different than he told Kate Mansey?

        • Rose Marie says:

          Yes this is true. Kate Mansey did not speak Italian and Sollecito did not speak English well. Her articles have many mistakes in them. Just more sensationalism. Whether Sollecito got dates wrong or words wrong or she did – or they both did- those articles by Kate Mansey are completely bogus and do not reflect at all on Sollecito’s innocence or guilt- only on his poor judgment (talking to reporters).

      • Alex K. says:

        If the British hack messed up the dates or invented things out of thin air, it is hard to see how it destroys anybody’s alibi. On Nov 5, Raffaele did not destroy Amanda’s alibi.

      • Rob H says:

        It is very clear that those who “lawyered up” in Italy immediately after Ms Kercher’s murder did so because they were aware of the culture of Italian Justice. In other words, they were all concerned that they would be implicated and wanted to protect themselves.

        Arguably, the person with the most to fear, on the face of it was Silenzi, Meredith Kercher’s boyfriend. Even with a rock solid alibi, once he heard of the murder and was required to return to Perugia, he made arrangements to be met at at a train station some distance from the town, by an attorney who accompanied him to the questura. I understand he did not have one conversation with police without representation.

        If Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito were actually guilty of this terrible crime, it beggars belief to suggest that they would not have availed themselves of legal representation immediately! Even “Nasim” clearly recognises that such “lawyering up” is standard in Italy, so by doing this neither would have stood out as being any different from anybody else associated with Ms Kercher’s apartment – her flatmates and her neighbours immediately below.

        What has always stuck me as very sad is why none of the Italians who knew Ms Knox did not take her aside and advise her to obtain an attorney; instead they looked after themselves. But, then again, perhaps that is merely a commentary on the climate of fear experienced by Italians in connection with their criminal justice system and such selfishness a necessary adjunct to survival. Only Raffaele Sollecito stood by her.

        Meredith’s “British friends”, of course all unconnected with the apartments, left Italy in military fashion.

        For “Nasim” to speculate that Ms Knox accompanied Mr Sollecito to the questura because she was afraid he would destroy their alibi is, even for him, extraordinarily dishonest or particularly stupid. They were not interviewed together. How could she control what he says to the police from outside an interview room?

        • Daphne says:

          Poor Raffaele and Amanda. Obviously each was set up to go against the other. I think they handled it all as well as they could.
          But the recent Anderson Cooper interview showed a side of Raffaele’s character I’d never seen before. He appeared to be on edge, on the brink of despair, so sure he would have been cleared of guilt. It’s difficult to watch these two alternate between hope and despair, it’s just too cruel to watch.

          • Luara says:

            It’s difficult to watch these two alternate between hope and despair, it’s just too cruel to watch.
            Very true …
            I was shocked when Nencini said that Raffaele should have let himself be cross-examined, and both he and his lawyer made clear that he was quite willing to be cross-examined, only nobody asked! How could such a fundamental miscommunication happen in this long trial?

      • Brian says:

        Consciousness of innocence is certainly not conclusive proof of innocence, nor is consciousness of guilt conclusive proof of guilt. But it is logical to think that if someone who is not a repeat, hardened criminal snaps and commits a violent act, their first reaction would not be to start thinking about alibis, fooling the police, etc. Their first reaction would be to PANIC and to hit the road.

        The reaction to run would, of course, also be the first thought of anyone else who felt they were in personal danger.

        So the fact that the English girls and the other housemates left quickly does not necessarily demonstrate consciousness of guilt, but the fact that Amanda and Raffaele stayed certainly demonstrates consciousness of innocence.

        I won’t even begin to get into the idea that because Amanda and Raffaele did not immediately lawyer up is a sign that they were guilty.

        BTW who is “Kate Mansey”?

      • T.C. says:

        “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. ” -John Adams

        Why didn’t the police record the interviews? Why didn’t the police provide an attorney and an interpreter? It is required by Italian law you know…Why did the lead investigator state case closed before the forensic investigation? You know, the investigator that was found guilty of abuse of power?

        Italy is lucky I am not President of the U.S. All diplomatic ties would be severed, trade agreements cancelled, military bases moved, and allied status would be a thing of the past. This would be U.S, policy going forward until the Italian government restructured and reformed it’s judicial system.

      • BigDinBoise says:

        Another brilliant analysis by you.
        She was 20 years old and you paint obviously ambiguous actions as those of some sort of seasoned criminal mastermind. Has it ever occurred to you that the local Italians decision to lawyer up might be explained in other ways? First of all, as you said, Laura and Filomena lawyer-ed up on the advice of their bosses, who probably had some inkling of the aggressiveness and ineptitude of the local police and prosecutor, not to mention Filomena kept pot in the apartment, and had even asked Amanda to lie about its presence.

        I think it’s pretty obvious why Giacoma lawyer-ed; he was sleeping with Meredith and was growing pot in his apartment, which was quickly discovered by police. He didn’t even return to Perugia right away when he heard the news of Meredith’s murder. Giacoma introduced Rudy to Meredith and brought him to the Villa a few times to smoke weed, Rudy might of even had some knowledge that the boys were going to be out of town that night that he gained from conversations with them.

        I’ve always thought it was strange that Amanda should be painted as such a whore by the prosecution and the media while Meredith was presented as the blessed virgin. Meredith was dating Giacoma, your typical bad boy, as compared to the somewhat nerdy and studious Raffaelle. I think Amanda and Meredith had somewhat paralleling lifestyles, and the only discernible difference I can see is that Meredith was more uptight then Amanda, due to her middle class British background. Both girls were typical of the culture from which they came.

        • Rose Marie says:

          Exactly right. Meredith was having sex and smoking pot and going out drinking. So was Amanda. The two young women were very similar in many ways.

      • Zalman says:

        Nassim, you still haven’t explained why Amanda and Raffaele – if they are truly guilty – didn’t “lawyer up”. Practically everyone who had some connection to that house immediately ‘lawyered up’ or fled or both. Why did they not flee? Why did they not lawyer up? Why did they agree to talk to the police without a lawyer – even as the police became increasingly aggressive to them in their questioning? Why would they agree to do so over four consecutive days – over 50 hours’ worth – of increasingly aggressive police questioning, without a lawyer? Their actions make no absolutely no sense if they are truly guilty. ‘Lawyering up’ is not an indication of guilt or of innocence. But NOT ‘lawyering up’ and agreeing to be interviewed by police day after day with no lawyer is a clear evidence supporting their innocence.

        • Nasim says:

          I think you would be shocked to read how many death row inmates talked to the police extensively without an attorney. Certainly the majority of the registry cases I’ve read about.

  72. T.C. says:

    “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. ” -John Adams

    “Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.”
    ― Benjamin Franklin

    Write your politicians….

  73. Frank the Tank says:

    Given all the conflicting stories about this crime, it’s no wonder that people have no idea what’s true or what’s not.

    Back in the early days, the tabloids were actually reporting that FOUR people teamed up to rape and murder Meredith Kercher. Patrick Lumumba, Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and an unnamed fourth person, a North African musician (who eventually was identified as Rudy Guede).

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492695/Meredith-took-painful-hours-die-refusing-extreme-sexual-experiences.html

    • duke says:

      It sure would have been a tight fit in Meredith’s tiny bedroom but only one person was clumsy enough to leave any evidence and then he fled the country but nobody else did.

  74. alisa says:

    Dearest Amanda and Rafael, and your families,

    I went through something where I can feel your pain and relate to it. Mine was on a much less public, and smaller scale– but the spiritual horror is in the same realm. So many decent people are heartbroken by the relentless injustices you and Rafael have faced. I know that this is making me sick to my stomach, and it’s sickening to those I’ve discussed it with.

    I pray all the time for justice in your case. As my case winded down you were acquitted and we celebrated here. The stories had the same time frame. If you read this, amanda or rafael, I advise you both to make this as public as you can. Keep this in the public eye, and keep repeating the key facts that show your innocence(the dna and the impossibility of you removing all but Guede’s DNA etc)Keep reminding the public about how everything was taped, but the interrogation and keep talking about Mignini’s past. Nothing he does should be trusted and you need to drive that point home. Also, remind the public that you and Rafael just met. Few know or can find the time to really know the case and you will need this public support now.

    Accept any offer to be on CNN, or any big channel. Public outcry and fear of exposure is what these rats fear most, and it can stop them more than anything else. Absent that sense of public outrage they will feel emboldened…
    If you ever need anyone to talk to — who gets how you feel, please feel free to e-mail me.

    • Daphne says:

      @Amanda and Alisa:
      Coming from another time where I loved life, and it loved me right back, I can only relate to your shock and terror all too well. Every day gets much harder in a quest to block out memories that changed our world forever. I had been on the brink, where I experienced intense fear for my life in serious attempts to attack, kidnap, arrest, and do me grave bodily harm on a persistent basis, as well as a devastation of my credibility as the sane, honest person I always was. I live with a threat that danger will certainly manifest itself over and over again if I attempt any further connections to society in a reality that no one cares, many hate, and I must actually be a true disgrace, even to myself. After futile attempts to relate my experiences to other people, I am giving up. Whoever may have done this to me spun so many stories against me I could no longer participate in anything without even the greatest discomfort. And so I totally empathize.

      • alisa says:

        Hi Daphne,
        Don’t give up. To be falsely accused and prosecuted on those accusations is a special hell. It also gives us such a sense of truth and justice. We can use that for good. Best wishes to you and sorry you have had to feel this way. It is true that many don’t care and many hate. God knows why these hateful characters exist, but there are the good people that maybe can get us to the finish line.

        • Daphne says:

          Alisa:
          Thank you. I have never been arrested, but what I had repeatedly experienced was a sudden, intense bias by an anonymous group trying to discredit me. I have tried reporting these to authorities, but they have been focusing on my age in order to underscore the validity of my claims. To think that one of these incidences took place in a public airport has shown me the extremes to which they will go to do me harm. I cannot actually come right out and say with certainty who the person behind all this really is because of intimidation. This person also plastered an online image of my face with my eyes lowered, to make it look like I was — asleep. I believe what you say about good people, and that is what keeps me going. I am glad I had a chance to examine Amanda’s case, court documents, and media interviews, because they made me understand what happened to me much better. To bring justice to Amanda is of utmost importance. I believe in her innocence.

  75. Katja Hrones says:

    Dear Amanda,
    I am another person writing to express my support. I have been following your case since the first trial when I learned the facts of the case and became convinced of your and Raffaele’s innocence.

    I have been so impressed by your incredibly supportive family and friends as well as the strength and character you have shown.

    Know that there are many people who have taken the time to learn the facts of the case and stand behind you in your fight for truth and justice.

    Best wishes,
    Katja

  76. Nigel Scott says:

    I have written this article that sums up the whole mess. It is beginning to get noticed. Please link to it if you can to push it up Google ratings:

    http://bit.ly/1bn5ziu

    Thanks

    • Katja Hrones says:

      I have read this article. It is a fantastic summary of the case.

    • T.C. says:

      Very well written article Nigel. Good read for all. I am thinking about copy / pasting it and sending it to my Senator.

    • Willis Coleman says:

      It’s obvious you don’t care about facts so it seems pointless to rebut. By the way what possessed you to take Raffaele to Meredith’s grave? The Kerchers want Amanda and Raffaele to stay away from Meredith and stay out of the media.

      • Matt says:

        What you talkin about Willis?

      • Julie Jorgensen says:

        You really have your facts screwed up. Amanda never took Raffaele to Meredith’s grave. She has never been there and has asked for permission to go there one day…she is still waiting for that permission. Raffaele went to her grave on his own. And the sad thing is this…considering the fact that Meredith was Amanda’s friend and that she did NOT kill Meredith…why would it matter? The only reason Amanda has not gone is out of respect for the feelings of the Kercher family. It’s obvious you don’t care about the truth.

        • Daphne says:

          Raffaele’s photos and movies on his google page indicate that British friends led him to the plot, which is a public place. This sentimental act is proof positive of his honour and will to pay respects to Meredith, who after all, was a fellow colleague — right? He probably felt guilty about missing her wake, due to the questura.

    • Nick Green says:

      Wow, Nigel. Terrific.

    • Amelia says:

      Very nice article. Does anyone know why Guede was never cross-examined? It seems so strange to me that he was left out. Did either side ask for him to testify?

      • Sarah H says:

        The defense wanted to question him in Amanda and Raffaele’s trial, but they weren’t allowed to.

        • Sarah H says:

          That should be one more grounds for appeal in the European Court of Human Rights, since one of the guaranteed rights is the right to question witnesses against you in a trial.

          • Daphne says:

            Yes, you’re right. I think more people should appeal to this court, as it is the highest and most just. I think before long, we will probably all be under that one court system.

      • Luara says:

        Why would Guede be a witness to anything? He’s a terrible liar.

      • Daphne says:

        Also, has Rudy ever been approached with a book deal? He will most certainly be as soon as he’s freed. That would make an interesting story. His perspective should go down in history.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Excellent article Mr. Scott. This is one that needs to be spread.

    • Philippe says:

      Wonderful, very clear and strong article. Thank you Nigel.
      I will also send it, or point to it around.
      It’s bizarre, as this totally unfair verdict is now out, tabloids feel athorized to call these two guilty, etc, and it’s therefor very important to deconstruct the system that created such injustice. The real question should be , how did so many people believe and fight for such a crazy fantasy scenario, when it is so obvious why and When, the inquiry got derailed , and how it continued to be so..
      Does anyone know when, how , the European court can be involved, and would they be able to sort it out, make a new fresh trial, or , better, simply investigate these proceedings…?

    • Hi Nigel…Great article…speaking the truth re: Italian Judiciary. Will put the Link on a few of my main music websites…1-2-3…Amanda and Raffaele are both INNOCENT, as the Beatles would say, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah…Best, Ken

      • Stay strong, Amanda, because it really gets to me to see you so sad on GMA…but it is surely justified…because of what you have had to endure since Nov. 2007. – Best, Ken

    • duke says:

      I just finished reading the article Nigel and it’s an excellent summary of what a disaster this case has been from the beginning.

  77. emma horsfall says:

    Keep fighting this unjust vergit and hope america stand by you and refused extradition one day I hope the full truth come out to clean your
    name because it not right your name is driven to the mud over police mistakes

  78. Jeff Anderson says:

    Dear Amanda,

    Everytime I see you in the media I am amazed at your courage and fortitude and strength. My heart hurts for you and yearns for justice for two very, very innocent people. Hang in there! You are not alone. Keep the faith that justice will prevail. And I will keep the faith as well. It also doesn’t hurt to write my U.S. Congressman (or woman), Senator, Secretary of State, Attorney General, and the President. And that’s what I intend to do. You have my support.

    With My Very Best Regards and Wishes,

    Jeff Anderson
    Marysville, WA

  79. Crista says:

    this verdict weighs heavy on so many hearts who don’t just believe in your innocence, but know it to their very core. we won’t stop remembering you, thinking of you and fighting for you no matter what, Amanda. wishing you all the strength and support during this time.

  80. Lisa Smith says:

    Amanda, there is a lot you could do to prove your innocence: take a polygraph test, and let the press have the results, no matter what it is . I am surprised you haven’t demanded it yet, it could at least prove a lot of people that you are being honest about what you say. You should do it now because in prison it might not be possible. Or is there a reason you don’t want to or are afraid of it? What’s stopping you? If I were you, I would have demanded it as a proof of innocence, it’s the only way. But then again, I don’t think you ever will do it anyway…

    • Brittany says:

      Lisa Smith,

      A polygraph machine is not needed. A machine that measures and records physiological indices -blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and skin conductivity is the answer Lisa? Lisa Smith cracks the case with such an excellent suggestion overlooked by many? The answer is in the evidence. The answer will never be found in suggested theories that cannot be supported by evidence. The answer will never be found in putting your beliefs in a smear campaign purposely aimed to mislead the public. The answer will never be found by people like you who are close minded, and set on believing guilt with great reasonable doubt.

      Enlighten yourself.

      http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html

      Brittany

      • Willis Coleman says:

        I agree with Brit. The answer is in the evidence. A polygraph can be beat. It’s telling that Amanda won’t answer simple questions but rather insists that they be asked offline where presumably they go straight in to the trash.

        • Brittany says:

          Willis,

          Amanda has been very open and forthcoming. Please explore her blog thoroughly. You will find interviews, court documents, and her comments on almost every blog answering questions and making clarifications as needed. Yes, that does speak highly of Amanda, and none of this information is hidden nor can it ever be discarded now.

          Brittany

          • Willis Coleman says:

            Ask her to post the documents which are listed but missing in the Meredith Kercher Murder section.

          • Lisa Smith says:

            Yes, she is answering everything, but I would like to see what lie detective says about it. What does she have to lose? What are YOU afraid of, losing your own credibility if the results would be deceptive? if you want the truth and nothing but the truth, that’s the only way convincing those who accuse her of her innocence. Only liars would avoid it! Polygraph can be beaten, but not many can do that. And since you believe she has told the truth, there’s nothing that can go wrong. Sounds to me, you actully DON’T believe her, and are afraid she wouldn’t pass it! LOL

          • Julie Jorgensen says:

            Lisa,
            Amanda has already stated that she is willing to take a polygraph test. If the day comes that she decides to actually take one we would support her decision whole heartedly.

            My concern is that even if Amanda passes a polygraph her persecutors will never believe it. They’ll find fault with the company or want proof of the results or say the people who gave the test were paid by the “Knox PR supertanker” and other such nonsense.

            If you doubt what I say just think back to what has been done to the forensic experts who were chosen by the Italian authorities to do tests on the supposed murder weapon and other evidence. The detractors have tried to tear their findings to pieces and have made up all kinds of nonsense about them and their findings. So, if Amanda doesn’t ever take a polygraph test…this will be the very reason why.

    • Lisa’s comment rings with Truth…and is profound insight and a very good idea. I would take multiple polygraphs from noted firms (also voice-stress polygraph) and others now available by computer and submit the results in court, if admissible, and also submit them for publication in various widely-read publications that have Global readership. Also study the polygraph industry, also, if you can before making any decisions. As for evidence against Amanda and Raffaele, there is NONE.- Best, Ken

    • Sarah H says:

      Lisa Smith, a lie detector result is not proof of anything, which is why no US court accepts one into evidence.

      • Rob H says:

        Why would “Lisa Smith” ask for a polygraph test? On this blog she has stated categorically that 1) Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on the bra clasp and 2) Amanda Knox’s shoe print in blood was found in Meredith Kercher’s bedroom! Yes, really!

        The person posting as “Lisa Smith” is utterly dishonest – the only motivation extant is a desire to see Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito imprisoned at all cost. The guilt obsessed in this case accuse Ms Knox of lying and yet time and time again lie repeatedly about the facts of this case.

        • Lisa Smith says:

          Not true at all. If I am shown to be wrong about the things I have heard and read, then I will immediately change my mind, and defenitely support any innocent person no matter who they are. Polygraph test would either prove to me that those accusations were wrong or that they were right.

          • Brittany says:

            Lisa Smith,

            I believe in Amanda’s innocence completely. I will not ever waiver. I find a polygraph test to be trivial. Sure, she could take one, but at this point if you can’t view the evidence and facts to see truth now, I doubt you ever will. It will turn into something else for guilters to descend on. I personally have zero faith in a polygraph test. US Courts do not find them reliable either.
            The National Research Council has found no evidence of effectiveness.
            Brittany

          • Rob H says:

            What?? What does a polygraph test have to do with the establishment of objective fact? You have stated that Ms Knox’s DNA is on the bra clasp and her bloody shoe print was in Meredith Kercher’s bedroom. This is untrue. Indeed, if your statement were true about the shoe print, all her defenders would become her accusers. The prosecution does not even believe this! Why do you need a polygraph test to “change my [your] mind” on these points? You can change your mind based on the evidence. Yet you repeat these lies at every opportunity. Either show us the link to the evidence proving your claims or apologise and admit you are wrong. Where have you “heard and read” them??

  81. Joel says:

    Hi Amanda,

    Well, Raffaele definitely distanced himself from you on Anderson Cooper. He said he didn’t want to be associated with your “peculiar” behavior. He’s definitely fighting for his life, and I’m sure he’s been told that you are not the best associate.

    Amanda, you need to make your case publicly in a big way. I know you’re a young writer trying to express yourself with some verve, but you need to make a succinct and direct case for yourself. Keep it strong and simple: I’m completely innocent. I did not commit this crime. Meredith was my friend. I have no history of violence. There was none of my DNA in the murder scene, only the DNA of Rudy Guede, etc. He admitted to being in the house with Meredith when she was killed. This is an open and shut case.

    I’ve read comments about your GMA interview and some people were confused by your statements no matter how thoughtful . You need to really focus on definitive statements. Forget them not proving you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You need to shout: I am innocent.

    You need to win America over.

    • Nick says:

      Raffaele did NOT say he didn’t want to be associated with Amanda’s so-called peculiar behavior. This is a lie you concocted by taking his words out of context.

      And Amanda doesn’t need your advice on how to give interviews. She is doing a fine job–very natural and believable.

      You, on the other hand, are a not believable at all. You obviously mean her no good.

    • Mike says:

      Well written

    • Luara says:

      Agreed. Any prejudicial reporting in the USA needs to be fought. Like this article on ABC News, that repeats a lot of old and discredited accusations.
      For example, the “changing stories” meme and “Amanda’s and Raffaele’s stories don’t agree”, repeated in this article, which sounds like it’s repeating things that appeared in English tabloids. That isn’t responsible reporting.
      A rebuttal article would be useful. It would keep the issue in front of the public and correct misconceptions. Maybe also legal action to hold journalists in the USA to the ethical standards of journalists.
      Also, acting unambiguously innocent. Some of the things you say, may give an impression of guilt. Such as telling Diane Sawyer “For all intents and purposes, I was a murderer—whether I was or not” in an interview. It sounds to me like you were showing the damage from how you were treated, even while talking about how you were treated. But other people might interpret that as a sign of guilt.
      Guilty people may drop hints, “admit it” in a circuitous way. They may admit their guilt in slow stages.
      Unfortunately, innocent people who are emotionally vulnerable may “take on” some of the guilt that’s attributed to them. It’s as if, under intense pressure, some of that “guilty” message leaks into their personality.
      Some innocent people have even come to believe that they were guilty! This happened to one of the Norfolk Four. He seems to have been very vulnerable to the intense bullying interrogation tactics that were used on him.
      Innocence and guilt can look rather alike, and you need to be very careful to avoid any statements that sound anything like a guilty person’s partial admission.
      Perhaps you should take a leave from college to fight for your freedom. Or maybe you could fight, and then in whatever spare time you have, do courses by correspondence. Learning creative writing sounds like something you could do by correspondence :)

      • Luara says:

        ps And Amanda’s supporters could perhaps help her with rebuttal articles.
        Most people in the USA know very little about Amanda and this case. It needs more (favorable) publicity.

        • Doug Moodie says:

          Yes, but there is no place to reply meaningfully on his (Dan Abrams) website. I have noticed the tv at least works very hard to control the message. No talking back.

          • Luara says:

            I didn’t mean reply as a comment on his website, I meant a rebuttal article given space on abcnews.
            They may (and should) give space to the target of these insinuations, to rebut them.
            Or for supporters to dig up the truth. Usually what is going on is that there are elements of truth in the insinuations, that have been twisted and exaggerated to look bad..

    • Caryl says:

      Sometimes I feel like it’s me who is the weirdo because I don’t see any ‘peculiar’ behaviour in any way – not in those interviews she gave since she’s back in America.
      It seems to me like she is sitting in front of millions of people who think they are some kind of psychoanalysts – analysing and interpreting EVERY move, glance, smile, word, pause, breath. And they’re not looking for the truth in it, only for guilt. It is impossible for me to even think of how horrible that must feel. And to think of any way to please those people.
      I really hope Raffaele stays true to himself, as it is, of course, admirable how Amanda had his back so far, but on the other hand it should somehow be self-evident to behave like he did, knowing she is innocent (assuming one is a honorable person).
      Both of them are fighting for their lifes now, it should never be a reason for giving up on loyalty and honor tho. It may just be me, but this is how I feel about it, no offence intended.

      • Luara says:

        Raffaele was talking about Amanda’s “peculiar behavior” right after the murder, which raised the investigators’ suspicions.
        Her behavior after the murder didn’t sound peculiar to me, either.
        They were two people in the first days of an intense love affair. They were in an altered state of consciousness even before the murder.
        Then comes this rare event, the murder in the middle of their intense love affair.
        Who’s to say what’s normal behavior and what’s “peculiar” in that doubly rare situation?
        Also, I thought police stations had a lot of “peculiar” people and “peculiar” behavior, and people wouldn’t be judged criminal for harmless but unusual behavior.
        There seems to be a lot of (perhaps religiously based) judgementalism in the Italians’ attitudes.
        The prosecutors for example (don’t remember which) said something like, we don’t need to have a motive for Amanda and Raffaele to murder because people nowadays murder without a motive.
        So, one of the basic elements of a murder prosecution – the motive – has been dispensed with! The prosecutors believe no motive is needed.
        Bollocks. People need a motive now just as they ever did. A murder accusation starts to make sense when the accused was frustrated with their spouse, say, and didn’t feel able to seek divorce.
        I agree with Joel that Raffaele was trying to distance himself from Amanda in that interview. I was surprised when he said the evidence against Amanda was “not very strong” – as in “smoke and mirrors”? He probably feels that he has to avoid offending the Italians.

        • Daphne says:

          Luara:
          Raffaele’s position is definitely the most difficult, as Italy is his native country. I totally agree with what you say about motive. The courts put so much emphasis on the crime as a spur of the moment random act. I am very suspicious of any theory that points away from true motive. It does seem as though Meredith was an intended victim; she may have been killed else where, and the robbery may have been just an afterthought by someone else. But Mignini’s original theory about the motive for Meredith’s death is too unrealistic.

          • Luara says:

            I totally agree with what you say about motive
            Motive is very important. People get angry, even angry enough to think about murder. But as for actually doing it – if Amanda were that bothered by Meredith, why wouldn’t she simply move out? Millions of college students do just that, every year.

          • DW says:

            Frankly, even the “satanic orgy” theory is more plausible than the “killed roommate over arguments about cleaning the bathroom” type theory. Come. On. Have there ever been college roommates who didn’t squabble over housekeeping? And even if it had become hostile, Amanda had apparently basically been living at Raffaele’s for the better part of a week. It hardly seems likely that her hypothetical rage over cleaning the bathroom or whatever would boil over right then. I would guess she could have cared less whether that apartment was clean, and if Meredith had been hassling *her* about it, how likely does it seem that, in her then-state of newly in love with a wonderful guy, etc., that she would, oh heck, take out a knife and stab Meredith for it? Right.

      • Philippe says:

        Place anyone, really just anyone, on television, and present them to the audience with the possibility that they are murderer or criminal, and you will be looking at the killer.
        That’s why society should have an independent justice system, away from media pressure.
        That jurors can go home and look at media attention on the case they are judging is not right and seems illegal other countries. And there are good reason for that..

      • Daphne says:

        Raffaele’s shadowy image in all this is so eerie. I can only hope, as someone else posted yesterday, that the appeal will go very favourably for Raffaele and Amanda and that they will be cleared of guilt. I think the prosecution may have unintentionally led defence to think that the same evidence was now being scrutinized under the same context as last time and not on a domestic dispute.

      • DW says:

        I agree, I have never understood what the accusation of “peculiar behavior” amounted to. I had heard there was a supposedly disturbing video of Amanda and Raffaele kissing, right outside the murder investigation scene, and I admit I found that odd and possibly disturbing – until I saw the video. It isn’t salacious, for pete’s sake. Amanda looks as distraught as you would expect a young woman to feel a few minutes or hours after learning her roommate had been murdered. And Raffaele is comforting her. They were very, very young. They’d only been together about a week – they were in the first stages of an infatuation. Their behavior seemed perfectly normal to me. They did not, at that point, have any reason to even dream they’d be considered suspects in this murder and they didn’t imagine they needed to think about how their images would come across in the media!

        And people ask why didn’t Amanda act more grief stricken, more somber, never smiling, etc. But the extent to which Amanda could reasonably have been expected to be “grief stricken” is overblown. Sure, they were roommates and friends, but they hadn’t actually known each other very long – about 6 weeks? They really realistically couldn’t have been expected to be tight friends, and obviously Amanda was spending most of her time with Raffaele. It’s not like this was Amanda’s best friend from childhood or something.

        As for “cartwheels,” etc., at the police station, well, that’s just silly. Amanda was 20 years old, very very young and naïve. Probably she was somewhat immature, but so were we all when we were 20.

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          Amanda could never do anything right in the eyes of the twisted media. Every action was taken out of context. In the beginning she was vilified for not smiling…then, later in court, if she happened to smile at a family member as she walked into the court room, she was vilified for smiling too much.

          She was harrasssed for NOT crying openly when Meredith was murdered yet she has been harrassed since then for daring to cry during her interviews saying she is seeking sympothy and attention.

          How can a person even live a normal life when every action, clothing choice, even hair cut is dissected and vilified…yes they even tried to make her recent hair cut into something diabolical…some devious plan to change her image after her sentence. What they failed to mention is Amanda had cut her hair a month before the sentence even came out.

          It saddens me that Amanda is under this crazy microscope. I hope one day when this is all over and she is finally completly exonerated…that the day will come that people will say…Amanda who? And she will be able to live her life without tabloid photographers following her every move.

          It would be wonderful if the day came that people knew Amanda only for her writing and her activism…but not for this case, this murder for which she is completly innocent.

          In an interview a while back a person at the coffee shop where Amanda was being interviewed wanted to know who she was and why people were following her with cameras…she was pleasantly surprised and said…”I’m a writer”. That’s the future I wish for Amanda.

          • DW says:

            “She was harassed for not crying openly when Meredith was murdered”

            Maybe there were cultural differences at play, but some people cry in such a situation, and quite a few others don’t. Many people would not cry in the immediate aftermath of coming upon a grisly murder, though they might cry several hours or days late.

          • Julie Jorgensen says:

            Actually this information from the tabloids isn’t even accurate. Amanda did cry. She cried plenty. She cried in the car, she cried when they took her back to the villa later, she cried in prison…even though recent articles claim she didn’t. And now she is being harrassed because she IS crying openly. This is crazy making. A person cannot live under such pressures and the tabloids need to stop it. How I wish the laws against libel really had some teeth in them and that there was some recourse for her and her family against them.

      • Daphne says:

        Caryl:
        You’re not weird. Other people have said the same. I read the accounts and some testimony; even from the first movie, it’s clear Amanda’s behaviour was not peculiar, unless people are referring to other things.

    • T.C. says:

      Raffaele needs to do what he has to do. This has nothing to do with Amanda not being in Italy. This is about the so-called Italian justice system saving face. See: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/31/amanda-knox-raffaele-sollecito-case-harsh-verdict-italian-justice and: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/04/knox-acquittal-only-possible-verdict

      This case should have never been brought to trial. It would never have been brought to trial in the U.S. or any developed country in the western world. Italy may think it is a developed nation but it is not. It’s judicial system is a holdover from the Mussolini era police state as the articles above mention.

      The U.S. through trade, extradition treaties, and being allies, have condoned Italy’s judicial behavior. The President, The Senate, and the State Department needs to reexamine U.S. policy with Italy. There should be some sanctions imposed on them until they restructure and reform there system of justice. Travel advisories need to be issued as well.

      Judge Micheal Heavey in his letter to Barrack Obama described how the U.S. consular office failed to protect Amanda along with the fact that Italy prosecutors and police violated Italian law. See: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/ConsularFailureKnox.pdf

      If Italy can’t follow there own rule of law, why should the U.S. give any merit to Italy’s justice system? Can it be a fair system if they can pick and choose what laws to follow and what laws to ignore?

      Corruption? You bet…

    • Rose Marie says:

      I agree in part. Amanda, it may have been due to editing, but your GMA interview was such a missed opportunity to say simply that you are innocent. That you had nothing to do with this awful crime. Same thing with your statement issued after the verdict. I understand how upset you must have been. But just keep it about declaring your innocence first then any commentary about disappointment in the verdict.

      This business about saying there isn’t evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s true! But leave that for your lawyers to say. You say, I’m innocent and leave it. I was dismayed by Raffaele’s words, also, suggesting that there wasn’t evidence. Again – true! – but that sounds like someone trying to get off in the grey area. No one wants to hear that. It should be very black and white, clear, succinct. As Joel said.

      I know this must be a horrific time for you. Devastating. For you and Raffaele as well, of course, even more for him as he is in Italy.

      The awful thing about the media is that they are vultures hanging and waiting on your every word. But let them wait. Only say what you wish to say and in your time.

      • Julie Jorgensen says:

        I do have to agree with some of the above comments. People are inherently lazy and sound bites seem to be how everyone gets their information these days. Keep your message simple and to the point every chance you get…whether in the written word, or on television. Simply say….I did NOT commit this crime. I am innocent…and the evidence proves my innocence. Rudy Guede is the true and sole murderer of Meredith Kercher. The evidence proves he was there. It was his footprint, his handprint, his DNA. Keep pounding back this message so people don’t get lost in the message.

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          Yes, leave no ambiguity….leave NO doubt of your innocence every time you speak. Also, make it clear that a grave injustice occurred, full of corruption and illegalities that must be rectified either by the Italian Supreme court or the U.S. State Department. It’s time to take the gloves off…you will not accept anything less than the truth and your complete exoneration. No need to apologize ever again to anyone for any of your past actions, especially your illegal interrogation.

          • Brittany says:

            Rose Marie & Julie,

            I know what you are suggesting is your way of offering support, and a way for Amanda to see others perspectives. I too have my own perspective that differs from yours, but it’s a friendly debate. I think what you encourage her to do will be done as she has done so in the past.

            Sincerely,

            Brittany

          • Julie Jorgensen says:

            Thank you Brittany…as you pointed out…none of us truly knows how Amanda feels or the stress she is under during every interview. She had done a commendable job. Our suggestions may not be what’s best either…only she can make that decision.

        • Luara says:

          Yes, and when negative, slanted articles appear, that’s a chance to demand space to rebut the accusations. If that space is not given, it becomes slander or something close to it.

        • Rose Marie says:

          Yes, agree with you in part. But Amanda was not present at the murder, so she doesn’t know who did it. She doesn’t know if it was Guede. Certainly, significant and concordant evidence points to Guede.

          And for Amanda, I don’t know what it’s like to be in your shoes. I can imagine it must be a horrific ordeal all these years. But anyone with any humanity can relate.

          I am only suggesting these ideas about what to say publicly. But I cannot know how hard it must be to keep your cool, manage your fear, anger and hurt, and speak your truth.

      • Brittany says:

        Rose Marie,

        How easy is it to say “I’m innocent!”? How flat does that come across? What Amanda does is explain her innocence, and that is far more impactful. There are people who know where, at which steps of the way, this case was prevented from moving forward in a fair manner. The statement she released after the verdict is really on point, every point so valuable and necessary to make. Then on GMA she reiterated her statement. She is not rehearsed. Her heart is on her sleeve. She is innocent and everything she’s said makes that clear.

        Brittany

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          I love and cherish every one of Amanda’s interviews both in print and in video form. Amanda is always very sincere and her heart is on her sleeve as you say. For those of us who actually take the time to take in all her words we have discovered great depth and wisdom. So yes, there still is a place for deep, contemplative comments, especially for longer interviews. Yet, there are those out there who still do not know the story or the truth and who are confused about who really killed Meredith. For those people and to reach those who don’t or won’t take the time to listen thoughtfully, Amanda might need to have more concise and quickly impactful statements that hit all the important points. Just a suggestion. As always, Amanda has to ultimately decide how to handle these things for herself. I support her regardless.

          • Sarah H says:

            How many of us could sit on a stage like Amanda and go through so many interviews? It’s easy for us to critique her performance from our easy chairs. But imagine what it would be like in her place, trying to defend yourself from these insane allegations. She doesn’t know what she’s going to be asked in advance and can only do her best on the fly. I think she does an amazing job. Far better than I would in her circumstances.

        • Rose Marie says:

          I appreciate that you support Amanda. Your heart goes out to her. You feel her pain.

          I also feel her pain. But saying these simple things are not beneath her or somehow too easy. They are vital and important and critical words that she should say EVERY TIME she is interviewed – and the first thing she should say. I suggest that she should simply say: “I am innocent. I did not kill Meredith, I did not have anything to do with her assault and death,” etc.

          Perhaps you don’t understand because you empathize so much with her. But many people do not. And they are shocked and angry that Amanda seems to be focused on being a victim herself. She is, of course, of this injustice. And that is something she certainly can and should raise her voice about – but only AFTER she asserts clearly and simply that she did not commit this crime, that she is innocent.

          I don’t think Amanda has any problem communicating with her supporters. But it’s the other half of Americans and the majority of Italians and Brits and others she needs to convince.

          I believe she is so weary of being misunderstood or not believed that she gives in, that she does not try to repeat that basic message of innocence. But I believe it’s critical to do so – always.

          Let her lawyers and supports talk about the legal issues, the evidence and lack of evidence and so on.

          Here on this blog, Amanda has another great opportunity to shout it loud and long – that she is innocent.

          • Brittany says:

            I do not believe that it’s beneath her. I am not blinded by my empathy for her. Amanda has stated her innocence many times.

            The particular interview in question was given within 24 hours of the verdict being read, she was venerable. Her innocence was implied by her conversation with Robin. I understand what you are saying and your points, however she’s human, and one that continues to suffer.

            The fight for innocence to be recognized doesn’t end there. Without a doubt you will hear her say she’s innocent once again. As she’s said before “I didn’t kill. I didn’t rape. I didn’t rob. I didn’t plot. I didn’t instigate. I didn’t kill Meredith.” 

            Brittany

          • Brittany says:

            *vulnerable*

          • Julie Jorgensen says:

            I think you have some good suggestions Rose.

            None of us know how it feels to be in Amanda’s shoes. We empathize but we really don’t know. It must be so difficult for Amanda to have to defend herself over and over again especially when she knows she is innocent. It would be scary to be on live television and hope your mind doesn’t freeze. Amanda has done an amazing job tackling these things especially considering her young age.

            We all want the best for her and I hope it’s not offensive to her that we offer these suggestions. Again, Amanda will have to decide how she wants to handle future interviews. I do hope she will at least consider some of these suggestions knowing they are sent with the very best of intentions.

          • Luara says:

            I don’t think most people know anything really about this case. Maybe they recognize the name “Amanda Knox” but that’s about it.
            So the quick talking points – “I’m innocent” etc. are very important.
            We are drenched in it, Amanda is REALLY drenched in it, but most people only have a vague idea.

    • floen says:

      Amanda has strongly stated her innocence many times. 20 US forensic scientists already reviewed the case and advocated for her innocence. Judges, several FBI investigators and profilers, researchers, lawyers, police detectives… and on and on – and many more journalists, public personalities, writers and more keep speaking out on Twitter about their support. The truth is written all over the wall. Italy is looking really bad, with many from their own country speaking out. The anti-Amanda kooks on Twitter are one by one realizing they look foolish and are starting to back down or go silent. If the time comes, the State Department knows they will look too foolish. John Kerry has daughters of his own, and I think he will be empathetic about it.

    • Daphne says:

      Joel: I agree with most of what you say, as now two trials have come and gone, neither bringing us any closer to the truth. Amanda and Raffaele have done the right thing in expressing themselves by appealing to the American and European public.
      But I still think that a court of law is the most appropriate way to pursue the truth. Clearly there has already been too much speculation, too little evidence, and no real outcome as of yet. That, and having heard from two of the three victims (or four if you count Rudy), is the only official way to educate the public.

      • Daphne says:

        . . . “if you count Rudy,” meaning if he actually ever was “innocent” despite his presence in Meredith’s room and on her body.

  82. floen says:

    Blew off much of my work the last 4 days (I’m a freelancer) to work on countering the lies on Twitter with links to the truth. The little circle of people using Meredith’s face pictures to spread lies and links to a fake wiki site and websites with lies is definitely like a PR campaign- constant Tweets meant to mislead. But their followers are few, and the number of supportive tweets I’ve seen outweighs them. By clicking ‘favorite’ or ‘retweet’ on Twitter for all supportive Tweets, it helps us gain top results in searches. This is important for showing the stronger following that you have than the guilters do. They are tightly organized – favoriting each other’s tweets constantly. A group of us have blocked them for spam, and if enough people do they may get their accounts deactivated.

    Having seen the Panel video not long ago http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcGYrufLupA&list=LLzWcVfTR4-Ku-hsJzd9yKUg – the importance of the verdict had been weighing on me. I really did not think it would go the way it did – I was completely stunned. I hope more people keep watching the video – it has gotten 2,500 views in the last 4 days.

    I’m a strong believer that truth overpowers all in the end, but I’m also aware that innocent people spend their lives in prison. I can’t stomach the thought of you in prison again over something you didn’t do. I do not think that is going to happen though. I’ve been watching the headlines and people tweeting from around the world, and I think that all of the noise that is being made will make it nearly impossible.

    I’ve added as many of the supportive tweets as I can to my ‘Favorite’ list on Twitter, and have retweeted some of the best – in case anyone wants to browse through them. https://twitter.com/DreamsAndLight

    • floen says:

      I have to add a note about my above post. The last 2 days the war on Twitter intensified -the guilters started coming unhinged because we were beating them in the news headlines and in numbers. We had to put some of them in their place, so it got a little crazy. So to see the most positive comments in my Favorites or Tweets, scroll down to before Feb. 4 – Basically the 30th up until the 3rd. But now we are also getting more Tweeters from Italy, UK, London and Scotland speaking out and writing blog posts, and I am retweeting every one I see. Good stuff. :)

    • Daphne says:

      Twitter can be a cruel place for vulnerable people. It takes a lot of strength to tolerate some of the abuse there.

    • Daphne says:

      Floen: Good for you. You are apparently a sincere supporter.
      I too have “blown off” a term paper by posting here everyday in the hopes that I will hear about a retracted verdict, or perhaps a new arrest in the case. At best, I have found many insinuating photos casting Amanda in a negative or suspicious light.

      I for one am absolutely outraged that the new movie should debut this week — I cannot imagine how Amanda and her family, on top of that guilty verdict, can possibly be handling this. (Was Raffaele’s return to Italy the final episode?) I have once remarked that Italian art typically had a way of imitating life — but never to this degree.

  83. Raven1955 says:

    Amanda, I will be with you every step of the way. I pray for you every day and have prayed for you since the ISC ruling in March. You are a strong person. Raffaele is an incredible human being. I mean, if you both were criminals you would have turned on each other. But no, you both have remained steadfast in holding on to the truth. They tried to break you both, putting you in prison and solitary confinement(which is a human rights violation), but you both stood strong to the truth. You and Raffaele are innocent. No evidence is no evidence. I want to curse at Mignini and co, but I won’t. I will save all my energy and positive thoughts for you and Raffaele.

  84. Zalman says:

    Dear Amanda and supporters,
    I believe that there needs to be more of an offensive strategy than just defensive.
    Just a few examples out of literally hundreds:
    The prosecutor and their forensic police LIED and perjured themselves many times on stand. For example Stefononi lied and claimed they never tested a footprint of Amanda Knox for blood, yet they were certain that the footprint was blood. However on July 2009 when pressed by the defence they released some of the notes which confirmed that Stefononi HAD tested for blood and the test came back negative. A clear case of perjury. Yet for some reason Maseai judge ruled that even though there the TMG test came back negative for blood he decided that the footsteps were probably blood anyways.
    http://books.google.com.au/books?id=kN-xx5sQe7oC&pg=PT112&lpg=PT112&dq=stefanoni+luminol+footsteps&source=bl&ots=7ORZCWnU2I&sig=UIRlTHuAJlnZZelQa8aIf7-Fn8U&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JETwUpnlEIKGkAXhwYHwCA&ved=0CGUQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=stefanoni%20luminol%20footsteps&f=false

    Another example Stefononi lied and claimed to change the gloves every time she handled a new sample. But video proves she is lying.

    There is a strong Need to go on the offensive and show the corruption and perjury of the prosecution.
    In addition Amanda’s supporters need to emphasize that not only is Amanda not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt the evidence is clear: Its 100% impossible for Amanda to be guilty. See For example how to prove 100% innocence:
    http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI2.html

  85. T.C. says:

    This is why I state WRITE your Senators…

    “This week, Amanda Knox was , by an Italian court.

    She was found guilty of murdering her roommate Meredith Kercher in 2009, though the verdict . Last year, Italy’s Supreme Court of Cassation, , sent the case back to an appeals court and that court found her guilty.

    Now this hasn’t happened yet, but if Italy’s highest court decides to convict her, Italy would have to ask the U.S. to extradite her. That process, and whether or not the U.S. really would extradite her, turns out to be less about law, and more about politics and foreign policy.

    “It’s the dirty little secret of extradition law that it really is 90 percent politics and only about 10 percent law,” says Steve Vladeck, a law professor at American University. “It’s as much about the diplomatic and foreign policy considerations as it is about legal considerations.”

    Read more here: http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/02/01/269546798/knox-case-could-put-u-s-in-an-extradition-quandry

  86. Chris Frait says:

    Someone told me there was an online petition we could sign in Amanda’s defense. Does anyone have the link because I can’t find it? Thanks!

    Chris Frait

    • T.C. says:

      It was posted in the house keeping thread.

      The petition is important but I suggest that writing your Senator and other rep’s is more important. Senators can put pressure on the state department, ambassadors and others where a petition cannot. You can find your senator here: https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

    • Kenneth Janeway says:

      There were several petitions on-line back in 2009 for both Raffaele and Amanda and I started one in 2011 that was meant to be sent to the President of Italy. The URL’s should still be on-line. Actions that are far more powerful are needed now to free Amanda and Raffaele – I don’t think mere petitions will have much effect. Stay tuned. -Best, Ken

      • alisa says:

        Hi Ken,

        At first, I was sure this would be a done deal i.e. no way would America even entertain the notion. But, I know how corrupt both judicial (political)systems are, here and Italy, and for my own sake give us some direction or reassurance, please. I have faith that Amanda won’t be dragged off, but after what I saw here, and now with Dershowitz and some other seeming to be accepting of extradition… I’m not 100 percent confident. What do you think us in the public can do to make sure this doesn’t happen. And, is there anything we can do for Rafaelle?

        I think the CNN story must become one of a travesty that all decent people should feel compelled to fight. I’m convinced that that sort of non stop coverage can move mountains. A little girl recently got a lung due to this kind of non-stop news coverage etc.

        If the true story is clearer, many can even be mobilized to begin a boycott. Whatever it takes to give the message that this will cost these bad people, if they continue this witch hunt.

        So far Amanda and Raffaele have been too proud or something, and not enough seem to grasp the case, and how ugly the whole travesty is. I don’t blame Amanda and Raffaelle at all. I’m sure they are too overwhelmed, but I think they should show their outrage and disgust, well and often. And, they should not express sympathies for the Kerchers. If people kept trying to railroad and ruin me, I wouldn’t offer them further condolences.

        This new crisis demands that as many good people as possible- get to bare witness, and that political b.s won’t be tolerated. No idea how that message can be sent to people with the power to do something, but just throwing in my two cents.

        • Hi Alisa: There is a possibility that if an Extradition petition (federal complaint) is filed in Federal court in Seattle, that the court will require compelling evidence in order to send Amanda back to Italy to serve this 28 1/2 year sentence. She may come under U.S. Constitutional law which will allow her to plead that Double Jeopardy has occurred. The U.S. Secretary of State can also deny her Extradition from Washington, DC as a final step in the process. As soon as I get free I will be doing extensive research on Extraditions and am working on many other ideas for Amanda Knox. I think that once she is exonerated that Raffaele will be set free since this vendetta seems to be focused on Amanda for some odd reason. It is also financial as I have said before. Their re-convictions saved Italy a great deal of money, over $600,000 to be precise. I also think this is a political vendetta or just mere Anti-Americanism and sheer stupidity on Italy’s part. They should just “own up” and admit they made a huge mistake. The name Knox comes out of the Scottish clan “McFarland/McFarlane”. My great grand-mothers maiden name was Elizabeth McFarland so I am a distant relative to Curt Knox and I consider his daughters to be like my younger sisters in a sense, but the most important thing is that I know Amanda and Raffaele are Innocent – period. Influence is a funny thing, it is more powerful than money when used properly. Thanks for your comment today – Best, Ken

          • alisa says:

            Thank you, Ken. There you go… follow the money almost always applies. You say, ” Their re-convictions saved Italy a great deal of money, over $600,000 to be precise.” Now, that is something every one can understand without much effort on their parts- if explained in a little more detail. How so? How did it save them more than a half mil?

            It’s a cruel world for the wrongfully accused, and crueler still for the wrongfully convicted. Most will accuse them of conspiracy theorizing or paranoia if they say a whole bunch of police, prosecutors and judges are behaving very badly. As Amanda likely knows, this is mostly due to the sanity saving human tendency to want to be immune from this nightmare. Or, more succinctly: the “it can’t happen to me,” syndrome

            A lot will be said to keep them quiet, and it will take a long time to realize that shutting up is the worst thing victims of a malicious prosecution can do.
            You enter a world where now you are being made to look bad based on court rulings, that are as wrong as can be, and result from well placed phone calls and not truth. You have to explain at length everything, and you grow sick of it… very few have the time or inclination to hear things “at length.”

            I avoided the wrongful conviction horror, by the grace of luck or god or whatever… but I know about the rest… And, it got me to see certain things very clearly.
            a few of those things: Pride must take a backseat, as much as possible. You, and any one who can get the truth out must do it as often as possible. In this case, repeat and repeat a few key facts that would leave any sane person(let’s forget about the crazed hateful types for now,) understanding these kid’s innocence. Then, quickly move to the motive of this newest “verdict.” Money or face saving etc. Some discussion of the courts involved too. I’m pretty sure that I read that the court that acquitted them was the “cleanest” of courts in the Italian system. Expand on that.

            Show the world who the real criminals are. Put them on the offensive, by dissecting as quickly as possible, the case to show how it was impossible that A and R were involved.

            I tell you I selfishly can’t stand the idea of this latest twist in this tale of travesty… Thanks for shedding some more light, Ken.

            Also, shame on Dershowitz for this. He is either too busy to know the case or… Whatever the case, he needs to stifle :(

    • Luara says:

      Here’s a better-worded petition.

  87. Jeff says:

    Dear Amanda,

    I am horrified and appalled by what is happening to you. A couple of years ago when you won your appeal I was crying tears of happiness because the courts had finally gotten it right and you were coming home. Now they have gotten it wrong all over again. I can’t imagine what pain and fear you and your family are going through right now. Hold your head up high Amanda, and fight with everything you’ve got! You are a beautiful person and deserve nothing but happiness in your future. I will always be on your side and I hope that sometime soon this unjust verdict will be thrown out yet again.

    Love always,
    Jeff

    • T.C. says:

      Jeff,
      Take the time to write your Senator. Express your outrage.

      If this verdict is upheld and a extradition request is made, political pressure on the State Department may be Amanda’s only hope…It is that important. Write, write, write…Make a few calls as well…

  88. Amelia says:

    First and foremost, I think none of us should forget what an outstanding individual Rafael has shown himself to be. A man with less integrity would have thrown Amanda under the bus to save himself. If corruption wins, this outstanding man might end up serving a long prison term for being a good person. If I had been in his shoes, I would have left Italy for good when the Supreme Court tossed out the acquittal (if you’ve read the judges reasoning for throwing out the acquittal, you will understand). I would never have come back for the verdict. But HE did because he felt it was the right thing to do.

    I am thankful that Amanda is in the USA and likely safe from extradition due to an improper ruling, but Raphael, the hero of this tale who took the high road, is stuck in a situation where he may pay the ultimate price for not making a sacrifice demanded by the Italian political system.

    I sincerely hope that the Supreme Court takes another look at this ruling, but I am doubtful. I remember what those judges said a year ago. To me, they sounded like they were convinced that there was no possible way Amanda was not involved in Ms. Kercher’s death. I worry that they are very happy with the latest turn of events and call it a day.

    • Lvmp says:

      Yes, I wish we could also help Raffaelle. Both him and Amanda have suffered so unfairly.

    • Daphne says:

      In any case, the appeal may take place in the USA, and it should; too bad they couldn’t move the re-trial to USA — it might have made things much easier all around.

    • Daphne says:

      @Amelia: Those are very astute and sincere observations about the character of Raffaele. He seems to have all the right intentions, especially in his defence of Amanda. I guess wishful thinking has me seeing them in the past, when Meredith was still alive, and hoped that if they wanted to, they would reunite. But I hope that you turn out to be wrong. Surely this can’t be he final word!

  89. Deppie says:

    Amanda, it’s very encouraging to hear that you have developed an inner strength of some kind after all these years of persecution. I hope Raffaele has too. We are behind both of you and will support you all the way, wherever that leads.

    It was patently obvious that “Judge” Nencini was lying through his teeth when he read out your verdicts. He knew he was talking bull, that’s why he read so quickly and had such a pained expression on his face. His contorted comments to the media are an expression of his guilty conscience.

    • Anonymous says:

      How any court could use the same exact evidence that was used to overthrow the first verdict is what’s crazy. That alone says alot. You have alot of support Amanda and alot of people thinking and praying for you and your family.

  90. Fabio says:

    Hello Amanda, I just want to say that I am convinced of your innocence, even if I had not followed the story just to see your eyes to know that you are innocent, sometimes when you can not find someone who has committed a crime like this to avoid raising controversy about who the blame is easier to blame, this is what I think happened, now you find yourself in this nightmare without fault, but you’ll see that it will end the charges will be removed, because I’m sure you’re innocent , know that here in Italy many people believe in you.
    I hope I have not written badly, because I use the automatic translator.
    With the assurance that all will end well for you I send you a hug.
    Fabio.

    • Jonathan says:

      Welcome to the Real World, Fabio!
      I’m new to this blog, but so far I haven’t read any message coming from my country… I’ll read more to find out.
      Anyway, I’m very happy to find that there are other Italians out there that are piercing the veil of media programming!

      Italiani, spegnete il televisore almeno una volta nella vostra vita!

      Jonathan,
      from Italy

  91. cindy safier says:

    I have always felt you were innocent and have just finished your book and am totally mortified with how all this has played out, most especially this last trial ( if you can even call it that – more of a witchhunt!). I would love to help you anyway I can. I so relate to you and your mother, as I have a daughter your age that studied abroad in Italy and she would have probably handled the situation just as you did. When you are so used to doing the right thing and being believed while growing up, it is hard to imagine that you would ever need to be distrustful of authorities and have to protect yourself from being charged with a crime that you could never have committed. I am also so angry that the guy who did this is getting out in sixteen years!

    I don’t have any great ideas for how I can help you, but I was wondering if an online petition against the US extraditing you could possibly help. A petition to deport Justin Beiber got a lot of signatures – surely one for you could get even more. I can’t believe that US citizens are just turning their heads to this atrocity. You deserve protection by your own country from a corrupt Italian legal system and a media feeding frenzy. I hate to think that I live in a country that would allow this to happen to a wonderful girl like yourself. Please. please let me know how I can help!

  92. Caryl says:

    I am praying for you to never believe people telling you that something would be wrong with you. ‘Cause it is not. The only thing that’s wrong is the judicial system in Italy, people spreading hate and your fortune. You, on the other hand, are just right.
    I respect you so much for benefiting even from this horrible situation by helping others and spreading awareness of injustice in general. Even tho you seem to be weak in some situations (naturally), you are the strongest person I’ve ever heard of and I really hope you are aware of that.
    It is with a broken heart to think about the possibility you could someday give up on yourself, as you are such an inspiration in so many ways – not only surviving the situation, but fighting back.
    There are still so many things to say about the current events – but no words can express them properly. I guess, sometimes the only way to keep going is to believe there must be a deeper meaning in everything. I just really hope you will stay strong, as now, you (and us together) can really make a difference.
    You’re not alone. C

  93. Brigitte G says:

    Be sure, that there are many many people in Germany, that look at your case. We know, that there is no proof. The verdict ist totally wrong, unsane.

    • Ella says:

      Care to speak for yourself only and stop saying “we” cos i’m not you, nor is Anyone Else. I don’t know a Single Person around here who thinks she’s innocent. Quite the opposite really.

  94. Naomi says:

    Dear Amanda

    I wanted to let you know that me and my sister strongly believe in your innocence. We are reading every book that we can find about this case and every time we hear someone say that you are guilty we burst out to tell them that it’s not possible and give them every argument that we can find!
    I’m a student in the law, and I just can’t believe that they really think that you are guilty. It just amazes me in how (sorry for the language) stupid those people are!

    I seriously hope that you will never give up this fight, until your name is cleared!

    Belgium stands behind you, every step of the way!

    Take care,

    Naomi & Amber from Belgium

  95. Grace Boas says:

    We would not be able to live if we, as moral, humane beings, could not trust that truth prevails.
    All this scam in Italy will be exposed one day. I think you and Raffaele will have a place in history as one of those incredible victims of injustice… you have immense support all over the world and you are a role model of fortitude. I have a daughter your age.. I could just hug you..

  96. Grace Boas says:

    We would not be able to live if we, as moral, humane beings, could not trust that truth prevails.
    All this scam in Italy will be exposed one day. I think you and Raffaele ill have a place in history as one of those incredible victims of injustice… you have immense support all over the world and you are a role model of fortitude. I have a daughter your age.. I could just hug you..

  97. M says:

    As a kid, I was once wrongly accused of cheating in a drawing competition. The teacher said that an adult drew the bird since ‘it is not possible for a kid to draw such lines’. My picture was declined and I was given a disciplinary punishment. It hurt. Still hurts after 30 years.
    I cannot imagine what you are going through. I know how hard it is to convince people when they ‘know’. I’ve spent my whole life sharpening my intellectual skills of persuasion as a consequence. I hope you will get a chance too. You have the support of any intelligent person on the planet that takes more than five minutes studying the arguments.
    The truth must prevail. For humans as a race. It hurts me directly to see such ignorance on the highest level. I spend a lot of time discussing this with other people, hopefully spreading the fire a little. You may be in a bad corner right now, but hold on. I believe things are going to turn. This is too important, too important for everybody.

    • Rick Stilwell says:

      Wow, if I had been in your shoes I would have told that teacher “I will draw you another one right here on the spot to prove I did it.” Kids needed guts. We were too fearful to show we were right. Too used to submitting to others. At least as adults we are better at that. We now stand up and fight to prove our word. And that’s exactly what Amanda and Raffaele are doing. Going all out to prove themselves.

    • Amelia says:

      The same happened to me when I wrote a book report on Watership Down in the 4th grade. The teacher called in my parents to the principal’s office and accused them of “feeding me” the book report because she didn’t think I was smart enough to read a novel at that age.

      • Daphne says:

        That is such nonsense, Amelia. I sympathize; in grade two, I was using a grade 5 speller. Some teachers apparently do not know the first thing about their students! It reminds me a little of the justice system . . .

    • puzzled says:

      Yep me too. I was once wrongly accused. I just kept screaming my innocence and quite LITERALLY I actually raised my voice. All I could keep saying was I am innocent. Never missed a moment to say that. Because when you’re innocent that’s all you can think of doing. You simply state the truth as simple as daylight as the truth should be. Lies are much more complicated. And you state it whenever you can. That is why it doesn’t change no matter how you phrase it or what you are asked. It’s so simple. Say the truth. Not sure what is going on in this story, but it’s way past the point of simple truth. Nobody is talking naturally anymore.

    • Daphne says:

      Hi, M. That sounds atrocious. My grade two teacher did the same thing to me when I re-wrote, without any books, (in class!) a fairytale. She stopped me, grabbed my work, shouted at me in front of the whole class, and threw the paper in the garbage. Those kids stuck up for me, though, and actually stood up in front of the class and called that teacher a liar. We need more kids to speak up when they see injustice. Amanda needs the same from the Italian justice system.

  98. Rick Stilwell says:

    I really appreciate the fact that our ongoing support for you does have a positive effect on you, helping you to be strong enough to handle what comes in your way. The feedback you post here tells us we’re doing the right thing and motivates us to continue.

    I heard about your defense saying it is possible something can happen to the guilty verdicts due to misconduct by the judge (talking to the press about what influenced his decision, which is against the law). I really hope that card is played to it’s fullest because it would really be great for you and especially Raffaele who is in a less protected position to have a better chance. From here a redo of the trial could only be a positive thing because the worst that could happen would be the same (which of course is very bad). I’d say take that chance if given it as it makes sense mathematically.

    • Maryann says:

      IN THE NEWS
      Amanda Knox Puts U.S. Authorities on High Alert With Latest Statement (VIDEO)
      Posted by Rebecca Stokes on Jan 10, 2014 at 1:50 PM

      • BigDinBoise says:

        Funny how all the comments on this blog post from Rebecca Stokes are in support of Amanda – this will just continue to grow as people learn more about this case.

  99. Michael Wiesner (smith) says:

    “It is better to suffer wrong than to do wrong”
    Plato

    Those who insist on continuing this ordeal you and Raffaele are suffering will have to answer in the end. I’m not sure how, but they will. Amanda, I hope that inner fortitude allows you to finish your degree, and graduate in June with you head held high.

    Meanwhile, all your supporters will try to help in any way they can. Stay strong!

  100. Daphne says:

    Dear Amanda:

    I think you remind me of Katniss.
    My heart really goes out to the both of you, but I hope you still have the moral support of your family. That anyone should abandon you in this time is for me an unbearable thought. Hopefully your lawyers are not giving up.

    I heard Stephanie say that despite the verdict they are still in the dark about what happened that night; they do not know the details of the evidence. I thought that withholding evidence is not legal, or how would your lawyers have defended you? It seems so surreal so me. Surely someone must have some answers!

    I’m sure many of us are fearful and puzzled by the outcome of this case and its slow developments.
    I don’t understand any of this, but after hearing Stephanie’s statement, I know this sentiment is universal. It is almost as though those manipulating the events are creating a storyline for the upcoming movie. I think your case and many others are being used as a mouthpiece for propaganda — it’s incredible.

  101. JimZ says:

    Add my name to those deeply troubled by this turn of events, as I am certain of Amanda’s innocence.

  102. Susan says:

    Amanda,
    Bless your heart. I hate it so much that all this is happening to you!! I know you are innocent, I know you had NOTHING to do with that crime! NOTHING!! The only part you are guilty of is being young, vulnerable, and shame on the italian government for taking advantage of you that way. I can TRULY understand how one can become confused by people putting words in your mouth and your brain becomes scrambled because so much is going on and the media and police absolutely fed off that and twisted and turned your pictures, statements into something they were NOT. Because of what has happened to you, I will never travel to Italy. They are nothing more than a bunch of freaks if they believe that prosecutors words of you doing such horrible things to your room mate or flatmate for sex. How ridiculous can they be? Anyway, stay strong Amanda. Fight this all the way, raise your voice to be heard. Through out all of this, you never hear Rudy’s name hardly ever spoken. They have their man behind bars. I hope he burns in hell for implicating you in the first place. He will strike again when he is released someday. That is who Italy needs to worry about. Love ya in a non creepy way, and you have my support 100% Amanda. Stay strong sister.

    Susan

    • Daphne says:

      Susan:
      It is difficult to imagine someone like these two vulnerable people could be going through something like this. My heart really goes out to Amanda, because at one time she had been so inspired by dreams based on a love for the Italian people and their culture and courageously set out to accomplish that dream only to have her goals and hopes dashed by the horrific experience. Amanda’s silence these past few days have me worrying that she may give up the fight and give in. I hope she is OK. Wish someone could check in on her.

  103. Tanya Perkins says:

    Just hope that you are doing well, and able to focus on your studies. I have a daughter in college, just a semester behind you. She hopes to go to U.W. for her masters. Enjoy your time there, and try not to get too overwhelmed by what is going on with your case. I can’t imagine how hard it is day to day. Don’t let them rob you of your college experience. You have to believe that the U.S. will not extradite you regardless of what happens. Find love and comfort in those around you, who care so much about you. And, know that there are many more out there who think of you daily and hope that you are managing, and even experiencing happiness despite this great injustice!

  104. Maryann says:

    I listened to this audio book and find it to be a “selective victim consciousness” . There is little remorse for Meredith’s life. Something does NOT sit right with this audio book, even the FACT that Harper paid her 4M. I heard a lot of insincere “cries and gasps”, all for herself. Well, “Lady Justice” came with “Guilty” verdict for the second time, just few days ago and Amanda Knox started her REHEARSED “selective victim consciousness” again by going to TV interviews on every TV Chanel that would have her. My impression: Amanda Knox would have been better off today, if she upon her return from Italy, resumed a life as a Jane Doe and lived her life “under the radar” and sorted out her inner turmoil with qualified “Mental Health” professional. This book is incredulous!

    • Nick Green says:

      MaryAnn, a book cannot be “incredulous”.

      Believe it: Meredith Kercher will never rest in peace until her friend is fully cleared of all charges.

    • Luara says:

      Why would Amanda have “remorse for Meredith’s life” when she didn’t do it?
      Why do you think the “cries and gasps” are insincere?
      Can you imagine being accused of a murder you didn’t do, and being stuck in prison for years? Wouldn’t it make you cry and gasp?
      And what’s wrong with telling people about it?

    • T.C. says:

      Are you nuts? Show me the DNA evidence. Show me any evidence that ties Ms. Knox to the murder. I suggest you reexamine your lead prosecutor Giuliano Mignini…you know, the prosecutor that has been found guilty of corruption…you know, the prosecutor that goes to psychic mediums for crime theory….If Mignini is an example of Italy’s finest, Italy is pretty screwed up.

      Rudy Guede is the murderer. Why can’t you except that? No one else s DNA was found in the room. No DNA of Meredith was found on any personal items of Amanda or Raffeal. How do you explain that? This was such a brutal crime no one could walk out of that room without Meredeth’s DNA on them.

      • Daphne says:

        But Italy’s justice system at one time did base guilt on malicious intent. To what degree this still applies is not at all clear, and this could be why the prosecution is making such a case for the domestic dispute rather than the previous theory. Either way, neither theory is supported by any solid evidence.

    • BigDinBoise says:

      You seem to have a problem with Amanda’s voice or the way she talks – how superficial of you. Its her story and she has every right to tell it. Amanda is not the cause of Meredith death and does not need to answer for it.

      You seem to be appalled by how much she got paid for her book, when the fact is that she will likely end up with very little from the book money after paying taxes, lawyers, and her parents back for their support. What about the Kerchers asking for millions in civil damages for Meredith’s death, and her father profiting from the book he wrote about it?

      I support anyone who is unjustly prosecuted like Amanda and Raffaelle. Abuse of police and prosecutorial power is a significant problem around the world and people need to stand up to the powers that be to put a stop to it.

    • Jamie says:

      She did live “under the radar” (as much as she could) for over a year. She only started opening up to the media in the past year; first, to promote the book she wrote in part to cover the cost of her defense and later to defend herself during the re-trial. Who are you to say that someone else’s “cries and gasps” are insincere? Unless you have been through such a traumatic experience (that won’t end!), it’s really not appropriate for you to judge another person’s response.

      • Willis Coleman says:

        She was contracted to stay silent until her book was published. There is no evidence that her trial expenses are anything close to the $4 million she was paid. All the lawyers and PR people in this case with the exception of Bongiorno work for free. Dalla Vedova we still do not know for sure but it is rumored. Amanda’s family said it cost them over $1 million to keep someone with her in Perugia at all times. If true (and I think it could only be true if we count lost wages and assume full retail value on all expenses) it’s a luxury that very few could afford. Anyway you won’t believe me so ask Frank. He said Amanda once told him she’s stashed away her fortune to keep the Kerchers from getting their grubby hands on it.

        • Rob H says:

          Ms Knox’s financial arrangements are her own affair – but Willis “what you talkin about” Coleman can’t even get simple maths right in connection with published information – It was 3.8 m advance. Lose approximately 50% of that in taxes (he ignored tax) – pay your agent, pay your co-writer etc, then you are down to a figure closer to $1-1.5m. “Coleman” has no idea of any financial arrangements between Ms Knox and her lawyers but if he thinks that the net figure will cover much more than attorney fees and family expenses after six years of travails, if that much, then he is quite, quite deluded. But, didn’t we already know that?

          • DW says:

            To Ms. Knox, if you are reading this, I hope you will forgive me for laying this part out rather baldly. But I can only assume I’m not thinking of anything you and your family have not already had to soul search over at agonizing length.

            So, look: to those who think the book deal means she is greedy, or that she absurdly committed heinous crimes in order to write a cool memoir about it: GET REAL.

            She has to think through all the possibilities for her future. The best case scenario is that she has already lost several years of her life; the normal course would have been to finish school and likely start a career or find some solid means of self-support. This has been denied her, through absolutely no fault of her own. The whole thing is going to drag on for at least a couple more years now before, hopefully, she is completely exonerated. Her whole life is on hold and her lifetime earning potential, put baldly, is greatly reduced – absent the income from the book and anything else she can possibly earn from other publicity.

            Then, sadly, she and her family have to consider the worst-case scenario that she returns to prison, for a long time. What would her means of support be when she came out of prison 25+ years from now? She’d be over 50 with no real work experience. Maybe write another memoir? (sarcasm) Obviously, she would need family support, or she’d end up on welfare. Her parents would be very old or deceased by then.

            Last but not least, as a thoughtful young person she is well aware that her parents, who are not young now, aren’t going to get younger and they have made great financial sacrifices for her already, which at their age will be impossible to recoup. Even if everything comes out hunky-dory, say, a year from now, I am sure she also realizes that her parents are going to be old and need care themselves some day and have spent quite a bit of their own resources that would probably otherwise have gone into retirement planning. God forbid either of them – or her stepfather – needs long-term care some day. I know there’s another sister who might help and the family is obviously somewhat comfortable, but you just can’t lose several years of your normal adult wage-earning lifetime and not consider how to compensate for that or how to protect your family – never mind the horrifying and hopefully-won’t-happen possibility that she’ll lose even more years of her life to come.

            What kind of fool would she have had to be not to take the book deal?

    • Julie Jorgensen says:

      Maryann,

      I have one sincere question for you. Before you listened to Amanda’s book, did you already have your mind made up that you believed she was guilty? If so, then you heard exactly what your pre-determined mind was looking to hear. It’s an interesting but common phenomena. It’s the same with the T.V interviews. If you already have a certain mind set about Amanda then everything you see will reinforce that mindset. You really have to step back and examine your biases to objectively look at Amanda with clear vision. Try an experiment. Tell yourself in your mind…Amanda is innocent. Amanda is a good person who was unjustly convicted…try it just for a few minutes…and see if your eyes see and your ears hear something totally different.

    • Peter says:

      Maryann,

      Your comment here is bizarre. Let me count the ways in which it reveals your low intellect:
      1. As was already pointed out by Nick: A book cannot be “incredulous” since incredulous means “unwilling or unable to believe something”.
      2. You say that the publisher of her book paying her an advance of 4 million dollar is suspect. The publisher offered her that much because it had to do so to get the right to publish the book. Publishers set the advance paid to an author on his or her book based on estimated sales. And they compete with each other for manuscripts to publish. It’s Econ 101.
      3. You write that you “heard a lot of insincere ‘cries and gasps’” when listening to the audio book. Do you have any idea why we have a multi-layered court system? To ascertain truth, guilt and innocence. You seem to be one of the many people who don’t care about forensic evidence and the like, who think that they can determine the truth by means of armchair psychology and flying by the seat of their pants. It’s people like you who make evil possible, who make spectacular miscarriage of justice (which also happen in the US) possible.
      4. “Lady Justice” didn’t just come with “Guilty” verdict for the second time. What just happened is the continuation of a breathtaking travesty of justice. I don’t know what the final verdict of the Italian Supreme Court will be, but I think that Amanda’s chances of getting extradited to Italy are very low (less than 10%) simply because the case against her is so completely ridiculous.
      5. You write: “There is [in Amanda's book] little remorse for Meredith’s life.” Maryann, do you know the meaning of the word “remorse”? Remorse means “deep regret or guilt for a wrong that one has done”. Amanda is innocent: She had no motive to kill Meredith, the evidence against her has been discredited by court-appointed experts independent of the prosecution, and the evidence from the crime scene precludes her presence there at the time of the murder. Of course, I cannot expect these things to matter to you. Because you give the impression of being one of these people who are content to judge others’ guilt and innocence on the basis of vague hunches, intuitive feelings and blind faith in authorities … Any mistakes that Amanda made after the death of Meredith (and for which she might feel regret) seem small when compared to the corruption and mendacity of her pursuers.

      It’s a waste of time to even write this … since your comment is at such a low intellectual level that I cannot reasonably expect you to understand my response. People like you will never understand the simple fact that justice for victims like Meredith cannot be served by convicting innocent people.

    • Daphne says:

      Hi, Maryanne. Your point is well-made and actually proves Amanda’s skill as a professional writer. Her goal was to keep sentiment to a minimum in what was to be a very objective account of her experience. Amanda did voice an objective account of her meeting and friendship with Meredith, their outings, and her wish to be heard by the Kerchers and express her sorrow for Meredith’s passing .

  105. Daniel says:

    Amanda:

    You’ve been through so much over the past six years and you’ve had incredible courage and bravery. I understand what you’re going through – I went through a similar experience back in 2007, when I was just 16 years old. I know that the authorities like to twist your words, and when you are a young person, you really don’t know what to say or how to defend yourself. I know how frightened you probably are and I want to commend you on your perserverance – and the fact that you don’t display nearly as much fear as I would.

    I would just like to share with you some Scriptures from the New Testament of the Bible that really helped me during my difficult times:

    Rejoice in the Lord always. Again I will say, rejoice!
    Let your gentleness be known to all men. The Lord is at hand.
    Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.
    – Philippians 4:4-7

    I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.
    – Philippians 4:13

    For God has not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.
    – II Timothy 1:7

    And the Lord will deliver me from every evil work and preserve me for His heavenly kingdom.
    – II Timothy 4:18

    It might be interesting for you to know that the writer of these words, Paul the Apostle, was in prison at the time that he wrote these things. In particular, he was imprisoned in Italy, awaiting the outcome of his appeal to Caesar (see http://www.christianinconnect.com/bkgdpriepi.htm and Acts 21-28). During this time, the Apostle was under the most trying of circumstances – in a Roman prison, which had the worst conditions imaginable, even worse than our modern prisons today. Yet the Apostle still had incredible hope and comfort, because of his faith in Jesus Christ, a faith I also have that has helped me through the most trying of circumstances.

    I encourage you to read the New Testament, but especially the epistles of Paul and the other apostles, found from Romans through the Book of Revelation. The majority of these writings were written by men that were wrongfully and unjustly in prison, often in Italy, yet they give all of us personal hope, and also incredible direction on how we should live our lives down here, and even some of the most clear and unmistably accurate prophecies about our times that can be found anywhere. The epistles of the New Testament have given me a boldness and courage that totally goes against my human nature (I’m typically a shy and introverted person), and have helped me to understand so many things about myself and the world around us.

    Amanda, hang in there, I know you’re innocent – I can just see it in your face everytime they show you on TV. You’ll be OK, you’ll be vindicated in the end, because truth always is stronger than falsehood.

    God bless you and I’m praying for you every day.

    – Daniel
    California, USA

    • Mary Bullock says:

      Those are beautiful scriptures that Daniel mentioned. Cling to them. The Lord will prevail and He is fighting this for you and I am confident you are innocent and will be vindicated in the end. Mary from Alabama

    • Lisa Smith says:

      Amanda doesn’t believe in God. She’s an atheist, aren’t you?

      • Julie Jorgensen says:

        So….??? Amanda still has respect for these belief systems and an open mind to at least say the special prayer taught to her by Don Saulo while in prison in Italy. He is the Catholic priest who was such a comfort and help to Amanda and who still keeps in touch with her. Amanda often wears the dove necklace that he gave her on her last day in prison. Amanda also read many religious books during her time in prison. I think this comment, whether it is your intention or not, comes off as very judgemental. I have found the most spiritual people I know are not necessarily devout church attenders but people who live good lives helping others.

      • Daphne says:

        Whatever the case, I’m sure that’s not why Meredith’s not here any more.

      • Daphne says:

        If you read Amanda’s beautiful chapter about Don Saulo, she showed a belief in prayers, which were finally answered at her acquittal in 2011. Amanda’s faith in such spirituality proves how open and trusting she was to goodness. I think Amanda probably keeps a part of that with her and draws her strength from everything Don Saulo taught her, and it is symbolized by the gift he gave her.

  106. Peter Gabel says:

    Please know that there are millions of us out here determined to fight for your and Raffaele’s innocence. Since your memoir, your public appearances, and this recent trial, many, many of us have come to grasp the facts of this case–from the abusive police interrogation, to the absurd identification of Raffaele’s kitchen knife as the murder weapon, to the decisive exculpatory meaning of the DNA evidence, to all of the other faulty elements in the case against you two. With this much public awareness of the truth behind this case, we will win out eventually. In the meantime, remember that your inner strength and determination helps us to publicly manifest the same qualities of strength and determination in fighting on your behalf. And I hope we can do the same for you. We’re with you!

  107. Brian Boyer says:

    Amanda, you are very pretty, intelligent and yes you are so strong. Don’t back down, keep fighting til there is justice. I wish one day I could meet such a strong person like you. I’m certain this reply will be mixed in with all the others, but I know you will be okay. Stay strong, don’t let them break you.
    B

  108. Stay strong, Amanda and Raffaele. The truth is even more powerful than these despicable people who’s imaginations and delusions are the only real basis for their beliefs. You have many, many friends and loved ones that support you, and who have watched this whole insane process unfold.
    -Mark

  109. Christy says:

    Amanda,

    Just finished your book after reading it cover-to-cover in one sitting. I couldn’t put it down!
    I’m terrified and haunted by what happened to you. It’s hard to believe that such a thing could happen in our seemingly modern and logical and kind world. Fact is often stranger than fiction, as was proven in Perugia.

    I can identify a lot with you, as I’m a quirky American who studied abroad last year. I also have family and an affection for Italy, like you did.
    The injustice makes me sick and makes me want to do something about it. Currently living in Ireland, but if there’s anything I can do to help you or your cause, let me know.

    Hugs and support!

  110. Noel says:

    Amanda,

    We believe in you. We know that you & Raffaele are innocent. We will continue to rally around you & support you until the truth of your innocence is confirmed for good.

    <3 Noel

  111. Jennifer Schultz says:

    Amanda I can’t believe everything you have had to endure. I’ve been watching closely from the beginning. I knew you didn’t do it. I knew the kisses were just comfort from your boyfriend. I knew your “silliness” at times was totally normal for your age and what you were going through. I am 52 years old and can still have moments when I think or do something that might be considered inappropriate in times of great distress. It is simply a defense mechanism. You don’t deserve this. I can only assume that great things are in store for you in the future. And you are very very smart. I don’t doubt that you will be a voice for injustice that will be respected and celebrated by the world. If for some outrageous thing occurs like extradition – run girl. Run.

    • Daphne says:

      Jennifer:
      Same here. I absolutely see myself saying the things Amanda did. I have I tendency to say awkward things that should have been said in a serious manner. At my age (same as you), I give the impression that I am given to insensitivity or foolishness, or extreme naiveness.

  112. Z says:

    You are incredible, strong and honest. The truth will set you free, and that’s all you need to remember when things seem hopeless. Somehow, your complete lack of phoniness has convinced those who are ignorant that you are guilty. I don’t even know you and Raffaele and I’m so upset about this horrific, traumatic experience. I can’t imagine what you, your family and friends are going through. As a complete stranger, the amount of time I’ve spent in the last couple of weeks worrying about you and Raffaele is unhealthy. I wish I could do something to help. You’ve already inspired me to look into the Innocence Project. You will get through this, and you will be a hero for many – you’re already mine.

  113. neil jarman says:

    Hi Amanda I have to say i was totally shocked and saddened by the crazy verdict of your trial ! There really isn,t many words to describe how i feel for you ! i believe that somewhere someone will wake up and see what a total madness this whole story has been , you must remain strong and as long as you know your innocent ,then this will only fuel your inner self to fight these wrong do,ers and blind people :) take care and god bless America from Neil UK :)

  114. Lucinda L. says:

    Do not give up Amanda. We believe you. Please send our regards to Raffaelle as well. What an honorable courageous decent young man. I hate what they are doing to you both. People are cruel and opportunistic. I keep you both in my prayers always. I hope you find justice. You both have so much courage.

  115. Monica K says:

    Amanda,
    Do not lose faith! There are many, many people who believe in you and will do what they can to fight for you and the truth. I’ve donated to your defense fund and signed the White House Petition. Do you, your family or your lawyers have any suggestions for other things we can do to try to help you? You are such an amazing and strong young woman. I truly believe that the best for you is yet to come. I look forward to reading your next book, and the next one and the next one!!

  116. Nick says:

    Amanda, stay strong and know that many people throughout the world are utterly aghast at this latest turn of events.

    The media (Italian, American, British) has a lot to answer for. The distorted, fabricated portrayals of your character, temperament and motives (bizarre speculation presented as ‘fact’) has been desperately unfair and enormously damaging. A similar thing happened here in the UK to a guy called Christopher Jeffries (Google him) who was wrongly accused by the British media (but NEVER by the police) of murdering a young woman to whom he leased an apartment. Several days of baseless character assassination (all fabricated) by the British tabloids totally destroyed the man’s reputation. You have had to put up with crap like that not just for several days, but for YEARS. I admire your fortitude and believe that justice will prevail.

    • Cinnamon says:

      Gosh, I’ve just had a look at the Christopher Jefferies case. Even though I’m British, I hadn’t seen it before as I tend not to read tabloids. Very similar character assassination as what Ms Knox endured: http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Witness-Statement-of-Christopher-Jefferies.pdf

      • Rob H says:

        The Jeffries case is remarkable. Chris Jeffries was treated so incredibly shabbily by the police and the media in the UK (he recently received an apology from the police and succesfully sued half a dozen newspapers for libel) – his testimony as to the effects of his treatment he has delivered with incredible grace, dignity and intelligence – just like Ms Knox. He too was framed by the real murderer in his case – fortunately, British justice is not Italian justice – he escaped a trial and wrongful conviction, yet was still deeply and negatively affected by his experience.

        In Italy, if the Joanna Yeates murder had happened there, Mr Jeffries would have suffered the same fate as Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito – even when all the physical evidence in his case was found to incriminate one murderer (Vincent Tabak), they would have tried him for the crime too and likely convicted him in the same circumstances with no evidence and a made up motive.

  117. Audrey Dotson says:

    Amanda my sister told me of a book about you in 2010 after my daughter had been wrongfully convicted in Ohio for murder. We knew first hand how the media and Prosecutors can twist truths to reflect the sensationalism they want or need to sell the public. We have followed you and the success of the release and thought justice was done. I bought and read your book after my other daughter did. We Know firsthand what you and your parents are going through and we believe you and support you in any way that we can. You are not alone. I will pray for you and Raffaele when I pray for my daughter.

  118. Luara says:

    The USA press seems to be propagating some of the same untruths about you – when they do this, perhaps it would make sense to sue for slander.
    If the USA is going to have to decide about extradition, any prejudicial and untrue publicity about you here, is a serious matter.
    This could do three things for you:
    - publicize your case
    - get journalists in the USA to be more careful about what they write about you
    - perhaps get some much-needed money for your defense.

    • BigDinBoise says:

      I think suing the press for slander would likely be counter productive and ineffective. Slander is very difficult to prove in a country that constitutionally protects speech, and the press does not like being told what to or not to write – the result would likely be more bad press. I think the best thing Amanda can do is just keep telling her story and win the war of words by attrition.

      • Luara says:

        Celebrities do sue for slander in the USA, when falsehoods are printed about them. I doubt it would be done if it never succeeds.
        Journalists need to be careful about their sources, and some of the articles about Amanda contain information where the source seems to be a British tabloid. The press has had a free for all with Amanda.
        I also doubt that suing would make her look bad. It might instead make people notice that much of the information about her is unreliable.

        • BigDinBoise says:

          I suppose some celebrities do sue over some of the more ludicrous tales, and I do agree that the tabloid press and even more mainstream press has tended to run with unsubstantiated stories about Amanda and Raffaelle from the beginning. I’ve read the old stories from 2007 in the Daily Mail and they’re just horrible, complete character assassination based on outright lies or half-truths. But I still think it would be better for Amanda to just continue to make her case without pissing off the people that she might need on her side moving forward.

  119. Dirk Dietrich says:

    We all know, you´re innocent. I can´t not understand the verdict. You have my full support from Germany. Truth and justice will win.

  120. shirley anne says:

    Amanda, this is a terrible injustice and I just cannot imagine what you and your family are going through at this time. I admire your inner strength and courage in the face of such adversity. You have lots of supporters out there, who stand with you and continue the fight. I am here for you and Raffaele and send you much loving kindness, prayers and positive thoughts. Stay strong – you are an amazing young woman.

  121. Sam says:

    The injustice of this new ruling beggars belief – absolutely astounding that they have came to their original exceptionally flawed and falsified conclusion – knowing without an absolute doubt that the ‘original unbelievably shoddy/falsified evidence’ against you both was proved without a doubt to be manipulated and/or completely MADE-UP. As the experts say – there is no evidence of you having committed the crime and there is no evidence simply because you did not commit the crime!!! I despair for you Amanda, what a terrible thing to go through, absolutely horrendous ordeal to try and clear your name when despicable human beings are hell bent on destroying you for their own gains and to save face from their original shambolic investigation – shame on them, karma will take of them in time! The evidence is clear – the monster who committed the crime is behind bars – the monster who is responsible and responsible for this crime alone will actually be released from prison sometime this year 2014 – the monster who committed this crime may as well have left his name at the crime scene there was that much evidence again him – yet the proved innocents are still being hounded. Someone needs to stand up once and for all and end this serious miscarriage of justice – it is an absolute farse to say the least. Regardless of the Daily Mails false/malicious reporting of your case – i, for one Amanda, is right behind you and i will continue to give accurate fact based info of the case to anyone who’ll listen. So from Scotland…..keep your chin up lass….eventually (surely) the truth has got to prevail xxx

    We have 3 victims here – Meredith, Amanda and Raffaele. Stand united and find justice for them all x

  122. Chris Frait says:

    Dear Amanda and Friends,

    I just came back to your site and found your paypal link. I just made my $50.00 contribution. God bless you and keep you safe. I will be writing a letter to my congressman today to insist that they oppose any attempts at extradition. :)

    Thank you,

    Chris Frait

  123. Nick Green (UK) says:

    Amanda, it is heartbreaking to think that you and Raffaele are still going through this nightmare so many years on. It may only be cold comfort, but I’m sure that history will recognise you both as heroes for your courage and fortitude.

    And I hope that one day ‘Waiting To Be Heard’ will not even be your most famous book.

  124. Pawel says:

    Amanda, no need to thank us. This horrible ordeal that you’re going through is not something that one can battle alone and it’s more than obvious that we are here to make sure that you’re not alone and we are here to let you know we’ve got your back. Forever and for always.

    P.

  125. S. Michael Scadron says:

    Amanda, I know I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating: In championing the cause of others wrongfully convicted, you have shown that you have it within you to turn affliction to good, to convert sorrow to strength, to teach others so others might learn, and in so doing you are fast becoming a spokesperson fighting injustices everywhere. And because of you, the world will be a better place. Finally, please know that Terri and I are forever in your corner. After all, if they can do this to you, who among us is safe?

  126. Chris Frait says:

    Dear Amanda and Friends,

    I fully believe in your innocence and I am ashamed of the way you have been treated by so many evil, horrible people for so long. I used to have a good opinion of Italy. That is gone now. I am going to write to my congressman and insist that you be protected from extradtition back to that fascist state on the grounds of double jeopardy. I am so sorry for all you have suffered and I am praying for you each day. Is there any way I can make a financial contribution to your defense fund? Please let me know.

    Thank you,

    Chris Frait

  127. Tom Rochelle says:

    We care deeply about you and your family, Amanda. We draw courage from your courage and fervently believe that better times are ahead. We will always support you and fight for you.

  128. Ruth says:

    I knew from the beginning that you could not possibly have committed this crime. I cannot believe the courts have overturned the appeal. You are so considerate of the Kerchers despite their reluctance to believe the obvious truth that Guede killed Meredith. I try to fight for you by attacking writers of ridiculous articles in papers like The Daily Mail.

    • Daphne says:

      Hi, Ruth. “Obvious?” This case is so incredible, it’s hard to believe in whatever evidence is staring at us. Other than Rudy’s DNA (and bloody wall prints?) only he knows what happened. I wouldn’t be surprised if the knife wielder turned out to be someone else altogether. But that would be logically improbable.

  129. Heather Coy says:

    Amanda,

    There is at least one group of people — and I’m sure there are many others — who stand with you and Raffaele and will never stop fighting until this injustice is corrected.

    Let us know if there is anything specifically that you need or would like help with.

    Much love to you and the family,

    Heather

  130. Brittany says:

    Amanda,

    Everytime I am able to leave a comment on an article or news report about your case I will leave this:

    http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html

    And a link to this blog and your Facebook page, Amanda Knox Defense.

    The truth will be heard.

    X,

    Brittany

  131. Happy to keep telling the truth for you and Raffaele. One idea: perhaps your legal team is already on top of this but it occurs to me that it may be possible for you to take this to the European Court of Human Rights. I was just reading the Convention Articles and find that both the original and this later trial would seem to have contravened Article 6.2 which is in regards to a defendant’s right to “presumption of innocence”. In general, the European Court is specifically NOT set up to overturn criminal convictions of national courts, however, in cases where legal proceedings have violated the Convention I get the impression that it is indeed possible to bring a case before them. If your legal team has not already investigated this possibility then maybe they could look into it. It seems a bit unclear whether or not you would have to wait until all other national measures have been exhausted. In general, this does seem to be a requirement, but I also get the sense that in cases where there has already been a conviction and an appeal, the defendant would be cleared to take things to the ECHR at that point. It does seem that the Italian courts are so biased and rigid in their stance that going over their heads is not only an attractive option but could actually be legally allowable. As far as understanding the motives behind the wrong verdict, I think I understand the motives of both the courts (save face) and the Kerchers (keep Meredith’s name in the papers), as well as the tabloids (sell papers). It is also good to remember that Italy is the country that gave the world both the Mafia and the Catholic church. There is a lot of deeply embedded hypocrisy and superstition in the culture. It is hard to comprehend for those of us raised on the American ideal of “separation of church and state” but the church in Italy still exerts a heavy influence over the law. Stay strong, you really do have a lot of smart people on your side. Best wishes from France.

  132. Phil says:

    Similar to floen above, I’m not usually someone who takes an interest in criminal cases but the more I’ve read about this, the more I’m staggered at the lack of evidence presented by the prosecution. Some parts of the Italian authorities appear to have an agenda against you from day one. It’s good to know you have many supporters though. :)

    You and Rafaelle have both shown great courage, keep fighting and justice has to prevail!

  133. Amanda says:

    I believe you. Keep fighting.
    x a.

  134. David E. says:

    Amanda,

    I am an American who lives overseas in South Korea and have been following your case since almost the beginning. The verdict against you is unjust and ludicrous and I believe the truth will come out. I urge you to continue to fight the good fight. Also stop trying to contact Meredith’s family because they are only going to use that against you in the future. If it comes down to it I will stand behind you to fight your extradition to Italy as will many others.

    Take care,

    David

    • Daphne says:

      Well said, David. The problem is the prosecution likes their version of the “truth” much better. I don’t know who is manipulating the media to assert such a negative view of Amanda. I read somewhere that her hand movements worked against her. In a YouTube video, we can see Amanda swaying, rocking to and fro at court, as though dancing. Female dancing used to be associated with negative human qualities and that is why this message is so sublime. My point is that the media is sending out very specific messages about this case, and forcing you to process information a certain way. If you watch the video, the perception is clearly altered, almost as the person who shot the video was on a high. Symbolism has always been such a strong feature of Italian art. I think this should be pulled from YouTube because it sending our generation very disturbing messages. Here is the video. I hope the link works.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lrpLYpUbqU

  135. Wayne says:

    Hang tough Amanda. Also my condolences to Rafaelle. He was brave to go back but I can’t say it was the wise choice. I would no longer put any faith in the Italian system. Fight this fight here in the US and with the US court. I believe you will be vindicated in the end.

  136. Joe says:

    The strength you have is amazing, you will always have our support no matter what happens. Just keep fighting like you are doing and we hope the right thing will happen for you. Its almost unbearable for us to believe that verdict came back so I can imagine how you must feel. We are so proud of how you are handling this situation. We want to see you happy again and keep that beautiful smile on your face, you deserve much more than they are showing you. I don’t think there is any way they(US Gov.) would send you back over there. If they do we will fight right a long beside you. Please be safe and keep doing what you are doing.

    • Daphne says:

      Hi, Joe. The amendments do say that they must not extradite an American on suspicion of impending abuse by the requesting country. And according to media accounts, how has this already not been the single most despicable fact in the case from the very start. If someone doesn’t do something now, this fanaticism will become a universal reality before long.

      • Rob says:

        Daphne,

        Hi, you seem like a nice caring lady. But really suggesting that Italy is some tin-pot country is just bizzare.

        I would suggest your prison’s are far worse than anything in Italy, and the Police in Italy are as fair as the US.

        She will be extradited, it will happen for various reasons, but mainly because there is NO legal reason she should not be.

        Plus political pressure, its over already.

        If she believes (and her supporter’s believe) she has s defense, she needs to start work on it now) Ready for when she is back in jail in Italy

        • BigDinBoise says:

          “Plus political pressure, its over already.”

          What political pressure are you talking about? The request hasn’t even been made and won’t be until the ISC rules on the latest verdict – so your comment is meaningless because political pressure isn’t being exercised by either side at the moment.

          There are plenty of legal reasons not to extradite her, but I have neither the time or energy to explain them to an obtuse dullard like you.

          • Rob says:

            You are an idiot.

            Stop trying to big a big man in a little world. She will be extradited, rightly, and rightly spend many years in jail.

            Now go back to watching the Simpsons you moron

          • Daphne says:

            @BigDinBoise:
            I think Rob means he knows who set up Amanda and Raffaele. I am pretty sure they are not Italian citizens.

        • Rob H says:

          Nonsense! She has an appeal in Italy, which is likely not to be heard until 2015. The process has not concluded. She can defend herself from the United States and her attorneys can defend her in Italy, the US and elsewhere.

          There has been no extradition request from Italy and nor should there be unless the Italian process is concluded against her. Even then, extradition matters are not in any way certain – Italy may still choose not to request extradition; even if it does, it will be a matter for the US authorities and its courts with the outcome very much uncertain.

          You are profoundly premature – I hope this does not affect your life in other ways.

          You have come to this blog only recently and have mis-represented the circumstances of this case from the first moment.

        • Daphne says:

          I have always been misunderstood, but never on the fact that I have and always will love Italy. That the bizarre twists of this case do not bear directly on this beautiful country is clear; the truth is, they rather reflect a universal trend, that of manufactured crime, and this does not necessarily reflect poorly on the Italians, but on those guilty for the crime.

        • Daphne says:

          By all means, keep those “reasons” dangling. We have absolutely no business knowing what they could be, do we? But you’re right, I am very caring. I care about your perspective, because all aspects of the human psyche intrigue me. I care about the victims, and yes even the convicted man. Most of all I care about justice and love Italy’s (“tin pot”?) culture.

  137. Geraldine says:

    I was astonished to hear this ridiculous verdict. I can only hope that the court has backed itself into such a corner that, when you are eventually exonerated (and it must surely happen soon), the outcry and humiliation will be so great that it might transform the Italian justice system for others too. I can’t imagine what it feels like to be trapped in this nightmare but you and Raffaele are in my thoughts. I’m sure there is an amazing life waiting for you beyond this.

  138. Rob says:

    While I feel sorry for your family. You are a convicted murderer, and should be in jail. If you believe you have a strong legal appeal, then do it from Italy.

    Thankfully my own government (the British) appear to be pointing out to the US authority’s that there is no reason you should not be extradited to serve your term.

    When you suggested you would be ‘kicking and screaming’ being dragged back to Italy, I suspect Meredith was doing the same as she was being brutally murdered by those convicted.

    • Rob H says:

      I hasten to point out that this idiot is not me.

    • Lucinda L. says:

      How can you say this? Read some more. Read the evidence. It is clear Amanda and Raffaelle had nothing to do with this.

      • Rob says:

        Hi Lucinda,

        I am sorry but it is not clear. That’s the point.

        Italy, while not perfect (neither is US or UK justice system) found her guilty.

        If she believes she has a legal defense, then fight it from Italy.

        I can imagine all the people swooning over Ms Knox on here. Quoting bible passages, being the same people screaming for the US government to fire up the electric chair if the situation was reversed and you were trying to extradite an Italian to the States on a murder charge.

        Simply put. You can write to your congressman or Senator all day. The extradition request is legal, and there is no legal reason for it to be denied.

        Simply put, Ms Knox WILL end up back in Italy in jail, she knows it, and if she has a credible defence she can fight it from jail over there.

        • Rob H says:

          What extradition request are you talking about, “Rob”? There hasn’t been one in this case! Nor is it certain, however the case concludes, that there will be one.

    • BigDinBoise says:

      You know nothing of what your government is saying about this verdict. Since Britain is a country that believes in proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, I doubt they will press the unjust extradition of an innocent. I think the only Brits that are asking for her extradition is the arrogant Mr. Lyle Kercher and idiots like you. I have faith that the majority of Brits once they are informed of the real facts of this case will stand by Amanda and Raffaelle. Beside, extradition wouldn’t even be sought until there is a final verdict, which could be years, so you can howl all you want about extradition but you will be wasting your breath.

      • Rob says:

        Your argument is to call me an idiot? Brilliant.

        And Mr Kercher is arrogant? Let someone murder your sister and see how you react shall we?

        As for the British government, they have made their position clear.

        They expect a legally binding extradition warrent to be upheld and acted upon….

        • Rob H says:

          Source please, “Rob” for your comment about the British government’s position….

        • BigDinBoise says:

          If someone murdered my sister I would be seeking justice for her, not a payout. The last thing I would want would be for innocent people to persecuted in her name. The only person from Britain that has spoken out publicly about Amanda extradition is Lyle Kercher… he is arrogant because he makes foolish demands of the US to arrest and extradite her when the final verdict is not in, and no extradition request has been made. Raffaelle is in Italy and he has not been arrested, so why would US authorities arrest Amanda? BTW – you’re still and Idiot.

    • Julie Jorgensen says:

      Thankfully we live in the U.S and not Britain or Italy and we will follow the laws of our nation and not the finger pointing and injustice of another.

    • Javier says:

      fully agree with you, mate. She should be in prison and if she´s innocent, truth will prevail,,,,but from Italy, not hidden like a cockroach

      • Daphne says:

        Javier: “Hidden?” As in the covert, mysterious woman of the middle ages? Covert women do not promote their already proclaimed innocence by publishing 500 pages of life, attending university, giving interviews, and carrying on with life as all other “innocent” people do.

      • Julie Jorgensen says:

        Javier,
        Amanda has already spent 4 years unjustly in an Italian prison waiting for the truth to prevail. She should not spend one more second unjustly in an Italian prison because she IS innocent. It may take some time to prove how unjust and corrupt the Italian justice system is but it will happen. In the mean time, Amanda is going to school where she hopes to graduate soon. She is not hiding away nor should she ever.

      • Alex K. says:

        You are a sock puppet of one Italian guilter who spams various discussion boards with anti-Knox vitriol. Your “cockroach” betrays you.

        Don’t worry, your identity will be soon exposed (if it has not been yet) and you will have to take responsibility for the harm you have caused.

      • Rob says:

        No need to speak like that.

        She is still a human being.

    • John Rowell says:

      Amanda is not a convicted criminal, she is a convicted innocent. Therefore she has every right to kick and scream.

      • Rob says:

        No, she is a convicted criminal. A murderer in the eyes of the law.

        Last time I checked, Italy was a major western democracy.

        • John Rowell says:

          Last time I checked, Italy had the worst record in the European Union, and one of the worst in the world. An appeal to authority adds little to this discussion and being convicted does not guarantee guilt. It’s a petty argument really but I would bet my house on Amanda and Raffaele’s innocence having read nearly all the evidence in the original Italian.

          • Rob says:

            We shall agree to disagree

            You have decided to support Ms Knox, and that’s fair enough.

            Most Brits (and Italians) think she is guilty -I suspect that’s more about her running off to America- than actual guilt, but it is what it is.

          • John Rowell says:

            For the record, I am a Brit living in Italy, with a tendency towards being anti-UncleSAM (The government, not the people). I had every bias going to wish to condemn Miss Knox, but the evidence said otherwise.

          • Julie Jorgensen says:

            Amanda didn’t run off to America…she returned to her home..where she has lived all her life…in Seattle where she is attending college and finishing her degree. Hardly an example of running off.

    • Rob, I find it interesting to say the least that so many supporters of the wrong verdict, such as yourself, come from the UK, where the tabloid control of the story was and is nearly total. I know because I lived there at the time the story initially broke and until recently. You have clearly based your opinion on the numerous false stories that were deliberately planted in UK tabloid media by the corrupt prosecution, no doubt encouraged by Mr. Kercher via his friends in the tabloid papers where he spent his career. Bereavement has clearly made him and his family take leave of their senses. What’s your excuse?

      It is also beyond doubt that had this case occurred in the UK, the flimsiness of the “evidence” against Sollecito/Knox would have seen the case thrown out of court.

      Speculations deriving from the “demeanour” of the accused are not sufficient to build a legal prosecution there and the UK standards for DNA evidence, as in the USA, would negate any claims that the kitchen knife randomly taken from Raffaele’s apartment was the murder weapon. It was not. (The murder weapon, Rudy Guede’s knife, has never been recovered. No doubt he ditched it while jumping trains across Europe after the murder.)

      When strict standards of due process in UK law have been so hard won, over centuries in which tragic miscarriages of justice have been uncovered, proven and finally allowed to improve the letter of law, I find it sadly bizarre that so many people in the UK are applauding Italy for its primitive disregard for due process and brutal violation of such important principles as the presumption of innocence. Count yourself lucky that you will likely never stand trial in Italy or you would be singing a different tune.

      Why should a person who has already spent 4 years in prison for a crime they did not commit have to prove to you that s/he is innocent by spending yet more years behind bars?

      I only wish that Raffaele hadn’t been so trusting of the legal system and had moved to a country with no extradition treaty, while he had the chance. But he is a person of integrity and courage who knows that he did no wrong and thought that he would demonstrate his lack of anything to hide by not running away. How grossly unfair that he is now in danger of loss of liberty.

      Rudy Guede, the actual murderer, may be eligible for day release in a couple of years. The Kerchers complain that Meredith has been “forgotten” but actually it is her killer who hardly rates a mention these days.

      • Rob says:

        I suggest you read this.

        This is not some dodgy tabloid, its the sister paper of the Guardian, the newspaper that Ms knox herself used this weekend…..so all those moaning about British tabloids, remember that Ms Knox and her PR team were using them for her ‘side of the story’

        You can’t have it both ways guys.

        http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/its-not-right-to-say-there-is-no-evidence-in-the-case-against-amanda-knox-theres-plenty-9099649.html

        • John Rowell says:

          Well done Rob for quoting an article written by Leila Schnepps, a well known guilter who writes under the alias “Thoughtful” on the PerugiaMurderFile hate site, who when challenged on her mathematical approach to analyzing DNA on the InjusticeinPerugia, was ripped to shreds. In any case, she is an biased writer with years of hatred behind her, who said before this latest trial that if further tests revealed no Meredith DNA on the knife she would reconsider her assertion about it, but then when said DNA was not found she simply went back to her mathematical model built on flowed assumptions to confirm her bias.

          • Rob says:

            Ah, ok John.

            Anyone who disagrees with your position is wrong? Full stop?

            Interesting the article was in one of the papers from the group Ms Knox used to self promote herself.

          • John Rowell says:

            No of course not Rob. But I don’t put much faith in mathematical models based on flawed assumptions studying DNA when the author is both biased (her son-in-law knew Rudy Guede) and lacks knowledge of DNA.

        • Luara says:

          Rob,
          Well have you checked out the rebuttals to the claims in the article you linked to, say at http://injusticeinperugia.org ?
          Or are you just looking at opinions that support your belief in Amanda’s guilt?

          • Rob says:

            Thanks for link.

            I am not judging Ms Knox. She has been judged legally and convicted of murder.

            I was nearly pointing out that there is considerable evidence (To be fair both ways)

      • Rob H says:

        Once the British public understands that there is no credible evidence against Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito , the mood will change. There is profound ignorance in Britain with regard to the evidence in this case.

        Rob H

    • Pawel says:

      Thankfully your country and never ending tabloid crap is not relevant in Amanda’s fight for justice.

      I’m not here to shade the UK, though.

      • Rob says:

        You are miss-guided. I can assure you that SoS Kerry will have already been made aware of the British governments opinion, and reminded that there are currently 9 requests for extradition from the UK to the US…..you can not cherry pick which parts of international law/agreements you stick to.

        It doesn’t matter if I (or any of you) believe Amanda Knox is innocent. She has been convicted. In law she is therefore guilty, fact.

        There is no legal reason she should not be extradited.

        Any all the people coming on here slagging off the Kercher family, shame on you you idiots.

        Their sister/daughter/friend was murdered.

        • Luara says:

          Actually extradition is 90% diplomacy, 10% law and at the discretion of the State Dept. and there are clauses in the extradition treaty that may block extradition.

          • Rob says:

            No. Its 100% law. Because if the US blocked her extradition, I would expect Italy to moan to the EU and demand a cross-border suspension of extradition treaties between EU nations and the US. David Cameron has already made it clear he expects Ms Knox to be sent back to Italy.

          • Rob H says:

            Source please “Rob” in relation to David Cameron’s views on the Amanda Knox extradition question. When and where did he say she should be “sent back to Italy”?

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          Rob,

          At least speaking for myself and those I know well who support Amanda, we care about the Kercher family and all they have suffered. We are saddened that Meredith was murdered in the prime of her young life. That is a terrible tragedy. We hope the Kercher family can find some peace and ease to their suffering.

          We also believe Amanda is innocent. It does matter that we believe this. Because of this strong belief and conviction in ourselves, we will never be OK with Amanda having to serve one more second unjustly in prison.

          Amanda already suffered 4 years unjustly in prison. We will not sit idly by while a corrupt legal system in a foreign country tries to force this injustice upon her again.

          If Amanda was someone you loved or cared about…maybe a sister or friend, wouldn’t you do the same thing?

    • Daphne says:

      Yes, there is, and it’s been well documented, featured in a movie, and covered by the media.

    • FP says:

      ROB,
      Since you have mentioned British Government lemme ask you a quick one
      Who killed Princess of Wales ? No single trails wow awesome Government ?
      I asked this question to make u realize……. U MUST HAVE NOT POSTED A SINGLE COMMENT ON PRINCES DIANA BLOGS for AMANDA KNOX u posting murderer ? ROB shame on u
      just imagine your self instead of Amanda……. so many difficulties she must be facing in her daily life.

      • Rob says:

        Yes we killed Princess Diana…..

        Yes the US didn’t really land on the moon, JFK was killed by the mob, Elvis works at Walmart…….

        She is a CONVICTED murderer. What I think is irrelevant, what you think is irrelevant.

    • Alex K. says:

      I think it’s you who are going to be jailed, and sooner rather than later for being part of a hate group stalking and harassing Amanda.

      Your country has laws against hate speech and American states have laws against cyber-stalking.

      Worse than that, helping a group of corrupt foreign nationals to persecute an American citizen could land you in greater trouble than you can now imagine.

      • Murderer lover

        #sendKnoxtojail

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          We do care about Amanda. She is a 26 year old bright young woman. She is the big sister to her 3 younger sisters. She is a friend to many. She is the daughter of parents and step parents who love her. She is a student finishing her degree in writing. She is an advocate to others who have also been unjustly accused or imprisoned. She is a writer who’s just blossoming in her skills and talents. She is an avid reader of books, having devoured over 1000 books during her 4 years in prison. She is a kind person with wisdom beyond her years. I could go on and on. All of these things describe Amanda. The real Amanda, not the phantom created by the tabloids. Your hate goes to this phantom. This person does not exist. The person you hate is not real. The person we know and love is real. I hope one day you will be able to see the difference.

      • Daphne says:

        I just don’t believe that it was the Kerchers who posted such a hideous comment.

        • Julie Jorgensen says:

          I just noticed that the person posting these comments is not even spelling Meredith’s name correctly. They are spelling it as “Meradith”. It appears they really don’t Meredith well enough to even spell her name correctly let alone give her rightful justice. That would come by the way by making sure Rudy Guede does NOT get out on day release this year or ever.

    • I agree. Throw her in the pokey to rot.

      #sendKnoxtojail

    • Daphne says:

      And their names were . . . ?

  139. Rob H says:

    “…it’s hard to know what I, or anyone, can do. I hope that people who know the case and who know the justice system will step up and testify as to how this is happening and what we can do about it…..”

    Yes it is hard to know – but I am convinced there are people out there in many countries, including the UK who do know the case and who will “step up”; good people with expertise, not just us well meaning bloggers.

    This CAN be turned around.

  140. Amia says:

    Dear Amanda.

    I’m writing from snowy cold Finland.. You are on the news here aswell and I had seen your face on international news already years ago, but never went so far to really read into the case.. I, like I’m sure most people reading just the headlines, would at first just assume you are guilty.. There is a case here in Finland, a mother of 4 accused of killing her husband, its been in different courts for over 6 years and in a sense, it is like your case. A witch hunt, they will make up anything to have her convicted, just to cover up the fact that they did not do their job right from the beginning. That sparked my interest to look into more cases like this..
    I spent the whole weekend glued to my ipad reading about you and watching your interviews.. It is horrifying that this is happening in our world, but nothing should be a surprise anymore.. More people should open their eyes, this is everyday, and you can’t blindly trust the authorities, not even in your own home country. Also horrifying to see people on the internet and media judging you, convicting you of murder based on your behaviour in a crisis, personality or your appearance, when the focus should be on the evidence or lack there of… Angers me so much.
    Please know that there are people all over the word, that if taken the little time to read up on you, will believe in your innocence. I do now. I wish you and your loved ones all the possible strenght you could have to face what is ahead.. You will get through this nightmare eventually. I will continue to follow you and wish for the best!

    • Daphne says:

      OMG.
      What people just have to realize is that such medievalism was condemned back in the 1500′s by the very Vatican context overseeing Italian courts today! This is sociopathic. The confiscating of Raffaele’s papers was based on . . . evidence we don’t know about? “Lettres de cache,” letters written to the state by aristocrats to prevent people from marrying abroad also went out also in the Renaissance, and was typical hate behaviour. All this stuff was banned hundreds of years ago. Wake up, everybody. How is this trend of persecuting people digitally not related to hate and medievalism? Shame on the US government for allowing such media coverage on Raffaele and not addressing Amanda’s abusive treatment as unconstitutional. Someone should definitely sue. If I were Amanda and Raffaele, I would have a very long list of damages.

    • Lisa Smith says:

      That “innocent” person Amia is talking about (Anneli Auer) was put to prison for 7 years for pedophilia, a serious acts of crimes against her own children who testified against her also in murder trial. But people like you call it a “witch hunt” Nice try, Amia.

  141. JLS1950 says:

    Stay in there, girl. We have not wavered.

  142. Doug Moodie says:

    I also have a great deal of admiration for you. Clearly, you are someone of extraordinary good character. But, even more, I admire Raffaele Sollecito. I had not even heard of your case until I read the news reports of your first conviction. It seemed pretty crazy to me then, and so I started taking a closer look. I read Raffaele Sollecto’s prison diary and I could see in it something truly remarkable. From his writing I can see that in his interrogation, the police convinced him that you were a vixen, that you were cheating on him with more than one man behind his back, and in particular with some Argentinian man. At first he trusts the police. He believes them but even still he writes that he knows you are too nice to have killed anyone, even if you cheated on him. But, over the next few days, you can see the wheels turning as he puts together the fact that what the police told him was a lie. From there, he conducts his life from the strength of the truth. At any time, right up and through the last appeal trial, he could have lied about your whereabouts on the night of the murder and walked away a free man. But he did not and would not, because it is not the truth. That is a man!

    It is too bad that in Italy they seem to praise their weasels and damn their lions.

    • Nick Green says:

      My thoughts exactly! Raffaele rocks.

    • Katy says:

      I read your comment and then went and read the prison diary, and I absolutely agree with you. What really gets me is the moment when the guard asks him if he likes prison, and he thinks the guard is being sarcastic until he realizes that there are people who genuinely enjoy prison, because they have so little on the outside. And his reaction, essentially, is, “I haven’t done enough to give back to society for how lucky I’ve been; I need to do more.”

      You know who else impresses me? Amanda’s friend Madison.