Gratitude for the Marasca Report

I am deeply grateful that the Italian Supreme Court has filed its opinion and forcefully declared my innocence.  This has been a long struggle for me, my family, my friends, and my supporters.  While I am glad it is now over, I will remain forever grateful to the many individuals who gave their time and talents to help me.  Today would not have been possible without your unwavering support.  I will now begin the rest of my life with one of my goals being to help others who have been wrongfully accused.

The Marasca Report.

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

267 Responses to Gratitude for the Marasca Report

  1. It is really depressing to me that there are still people out there who continue to insist on the guilt of Knox and Sollecito, long after the contrary has finally, once and for all, been decided beyond a shadow of a doubt. There is absolutely no other way that these two could have been exonerated, especially when you consider the over-zealous intensity of the prosecution. If there was even a shred of reasonable evidence that proved their involvement, does anyone really think that the authorities, under the watchful scrutiny of the entire international community, the media and legal experts worldwide, would just cave in and release the guilty parties, stating unequivocally that they had nothing to do with the crime? Of course not. The case was a sham from the beginning and there is really no mystery whatsoever about what happened to poor Meredith. It’s a story as old as the hills, as unoriginal, as unexceptional, as tragic and boring and run of the mill as horrific crimes come: girl at home alone surprises known house-burglar who decides to try opportunistically for a rape as well; girl fights back; girl dies. End of story. And indeed that would have been the end of the story if the Kercher family had not sought help from the tabloids. Between the sales-obsessed rags and the satan-obsessed Prosecutor’s office, a fantasy story was cooked up to implicate two entirely innocent young people. Meanwhile, Rudy Guede is out on day release, and nobody seems to care.

    • Liz says:

      Diane have you read the translated report ? Rudy Guede isn’t out on day pass and the SC determined two important things , the break-in was staged and he didn’t act alone. Amanda has said she is grateful for the report and has not spoken out about the section which places her at the cottage the night of the murder in a non participatory role. This SC ruling faults the investigation , but fails to answer the question who assisted Guede.
      Amanda is satisfied with the ruling which places her outside the bedroom but still keeps her activity at the cottage that night an unknown. There has been virtual silence from the defendants surrounding some of the SC’s curious findings. I believe the court’s finding she was there and for some reason was afraid to come forward is true by her complete acceptance of the report.

      • Yadda Yadda says:

        (Dare I get involved in this again…)
        How on earth can anyone say the break-in was staged? Did Rudy announce his M.O. right before he tried to flee the country? Or was it just the biggest coincidence that it happened to look like every one of his previous break-ins?

        There was a dent on the OUTSIDE of the shutter. Did the accused go outside and smash one of the windows AFTER the murder, hoping it wouldn’t draw too much attention?

        Everything about this case is such a farce, I can’t believe the lack of critical thinking skills so many people seem to possess.

  2. Stewart says:


    You have written:
    ‘I will now begin the rest of my life with one of my goals being to help others who have been wrongfully accused.’

    Well, police officers who investigated the death of Meredith Kercher have been wrongfully accused of causing a bloody mark under her bed and then concocting a bogus story to cover their mistake – in the PDF file entitled ‘What Really Happened To Meredith?’
    Furthermore, a picture was photoshopped in order to support that accusation.
    Bearing in mind your declared interest in fighting for justice, you might want to start as you mean to go on and do something to help those who have been targeted by this hoax?

    If I felt myself to be an innocent victim of an injustice I would be appalled by this kind of behaviour by my supporters. I would be embarrassed to be associated with it in any way, and would have no difficulty whatsoever in condemning the allegation against the investigators for the appalling dirty trick that it is.

  3. Brian says:

    The “slander againsr the police” trials in Florence against Amanda, and I believe against her parents and Raffaele also, are going on right now. There have been no news stories about this. Does anyone know what’s going on?

    Also, does anyone know what the status of Amanda’s appeal to the European Court of Human Justice is? Timeline for them to render their judgements?

  4. William Benjamin says:

    @Stewart – Your repeated comment from May 8, 2015 and further contextual posts from that same blog comments section, “Moving Forward, With Gratitude and a Purpose” by Amanda Posted on April 3, 2015” was not that important to me, because it seemed you were seeking a proclamation that the opinions of Ron Henley’s scholarly opinion needed to be proclaimed as either being true or false. This is interesting only because the basis of your demand precludes a concept of what an opinion is.

    If I may draw attention to your comments earlier down below this post, where you stated the following saying in part… “the idea that the defendant is innocent until guilty is of paramount importance, and I would defend that principle to the last.” was a response to my question of whether you were a supporter of a defendants right to the norm of law requiring a judgment to be “beyond any reasonable doubt” as published by the Italian superior court.

    I find it difficult to believe that you are capable of supporting the concept “to the last”, when you can’t even do that with the concept of an opinion… that by it’s very essence freely admits that it is subject to alternative interpretations and therefore freely admits that it not “beyond any reasonable doubt”.

    Could you please either tinkle or get off the potty. What’s your point and why do you care. We already know that there are a multitude of alternative scenario’s that are possible and the superior court of Italy has agreed with this citing an enormous investigatory failure because the practices of the original investigation were corrupted by a zeal to charge and convict two innocent people. The central concern is an issue between Italy and the UK that was and is so far beyond the capabilities of Raffaele Sollecito or Amanda Knox that any other assertion is ridiculous. All things being even or close and being forced to make a choice the US will always stand by the UK. Italy is in our heart but the UK is family. And this mess has broken many hearts, mine included. Neither Henley, Knox, Sollecito, myself or you can possibly know precisely what happened to Meredith “beyond any reasonable doubt”. But we do know “beyond any reasonable doubt” is that many of the behaviors of the original investigation enabled that doubt in a contradiction to the central purpose of what a murder investigation is obligated to be.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Here’s a source that lists some of the actual Italian and European laws that the Italian authorities broke in their misguided crusade:

    • Stewart says:

      @William Benjamin

      The most important thing about your post of course, is the omission: you completely fail to deal with the false claim that was made against Italian investigators contained within the ‘boot under the bed’ allegation. It is precisely because of this kind of evasion that I have been stuck asking the same questions ad nauseam. Time and time again I have queried the claims made by Ron Hendry only for the points I have raised to be ignored, so it is not me that is responsible for any prevarication.

      ‘The opinions of Ron Henley’s scholarly opinion needed to be proclaimed as either being true or false.’
      Wow! You don’t think they have to be? William, we are talking defamation here.

      Most of the rest of your post appears to be lacking in relevance. You don’t think much of me, well I can live with that, although I feel I should point out that just because I disagree with your opinion that does not make me wrong or incapable of accepting or respecting other opinions that differ from mine. I have faced near total disagreement on this site – that does not mean that those people who have opposed my opinion are incapable of supporting the principles of justice.

      You ask me ‘What’s my point?’
      It is to question the claims made by Amanda Knox and her supporters. Like, for example, the unsubstantiated claims:

      ‘The practices of the original investigation were corrupted by a zeal to charge and convict two innocent people‘, and ‘we do know “beyond any reasonable doubt” is that many of the behaviors of the original investigation enabled that doubt in a contradiction to the central purpose of what a murder investigation is obligated to be.’

      Many officials involved in the investigation have been made to look as if they are the lowest of the low. If you are all to be believed on this site then they are incompetent, perjurers, and guilty of some of the worst examples of framing. Imagine how you would feel to be on the receiving end of that.
      My point is to just to challenge those claims, and, if they are all correct then you should have no problem in responding to that challenge.
      Perhaps, William, you can start with the ‘boot under the bed’ allegation. Answer all of the doubts I raised, and then tell me if you support or condemn the ‘boot’ allegation.
      As someone who is apparently committed to the ideals of ‘innocent until proven guilty‘, and ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ you should be more than willing to do so.

      • William Benjamin says:

        You got most of what I said correct. You are persistent in demanding things that you have no right to demand as if your bias is in search of a confirmation. I was hoping that you had something more then just more bias.

        I think you are so blind to yourself that you cannot see that I answered your questions. “Neither Henley, Knox, Sollecito, myself or you can possibly know precisely what happened to Meredith “beyond any reasonable doubt”. This obviously includes precisely what happened to the boots. Your question is unanswerable but answers to it can be used to confirm bias.

        Having put a large effort into advocating against the use of bias in understanding this mess, it is my firm belief that there was a profound absents of empirical evidence where ample quantities should have been readily found. And it is the investigators who own that failure. Then the superior court codified the existence of multiple attackers because of evidence of strong bias and not even a hint of empirical evidence. What do we need justice systems for when this very same thing is accomplished with a mob, a sturdy tree branch and a length of rope. To make a lynching look respectable?

        • Stewart says:

          ‘You are persistent in demanding things that you have no right to demand as if your bias is in search of a confirmation. I was hoping that you had something more then just more bias.’ @ William Benjamin

          William, if you believe that I am guilty of invalid reasoning then show me where I have gone wrong! Expose the objection I have raised to the boot allegation for the sophistry you believe it all to be.
          Tell me how the boot could have made the collection of fine marks and voids under the bed, as it was not placed there until at least 24hrs after the crime, when the boot would not been capable of leaving anything more than a crude smudge.
          Tell me what part of the bulky boot could have left the intricate marks found under the bed.
          Tell me why the photo of the boot under the bed in the PDF file entitled ‘What Really Happened To Meredith?’ has signs of being photoshopped.
          Then, while you are still on your moral high horse invoking confirmation bias, mob rule and lynchings, tell me if you would condemn a man on the evidence you have been presented with concerning the boot allegation.

          “Neither Henley [Hendry], Knox, Sollecito, myself or you can possibly know precisely what happened to Meredith “beyond any reasonable doubt”. This obviously includes precisely what happened to the boots.’ @ William Benjamin

          You would support the claim that investigators made the bloody mark under Meredith’s bed by putting a boot there and then lying about it, because – you can’t possibly know precisely what happened to the boots?

  5. Stewart says:

    @Tom Mininger

    Tom – either back the ‘boot under the bed’ allegation or condemn it. To refresh your memory here are the points I raised back in May which you still have not dealt with:

    1. Did the defence make this an issue at any time after the original article was published (2010?) – at the Florence appeal for example?

    2. Surely the blood on the boot would have coagulated and dried sufficiently by the time it was moved (at least 24 hours later) not to have been capable of leaving the shiny beads and crisp shapes made of blood under the bed.

    3. What part of the bulky boot could have left the intricate detail of fine marks and voids that the blood under the bed consists of?

    4. View the photo as displayed in the PDF file entitled ‘What really happened to Meredith?’
    This enables you to zoom in on the area concerned (2400%).
    There are some things here that are troubling me. For instance, the boot has a blueish tinge that is inconsistent with the rest of the photo. Why is that?

    5. The beige/brown material to the left of the toe of the boot has a couple of strands hanging down that have a ‘melted plastic’ look reminiscent of the kind of effect that can occur when using a photoshop utility, such as a cloning or eraser tool.

    6. The slanting outline between the boot and the object in front of it appears to have a sharp raggedy edge inconsistent with the softness other outlines (as indeed does the back of the boot image), as though it were the edge of an inserted image.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Your questions are quackery to me. imo you are not accepting reality.

      I invite others to study this Ron Hendry article and his others at the IIP site. He is a professional Forensic Engineer with over a quarter century experience reconstructing events from photos. He was given access to defense material on this case in 2010 including many police photos of the crime scene. He has written several articles presenting his analysis.

      • Stewart says:

        @Tom Mininger
        ‘Your questions are quackery to me. imo you are not accepting reality.’

        Well, show me where I have gone wrong then. Show me the ‘reality’ – answer the questions.

      • Tom Mininger says:

        Your photo “analysis” is either a mumbo-jumbo guilter smokescreen to lead me on a wild goose chase OR you actually are an anonymous expert at detecting photoshop fraud. If the latter is true your questions and comments are beyond my ability to respond.

        I recommend you contact the Italian police with your concerns. But I wouldn’t get my hopes up. They prefer to pursue people when they can hide recordings and transcripts, not when photos catch them red handed.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          btw this Hendry article

          includes more police photos showing how the bloody boot was moved under the bed during the police 6 week trashing of the crime scene.

          • Stewart says:

            @Tom Mininger

            You still have not answered any of the points I have raised about the ‘boot under the bed’ allegation, although I note your unsubstantiated support for it.

            The photo in the link you gave me has a better boot colouring in it at least. However, the photo is not so easy to zoom in to as the PDF version, so it could be just another fake, and signs of distortion due to a cloning or blurring tool do seem to remain just to the left of the boot – and even then we are still left with the problem of the photo in the PDF presentation ‘What Really Happened To Meredith?’

            Furthermore, even if it is the boot in question, it could not possibly have left the marks under the bed, having been put there at least 24 hrs later, and possibly a lot later than that. The photo of the clothes on the bed would have been taken on the 18th of December.
            The claim about the boot is false and defamatory.

            As for your suggestion that I contact the authorities about the matter – what a good idea! You could always do it Tom if you are so confident about the allegation against the investigators, or better still, write a signed letter to the relevant department in the U.S government, making them aware of the ’boot’ claim – with Amanda’s name at the top of the list of signatories.

    • Som Nathan says:

      @stewart, clearly you don’t understand this simple case of an interrupted burglar seizes the opportunity to rape, murder and rob a helpless and terrified woman. In the end after ISC got it right.
      You are wanting time looking for predetermined answers you want, just like Perugian police and prosecutors. Go home Stewart, it’s ALL OVER.

      • Liz says:

        The SC does not buy into the lone robber turned murderer theory. The case is over but the motivational report left many questions unanswered. Does anyone know why the robbery or fake robbery resulted in Filomena missing only makeup from her room? Jewellery, a laptop and other items of value were not take only personal face makeup.

  6. justme says:

    An English language translation of the report is now available. It is difficult for me to read it as anything other than a complete vindication when the report, with withering sarcasm, cites Galileo Galilei (section 4.1) in attempting to explain the very basis of the scientific method to the prosecution and the presiding judge of the prior trial.

    No subparagraph or parsed phrase, no subset of this report and the trials it documents can change the fact that it openly mocks the arguments of the prosecution and the judge of the prior trial. It is quite remarkable, and perhaps unprecedented (?) in this regard. This is not a half-hearted endorsement of the defense; rather, it strongly endorses their innocence.

    I hope Raf and Amanda keep reaching out to their supporters if/when they ever see a farce of a show trial like this happening to anyone ever again as, unfortunately, I’m sure it will.

  7. kate beswick says:

    Congratulations,Amanda on receiving justice at last. I have supported and believed in your innocence from the beginning and I am filled with happiness that this cloud is now lifted from your life and you can move forward to fulfil your real potential.I wish you and your family every happiness in the future

  8. Stewart says:

    Re. Amanda Knox’s second trial for calunnia recently.
    How did it go? Can her legal team can be as effective without the support of Giulia Bongiorno?

    Re. The Marasca Report.
    Perhaps someone can help me here. As I understand it the gist of the report is:
    1. The police investigation was manifestly flawed, despite the 5th Chambers being unable to supply any well reasoned proof that it was so.
    2. The genetic evidence was contaminated, despite the 5th Chambers being unable to show that it was – in direct contravention of the Supreme Court’s own directive that contamination must be proven.
    3. The 5th Chambers were unable to provide any new proof exonerating the accused.
    4. The two accused were present at the cottage on the night of the murder, and there was more than one culprit.

    Therefore Amanda Knox is exonerated. Have I got that right?

    Re. Defamatory claim made by Knox supporters.
    In the PDF file ‘What Really Happened To Meredith?’ by Ron Hendry a false and defamatory claim was made accusing the police of creating a blood stain under the bed in Meredith’s room, by putting a boot under there, and then making up a bogus theory to cover up their mistake.
    Not only that but a police (court evidence?) picture was crudely photoshopped in order to support the slur.
    The claim still hasn’t been retracted or condemned. Nor has any information been given about who is responsible for this piece of trickery.

    • William Benjamin says:

      Yes it’s true, Knox and Sollecito are exonerated, It happened last March.
      Yes the high court was highly critical of the investigation and did in fact publish their reasons.
      No I’m not going to read it to you.

      Many of the reasoning that you have gleaned from the motivation report are products of your interpretations of that text and are not supported by the text itself. Much of your commentary shows a dictatorial approach where you take issue with the concept of presumption of innocents, i.e. the court did not in specific instances prove innocents or prove contamination had occurred or prove misinterpretation had occurred. I believe you are absolutely correct. They did not. I also believe you so ideologically wrong in what you expect from a court system that your premises frankly baffle me. Correct me if I got you wrong but are you in essence advocating for totalitarianism. Democracy simply can’t survive under your paradigm. Every political adversary to those in power could be jailed under a courts’ predetermined outcome.

      The court was actually saying that if circumstantial evidence could be equally explained by other means that are harmless to the defendant, or that dna contamination was possible or likely or if the dna was of such a low quantity that the results could not be replicated, then those evidences are not strong enough to circumvent a defendants right to the norm of law requiring a judgment to be “beyond any reasonable doubt”.

      It put the burden of proof of guilt on the state and was critical of prior suggestions that the defendants were responsible to prove their innocents instead. It continuously returned to the generally accepted principle of a defendants right to the norm of law requiring a judgment to be “beyond any reasonable doubt”, even if that defendant chooses not to speak in their own defense. This is exactly as it should be in any court of any western democracy. Any standard less then this runs the risk of becoming a show trial with a predetermined outcome.

      • Stewart says:

        @William Benjamin

        ‘Yes the high court was highly critical of the investigation and did in fact publish their reasons. No I’m not going to read it to you.’
        Well, that isn’t a good start is it? I’ve just got to accept that their reasons are sound – because they are?

        ‘The court did not in specific instances prove innocents or prove contamination had occurred or prove misinterpretation had occurred. I believe you are absolutely correct.’
        Ok, so contamination was not proven.

        ‘The court was actually saying that if circumstantial evidence could be equally explained by other means that are harmless to the defendant, or that dna contamination was possible or likely or if the dna was of such a low quantity that the results could not be replicated, then those evidences are not strong enough to circumvent a defendants right to the norm of law requiring a judgment to be “beyond any reasonable doubt”.
        ‘If’ and ‘possible’ seem to be the key words in that paragraph.

        William – the idea that the defendant is innocent until guilty is of paramount importance, and I would defend that principle to the last. However it did not apply in the Supreme Courts final judgement as guilt had already been proven in the original trial and upheld by the appeal court. The 5th chambers were not there to retry the case, they were there to find a good reason to overturn the established legal fact of guilt.
        You have not told me why they did so.

        • William Benjamin says:

          Your concluding premise is false and it is simple to explain. You are attempting to apply the regular procedures of common law systems familiar to the UK and US to Italy.

          Those lower court verdicts were never legally enforceable. The supreme court is there to validate the lower courts’ verdicts that only then would make those verdicts legitimate. It passed on doing that citing an ineligibility for that status.

          It is a different type of legal system and I think a lack of understanding those differences has generated to much conflict.

          • Stewart says:

            William, I accept that the Italian criminal justice system differs from that of the U.K and the U.S.A, and that a guilty verdict in Italy is not finalised until the Supreme Court have ratified it. However it is still not an infringement of the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ principle to say that the Supreme Court have to prove that the guilty verdict can be overturned.
            They did not do so.

          • William Benjamin says:

            The guilty verdict to which you speak had not happened yet, because it had not been validated yet, so this was not an overturning.

            The only thing that this superior court did was refuse to validate a verdict, not because they could prove it was wrong, but because the verdict didn’t rise to a minimal standard that was required in exchange for a validation.

            Since that minimal standard of evidence supporting the earlier verdict was absent they concluded that the defendants could only be found to have not committed the acts, because the low quality of the evidence was insufficient to claim anything more harmful to them.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Ah yes, the pictures must be attacked because they expose the corruption with a clarity that words alone cannot match.

      Actually contamination was proven. CSI Stefanoni’s lies about contamination in her lab are just a subset of her multiple counts of perjury on this case.

      I can’t imagine how embarrassing it was for real Italian scientists (and there are many) to have the Supreme Court of their country (back in 2013) make a statement like “contamination must be proven”. It’s painful to watch the CSI pictures and videos but hey will be useful for CSI courses:
      There’s lots more.

    • Len D says:

      “Re. The Marasca Report, Perhaps someone can help me here.”

      1) It appears that you are confused that the Italian SC didn’t find positive proof that something didn’t happen
      2) You don’t prove contamination exists or occurred. You prove that you followed procedures known to avoid contamination.
      3) Yup, they didn’t find positive proof that the accused didn’t do something. Funny about that concept of burden of proof.
      4) Proven by what credible evidence?

      “Therefore Amanda Knox is exonerated. Have I got that right?”
      Yes. Somehow you got this part right.

      • Len D says:

        1) i.e…they weren’t out to prove the investigation was improper…they just didn’t find a proper one.

      • Stewart says:

        @ Len D
        1. No, I am confused that the Italian Supreme Court could not back their assertions. If they can’t then they have no reason to make those assertions, and therefore cannot overturn previous rulings of guilt.

        2. Yes you do have to prove contamination exists or occurred. Otherwise you cannot assert that it did!

        3. The accused were found guilty at the original trial, and that verdict was upheld by the appeal court, so the concept of innocent until proven guilty did not apply. The Supreme Court needed to show why those previous verdicts were clearly wrong. A new piece of evidence proving innocence was one way they could have justly acquitted the accused – none was given.

        4. So the 5th Chambers are wrong?

        • Len D says:

          1) Obviously they didn’t describe, to your satisfaction, what the minimum standards are for a proper investigation but obviously they exist and this investigation fell below that standard.

          2) “Yes you do have to prove contamination exists or occurred.”

          There are many instances, like drug manufacturing, food manufacturing, or scientific testing, where there is no remedy after something has been contaminated. Because there is no remedy, the only solution is to have proper procedures in place to prevent contamination. Skip the procedures and risk having a contaminated and ineffective drug or in this case tests that produce anomalous results. Also, there is often no practical way to test for contamination but what you can do is check the documentation to see if procedures were properly followed. This isn’t a new concept.

          3) Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It’s the same rule for everyone…including you and/or the 5th Chambers.

          • Stewart says:

            1. Show me how the 5th Chambers proved that the proper standards for an investigation weren’t met.

            2. So contamination doesn’t have to be proven, we can just assume it happened – because it did? Did the 5th Chambers prove that the genetic testing was at fault because of bad procedures?

            3. Actually, claims just need evidence however extraordinary the claim.

  9. Emily says:

    I’m very happy for you Amanda and I wish you well. I have supported and believed in you through all these years. But you were convicted for callunia for putting Patrick Lumumba in jail. Maybe it was psychological pressure or not, but this was written in the final court report as a final fact. So you wrongly accused him of murder. And now you say that you want to help those wrongly accused, so I think that you should pay him the 40,000 euros that the court has ordered you to. This would help him and his family and greatly help your public image. I hope that you agree with me.

    • Som Nathan says:

      Amanda, doesn’t owe anyone a single dime, pence, shilling or lira. It’s the Perugian law who owe Patrick L., whatever he wants. He has made plenty by selling his lies to media, and has blamed her for the crime. First he should learn to speak truth.

    • Vicki says:

      Why should she pay for a confused, rambling statement she signed under duress while being emotionally abused by authority figures at the age of 20? The police should have NEVER arrested and held Lumumba on such nothing evidence. This was their fuckup, not hers.

    • Free Chelsea Manning Action Committee says:

      Anyone as tightly connected to the Perugia demi-monde, as Patrick Lumumba was, knew Knox was innocent and yet he turned up for the Rome hearing in order to gloat at a hoped for conviction.
      Patrick Lumumba will receive his money on the completion of the ECHR process – presumably from the Italian state. Since, according to the court testimony of Laura Mezzetti, Mr Lumumba was disinclined to pay Knox her wages when she was working for him at 5 euros an hour, then he will surely appreciate the irony of having to wait some years for his compensation.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      This conviction is currently on appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.

      • Rob H says:

        We should be clear, Tom, that it isn’t technically an “appeal”. It’s an application, which contends that violations of Amanda’s human rights were perpetrated by the Italian authorities in connection with the case.

        A finding of a violation or violations does not in and of itself, over turn a conviction. However, the remedy in Italian law for a violation of Article 6 – the right to a fair trial, is annulment of the verdict, though this will need to be pleaded in an Italian court. Additionally, the council of Europe and possibly even the ECtHR itself, will also argue that annulment of the verdict is the appropriate resolution.

        Matters related to police interrogations are covered by Article 6.

        Interestingly, the Bruno-Marasca motivation report explicitly states that the callunia verdict and sentence is untouchable, even if the ECtHR upholds Amanda’s application.

        The report is wrong on this point – egregiously so.

        • Richard M says:

          My question to the Perugia police would be why they kept Lumumba in jail so long. They released him because he had a rock solid alibi in the form of witnesses plus there were absolutely no “biological traces” either DNA or hair or anything else in the murder room. They probably found hairs of someone of African descent but that quickly turned out to be Guede. Lumunba’s alibi witnesses could have been checked in hours especially since he would have given them the names in any initial interview. If it would have been me I would have loudly told them the names as they were hauling me in. Plus they knew they had fed Lumumba’s name to Amanda in an intimidating interogation and she had aleready reversed her statements as soon as they stopped threatening her. If the appeal makes the police say what they were thinking in holding Lumumba so long and locking up his bar that would discredit the whole case and shift the responsibility for damages to the Perugian prosecutors. My humble opinion for what it is worth is that the police had some other reason not in any way connected to this case to want to shut down his bar.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          Thank you Rob for the clarification.

          My understanding is that the Marasca report claims the verdict will not change no matter how much Amanda was violated on the night of Nov. 5/6 because she did not recant “her” accusation against Patrick.

          The entire Italian Judicial System suffers collective amnesia regarding the existence of her Nov. 7 note (Memoriale #2) to the police recanting the interrogation results. The whole world can read it here:

          She recanted again to her lawyers after the Nov. 10 hearing when she finally got to meet with them for the first time. Mignini used the 3rd world tactic of incommunicado detention to keep Amanda and Raffaele from legal access leading up to the hearing. So her lawyers told her not to say anything until they could meet.

    • Laurie says:


      Amanda recanted her coerced “testimony” within a couple of days and in no uncertain terms. The authorities chose to ignore her statement. Furthermore, the reason why Patrick lost his business was because he was not allowed to re-open his bar for another two months, with the authorities claiming that it was a potential crime scene. Last but not least, it was the police’s job to investigate the truthfulness of Amanda’s statement to them before they arrested Patrick.

      Amanda owes Patrick nothing. He himself has lied about her many times, stating that he had fired her when he had not, and repeated many times that she had committed the murder, and, like the Kerchers, put a great deal of efforts into seeing to it that she would stand accused of the murder for good.

      At every step of the way, Patrick was a victim of the authorities,and not of Amanda.

  10. Jonathan Monti says:

    Thank You!!!

    Have your life back, Amanda, step by step. And don’t be sorry for anyone. Everybody has to take care of his/her own lack of insight, delusions, whatever… sooner or later.

    You faced the unknown, literally, and you won in the end!
    That’s great news, anyway 🙂

  11. Brian says:

    There are still a few matters pending, for which I and others would love to know their status:

    1. Amanda still has an appeal pending before the European Court of Human Justice on her slander conviction vs. Lumumba – what is the status of that appeal, and when could it possibly be decided?

    2. Amanda (and, I think, her parents as well as Raffaele) are being charged with slander by the Perugia police and prosecutors. I think those trials are going on right now in Florence – what is the status of those trials? I am aware that Amanda’s attorneys did not seem worried about it because the statute of limitations would likely expire before the cases are complete?

    Are there any other legal matters pending against either Amanda or Raffaele or their families?

    I am sure that neither Amanda, Raffaele, their families nor all of us who are her supporters will rest completely easy until all these matters are closed. So a status report would be very welcome, and reassuring.

    Amanda, if you see this post and can find a minute for a quick update it would be wonderful. Thanks!

  12. Heather says:

    Dear Amanda,

    I am so happy for you. I have followed your case, read your book, and prayed for you for years. I have also hoped that you would feel God’s peace through all this. Please know that God knows your pain and suffering. Remember, Christ himself (God made man) was ALSO falsely accused and persecuted. He KNOWS, He counts the hairs on your head, and He has seen you safely home and brought to true justice. Praise God! This is exactly why Christ died for us, to set us free from our accusers. Satan is the ultimate accuser. In this way, you have been such an inspiration to me.

    I deeply hope and pray that I will see you in heaven – you’ve had enough hell here on earth. Place your trust in Christ and keep on going, strong lady!

    Much love and all my admiration. Peace. God bless.

  13. I’m happy about the outcome! I wonder if an English translation of the Marasca report is available. Most of the news reports I’ve seen are just a few paragraphs, but the report is over 40 pages.

  14. Manuela Krenn says:

    I am deeply reliefed, that this horrible case is definitive over. Following the revolting witch trial from the very beginning, I was always totally convinced of your and Raffaeles innocent. I wish you very, very best for the future … may the force be with you!

    Manuela 🙂

  15. The Free Jodi Arias Action Committee says:

    Here on The Free Jodi Arias Action Committee we hoped for a more generous conclusion to the Kercher case rather than the recalcitrant Motivation Report released in Rome a few days ago. On the other hand, if you are on CCTV entering the apartment with Rudy Guede at 20:44 then you just have to take it on the chin. The wages of the Omerta is life under a constant cloud of suspicion, I’m afraid.
    We look forward to the day when you apply you oft-repeated desire to advocate for the wrongly convicted to Rudy Guede; which is, after all, the single case where your advocacy could make a meaningful difference.
    Best wishes
    The Free Jodi Arias Action Committee.

    PS: Jodi Arias slashed Travis Alexander’s tyres? Yeah, right. Such a toxic prosecution based on innuendo, character assassination and prosecution zealotry would be laughed out of court in Italy….

    • Len D says:

      A claim but no proof, ample evidence to the opposite, and hiding behind a screen name. Yawn.

    • Penthilesia says:

      Free Jodi Arias. Really? You are some clown to be so wrong on one case and then use that as a pseudo legitimate argument on another case.

    • Smalldeer says:

      How exactly was Rudy Guede “wrongly convicted”? His DNA was inside Meredith, on her purse, sock, coat cuff, etc. We KNOW that Rudy was in that room and had a motive to kill Meredith.

  16. Len D says:


    Now that this case is over, make sure you get all your stuff back from the police. Even the things they claim don’t work or were…“burnt”. You never know.

  17. Tom Zupancic says:

    The Marasca final motivation report explaining the definitive and final decision of the Italian Judiciary System emphatically states that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito did not kill Meredith Kercher. This case is officially closed.

  18. Richard M says:

    The good news is that the Court of Cassation found you and Raffaele absolutely innocent of the murder. The next thing they must do is make certain that the Kercher family knows beyond any doubt that Meredith was killed by Guede and only Guede. It is the duty of law enforcement everywhere to bring justice to the victim’s family and even more so in this case because of the way it was handled. If you could just meet with the Kerchers they would be convinced of your innocence and they would then convince the rest of the world.

    The court of Cassation stated that the prosecution made glaring errors, had investigative amnesia and guilty omissions. In reality the prosecution made no “errors”. This case was much more sinister. This was the deliberate, cruel and malicious attempt by Juliani Mignini to cause two people he knew to be absolutely innocent to lose their lives to prison. His motive was personal promotion for vocational advancement and personal glory, all the time while destroying the integrity of the Italian judicial system more than it already was. The court said the investigation was accelerated by the media but it was Mignini who was controlling the press by leaking half truths and out and out lies. He bullied all those around him to produce the forensic and circumstantial evidence that he wanted and he had the political clout to push the system into accepting it as absurd as the evidence was.

    This political power was evident in the motivations where the court called Mignini and his group merely incompetent instead of the criminals they actually were. This last Court knew you were innocent and in no way were they going to say anything else but at the same time they were not going to throw Mignini under the bus where he belonged. He just had too many political allies in the system. The reasons the Court gave for their verdict says that while there was absolute proof you did not commit the killing maybe you could have been in the house. That was an appeasement for Mignini and justification for finding guilt for naming Lumumba. Since you were, in fact, not there you could only have named Lumumba who wasn’t there either while under so much pressure you would say anything they told you to say.

    The big mistake Mignini made was that he chose a talented writer as his victim. A talented, passionate writer has an immense power to influence peoples thinking. With that you can do much to correct unjust prosecutions and promote what is good in the world.

    • Liz says:

      Why would the Kerchers meet with Amanda? They have respectively asked to be left alone. This ruling confirmed Guede didn’t act alone agreeing with the earlier court.

      • Tom Mininger says:

        The ruling correctly states that it is impossible for Amanda and Raffaele to selectively clean their invisible DNA from the murder room while leaving Guede’s invisible DNA behind. Liz, do you know anyone in the world who could clean their invisible DNA from the murder room while leaving Guede’s invisible DNA behind?

        I agree with you that if the Kerchers want to be left alone they should be. I pray that one day they will see what Guede did to their beautiful daughter and what Mignini did to them.

        • George says:

          The report also says Amanda was there in the house yet not involved in the murder. You really must read the report because it’s not a clean exoneration. By any means. The judge explains that the forensic evidence is the main reason for the release but believes Amanda when she said she sat under the table, holding her head and listening to Meredith scream as she was killed. That is why this conviction was upheld. The Kercher family believed Amanda when she confessed to being in the house during the murder. So imagine you’re Meredith’s family and the judge’s final word – a word supported by Knox and her supporters – is that this so called friend stood by and watched their daughter/sister die and did absolutely nothing – how would you feel towards her? Don’t tell Meredith’s family what they selectively can and cannot believe from Amanda’s myriad of changing stories.

          • Tom Mininger says:

            I’m not telling the Kerchers to do anything.

            George, tell us what Amanda’s myriad of changing stories were. Leave out the one during the unrecorded, lawyerless, middle-of-the-night interrogation on Nov. 5/6. That one we know about.

            Here’s a timeline from the murder on Nov.1 to the initial arrests on Nov.6 describing the horror committed on Amanda. Warn your loved ones about this. It happens in this country too.

            Amanda’s Nov. 6 and Nov. 7 notes to the police recanting the interrogation statement, referred to as Memoriale #1 and Memoriale #2 are available in their entirety here. The first note demonstrates Amanda is still confused out of her mind. Italian judges can’t face this. And they always suffer amnesia regarding the existence of the Nov. 7 note:

          • George says:

            There were many stories told to many people… Before the ‘I was in the house holding my ears’ story, they were having dinner with friends, they were at a party, they were walking in town, they were in the murder house…which one should I choose Tom? Raffaele was openly telling Kate Mansey lies over coffee on the very day after Meredith’s body was found – Mansey is still happy to discuss that interview and has kept the recording. Amanda and Raffaele didn’t finally decide what happened that night until their arrests – 6 days after the murder. Horror committed on Amanda? She was interviewed by police for two hours between midnight and 12:45pm. She wasn’t waterboarded in Guantanamo! Some perspective is needed here. What you offer me is your opinion of what happened that night, you pick and choose what is good in the report – Knox PR tactics – rather than discuss the whole. I accept that there is no useable DNA in the murder room and that is why Knox was released but I also agree with the report that Knox and Sollecito were in the house that night. Amanda saw her friend die and did nothing at all. No phone call to police, nothing at all. To my mind, that is almost as bad as murdering the poor girl. Amanda needs to tell the truth. She’s done it once, in writing that has been accepted by the court and weighted the same as the lack of DNA that released her. Not to mention that the judge thinks Amanda was washing off Meredith’s blood in the sink – again weighted as strongly the lack of DNA evidence. Why are you dismissing this and accepting the rest when I’m supposed to accept the parts that suit you?

          • Audrey Windsor says:

            No. You are misunderstanding how the law works in this way. He is not stating that Amanda was there. He is putting it out as yet another ‘speculation’; thereby pointing out that this possible ‘speculation’ was missed by the lower courts. His point is that you cannot rule on speculation, but on facts alone. He is pointing out to his colleagues that there are additional possible speculative theories, if one wants to go down that train of thought. But that is not how one judges guilt or innocent. You have completely misunderstood the motivations report. He allows for the ‘possibility’ of Amanda having been there. He does not state it as fact. He is pointing out to his lower court colleagues that they cannot put someone in jail for murder on speculative theories. He is being diplomatic, in a very European way, as opposed to simply insulting his lower court colleagues, by telling them precisely how ludicrous it is speculate over such serious matters. The facts speak for themselves. She and Raffaele were not involved. End of story. People who get as far as being high court judges in Europe tend to also be extraordinarily great diplomats. He’s not going to blatantly insult his lower court colleagues by not allowing for “some” possibilities in their “theories”. But that is all they are – possibilities, and speculations, which are endless. We can all speculate for years as to what went on that night. There are endless possibilities, but not one of us “knows” for sure. That is why the law must rule on the facts; which prove that Amanda and Raffaele had nothing to do with this murder. That is all that matters.

        • Porter Hall says:

          Selective cleaning: DNA traces come primarily from blood and other body fluids. If you know where those are located and whose fluids they are, why can’t you remove them selectively?

      • Tom Zupancic says:


        It is obvious that Meredith Kercher and her family were ignored yet again here. The court first of all needed to correct a terrible injustice. Which they did by acquitting the innocent. But, unfortunately, they simply lacked the power to provide justice for the Kerchers. To do so would have required admitting that they made mistakes. That was beyond their abilities.

        • Audrey Windsor says:

          Rubbish. The Kerchers are the ones who have denied justice to Amanda and Raffaele. They have chosen to ignore the facts. End of story. Yes, their tragedy is the greatest one of all; but it does not justify making a tragedy out of two other young lives. They refuse to face the facts that prove the non-involvement of Amanda and Raffaele. The Kerchers owe Amanda, Raffaele and their families a big, fat apology. They had nothing whatsoever to do with their daughter/ sister’s death. It is unfair to state that Amanda and Raffaele, or their families must go on and on forever feeling sorry for the Kerchers. Amanda and Raffaele and their families, do not owe the Kerchers any more compassion than I do – that is, the compassion of an innocent person who hears of the tragic loss suffered by another family.

          • Liz says:

            I’m not reading that the Kerchers are saying anything about the ex defendants. Respectfully they asked that they stay away from the gravesite. Why must you and others continue to push for an apology or statement from them? Leave them is peace please . The ex defendants should not allow negative comments against the family on their personal sites without commenting.

      • Nick Green says:

        Liz, the ‘didn’t act alone’ ruling is just a circular argument, a myth perpetuated by the nature of the botched prosecution of Guede. They had Guede who was obviously guilty, but by then they were committed to trying Amanda and Raffaele as well, so the court effectively forced itself to rule that he didn’t act alone (to leave open the possibility of convicting two other people).

        They then tried to use this ‘fact’ (which was purely a convenience concocted by the court) as evidence in the other trial. Saying ‘the court has ruled it!’ does not make it true.

        Apart from anything else, forensic science simply isn’t able to say for certain that more than one person was involved, based purely on a pattern of knife wounds. Whereas the absence of other DNA in the room PROVES, not just beyond reasonable doubt but beyond all doubt, that there were no other killers in the room. Just Guede.

        • Liz says:

          The latest report did not simply say they couldn’t rule out multiple attackers they state Guede could not have acted alone. Having Amanda definitely at the cottage and in contact with Meredith’s blood is troubling to say the least. We can be assured that the investigation was flawed and no DNA was “found” inside the bedroom and that’s about it.

          • Tom Mininger says:

            Imagine the DNA in your own bathroom sink being used against you.
            Imagine a CSI using a wiping motion across the sink, collecting multiple samples with the same swab, then claiming mixed blood/DNA.
            Imagine this being allowed as “evidence” in a court of law.
            Imagine professional judges believing it.
            You don’t have to imagine. It happened. The one good thing is that they actually videotaped it for all the world to see:

      • Richard M says:

        A lot of people seem to be having trouble determining if the Court is saying Amanda was in the house at the time of the murder or whether she was not. That is because the Court of Cassation is saying two different things at the same time that can’t both be true. In the legal world this is a perfectly acceptable thing to do.

        In a recorded Skype call to his friend asking for money Guede said Amanda was not there. Then at his trial they asked him again and told him if he said she was there he would get 16 years but if he said she wasn’t he was stuck with the 30 years of his original sentence. Guede of course changed his story to say she was there and that statement then became a “judicial truth” in his trial. A judicial truth is just what it says it is – a statement that is true in the judicial reality but not necessarily true in the actual reality that the rest of us live in. I guess you have to go to law school to see how this makes any sense but for lawyers it does and it doesn’t matter what country you are in they all think the same way. For example, in the US a person can have a severe mental illness by a medical definition but be sane by a legal definition.

        This last Court of Cassation completely threw out the findings of one court because it was total nonsense but kept the nonsense of another court because it was a “judicial truth” established in Guede’s trial. That judicial truth based only on Guede’s testimony and no forensic or circumstantial evidence whatsoever stated that Guede did not act alone. The twisted logic then says that if Amanda could have been there because of that judicial truth then she could have fingered Lumumba even though the established and proven actual truth was that neither one was in the house. Anything is possible if you can have both an actual reality and an alternate “judicial truth” reality.

        • Liz says:

          I think its important to see the translated report. I do know that your statement about Guede getting a reduced sentence for naming Amanda is absolutely false. He chose a fast track trial an option available to all three defendants which automatically reduces a sentence.

        • George says:

          Simply put, the court accepted Amanda’s confession that she was in the house. Nothing to do with judicial truth etc, Amanda said she was there when Meredith died and the court believed her.

          • tomboy says:

            Not true. That evidence was not allowed in the murder trial because it was obtained illegally.

        • Audrey Windsor says:

          Exactly. In the legal world it is possible to point out all “possibilities”. That does not mean the statement is that each of these possibilities is fact. The facts show the non-involvement of Amanda and Raffaele. Most people can’t get their head around the fact that legal writing is not the same as other writing, and should not be interpreted so literally. The motivation report is not stating that Amanda was there as a fact. It is simply pointing out another ‘possibility’

  19. WomblingFree says:

    Have you read The Suspicions of Mr Whicher by Kate Summerscale? Maybe you could do a review.

  20. don't lie! says:

    Rudy Guede hasn’t written HIS book yet! Untill that, keep on faking it!

    • Steve Mahoney says:

      The report has it’s finding.I think we know Amanda did not do this.No evidence links her.

    • Stephane G says:

      « The Complete and True Story of My Ten Minutes On the Toilets While Some Other Guy Was Doing It ». By R.H. Guede. With the detailed list of the songs he was listening on his iPod. I can’t wait !

      • Stewart says:

        Perhaps that book will come out at the same time as ‘I used the mat to kind of hop over to my room’ by A. M. Knox.

    • Audrey Windsor says:

      It will take Rudy a long time to write a book. He isn’t literate in the way that Amanda and Raffaele are. He suffers from immense vagueness, where he doesn’t remember where he’s been or what he’s done for hours – often waking up in the middle of the night, having walked elsewhere in his sleep. He also went through stages of believing he was a dog. He was in need of serious mental health assistance and he never received it. Don’t count on his book coming out any time soon…

  21. don't lie! says:

    What a load of crap, Amanda! You say you will “being to help others who have been wrongfully accused”. This of course doesn’t include Patrick Lumumba, does it? Cause then you would have to pay him what you rightfully own him, thousands of euros. But that will never happen. That’s how sick psychopath you are! Go on, pretend as if you care of anyone but yourself! Full of shit!

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Amanda’s calumny conviction is under appeal to the European Court of Human Rights whether this Italian court likes it or not.

      My current understanding, correct me if I’m wrong, is that the ECHR has agreed to hear the case. Amanda’s side has submitted their material. Meanwhile the Italians are stalling. They haven’t exposed their treatment of a 20 year old foreign exchange student during a half week of trauma and growing sleep deprivation in their own courts. They certainly don’t want to expose it before judges who don’t care about Italian police and Mignini covering their a**es.

    • Amanda’s confession was coerced by the police. Amanda and Raffaele should receive a huge settlement from the Italian government, and so should Mr. Lumumba.

    • says:

      Professional victim Lumumba? The one that said he was abused by the police when they arrested him, but opted to sue Amanda instead because he saw the lynch mob forming and thought he could make more money that way.

      One would have thought the police would have actually, you know, investigated before arresting Lumumba- particularly when someone says, after hours of pressure, “I confusedly remember these things that make no sense” and then soon thereafter recants their statement. The motivation report specifically describes how the media attention led the prosecution to do no actual investigation. One supposes that if Amanda had named QE2 in her coerced statement, the British royals would be suing.

      Trolls usually live under a bridge and ask 3 questions. You’ve got a lot to learn about yourself, my friend.

      • Steve White says:

        I was reading some of the trial transcript online, I think the guy Quenell, and at one point Mignini tries to grill Ms. Knox about accusing Lumumba and how she did not, according to him, fix his arrest.
        She answered very straight, but I thought it would have been good if she’d asked right back – why didn’t YOU have the police check the handprint against Lumumba’s before arresting him? Why did you accept my word as gospel if you believe I was part of a murder?
        Why were you so quick to arrest the African?
        Why was his bar kept closed even after he was cleared?
        Why did he say the cops roughed him up in two different interviews after he was released?
        Yes, it would have made them mad but the confrontation, practically unknown in the authoritarian Italian courts it seems, would have made big headlines and hopefully brought these points to public attention, most of the superficial TV reports did not bring them out.

        • says:

          It’s nice to know I’m not the only one annoyed by Lumumba. Considering that during every trial he was telling every camera put in front of him that A was culpable, I think she should counter-sue Lumumba for slander. Let’s see… he spent a few weeks in jail, whereas A and R spent 4 years or so. So that means he owes A approximately 104 times as much money and should spend approximately 104 times as much time in prison as A did for being forced to name him, right?

          • Well reasoned! Unlike many of the accusations regarding Lumumba’s being fingered by Knox. Most people who continue to raise this stale old non-starter of a point have not even done sufficient research to understand that it was at the police’s emphatic “suggestion” that Knox considered Lumumba’s possible involvement in a crime, nor do they appear to grasp the nature of the interrogation exercise “creative re-imagining” (disallowed in most civilized countries) used to drag the weird daydream “confession” from Knox’s mind, nor have they followed the story closely enough to have observed Lumumba’s total hypocrisy in the aftermath, in which he went from saying nothing condemnatory about Knox and complaining about the brutality of the police, to going silent on the abuse charges and suddenly claiming all sorts of intimate knowledge of Knox’s personal corruption. It was not nice what happened to him, but he has shown himself up as a dishonest and opportunistic huckster in his response. He’s gotten a lot of money out of this by now for sure.

    • Len D says:

      It doesn’t take much courage to make a comment like that while hiding behind a screen name.

    • Penthilesia says:

      Patrick Lumumba unfortunately told plenty of lies of his own including selling his story to the tabloid where he made statements that disagreed with his court testimony, and repeatedly claimed he was a victim of a racist crime, which he was not.
      @Don’t lie
      While what happened to Lumumba is regrettable unfortunately a coerced confession is all too common a feature in cases of injustice including the Birmingham Six, The Central Park Five, and The Guildford Four. Luckily in all those cases the wrongly accused were eventually freed.

      In many cases they are not, so Lumumba was one of the lucky ones because he was exonerated. If you care about Lumumba so much send him some money.

  22. HelenaP says:

    “Nevertheless, there is a strong suspicion that he (Sollecito) was, truly, present in the house in via della Pergola, on the night of the homicide….since it is certain that Knox was present in that house”

    A translated line from the Supreme Court report. Hardly a forceful declaration of anyone’s innocence. What the report says in legally innocent but in reality, possibly actually guilty. So from all of the trials you have had, two have found you guilty as charged and two have found you legally innocent yet both reports say they don’t think you’re actually innocent. This is why the Kerchers think you are guilty – you’re not innocent, you totally dodged a bullet through judge shopping and consular pressure!! I have to hand it to your PR team though, they are excellent.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      IMO this motivation document is a disgrace. The judicial system doesn’t have the decency to admit to the Kerchers that Meredith arrived home and surprised the burglar Rudy Guede, who was on a 5 week break-in spree, including rocks, knives and second story windows.

      One of the many heartbreaking aspects of this case is that the police destroyed the PC hard drives and got rid of Amanda’s camera, destroying all the pictures and video of Meredith and Amanda’s friendship.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      It’s good that Italian judges have to write motivation documents explaining their verdict. It exposes just how scientifically illiterate they are for the world to see. It can be studied.

      This case will be a classic in CSI courses.

      Here in the US the science illiteracy of many judges remains hidden. IMO admissibility of forensic physical evidence needs to be determined by an independent team of experts before a trial, not by a judge in the middle of a trial.

    • Mark says:

      The Hellmann report certainly did find her “actually innocent.” It appears a straight faced logical repudiation of the prosecution’s evidence was too much for Italy to handle, so the latest report, from what I hear, unlike Hellmann, contains a bunch of nonsense. If it helps, Amanda wasn’t in the house that night, regardless of what is written on a piece of paper. At any rate it’s all over, time to move on.

      • George Bains says:

        Hellman said to the press afterwards that he found Knox ‘legally innocent but not actually innocent’ – rather damning and not a clear acquittal by any means.

        • Mark says:

          “We had acquitted those two youths because the trial had demonstrated that there was no proof of their participation in the crime.” – Hellmann

          Amanda may be guilty, and bigfoot may roam North America, but there is not a shred of evidence to believe either, and that’s what Hellmann found.

    • S. Michael cadron says:

      ” Because no biological evidence from Knox or Sollecito was found at the house in Perugia where Kercher was murdered, the 52-page opinion said, their “participation” in the killing should have been “excluded.”

      Pretty forceful, I’d say. Bravo Amanda and best of luck — Michael & Terri

    • Stephane G says:

      This is a very personal but wrong understanding of the report (you should read further). In chapter 9-4-2 (the part you are referring to), the court states that Amanda – and likely Raffaele – were present in the house at some moment in the night but ALSO clearly and undoubtedly rules out any participation in the crime, as Hellman did in 2011. If the judges thought Amanda and Raffaele were guilty, they could have simply based their reasoning on the same lack of evidences than Nencini or Massei and upheld the last verdict. Your understanding that these courts suggested guilt behind “legal innocence” (a concept that actually does not exist – you are found innocent or you are not) is simply as unfounded and unproven than these threadbare mantras about judge shopping, consular conspiracies, and omnipotent PR teams. These are beliefs and speculations.

      • Liz says:

        The confusion seems to be complicated by the report saying Rudy Guede could not have acted alone. The exclusion from the bedroom but not the cottage raises new questions. Bongiorno recently said if her role was that of a spectator the investigation failed to explore that. The fully translated report is much needed.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          What’s needed is for CSI Stefanoni to be indicted on multiple counts of perjury. She’s just a pawn for her lab boss, who was consultant to Mignini, but that’s the starting point.

          Over 80% of the DNA analysis on this case remains undisclosed. That’s what happens when the authorities jump to a conclusion, then everything starts coming in against only Guede. My favorite is Stefanoni’s claim that the human blood found in the downstairs flat was cat blood.

        • Stephane G says:

          Indeed it is… As I explained yesterday on IA, I asked my assistant, who is italian (on this occasion I even learned her brother was in the carabinieri school with Vanessa Sollecito), to give me a quick translation of different parts of the document. Sorry it was of course in french and only verbal, so it is not useful here for the moment…

          In the end it clearly seems that the ISC tried to reach a description that could fit different previous conclusions and rulings. That is : 1- lack of evidence – beyond speculations – that could link Amanda and Raffaele to the murder, 2 – “judicial truth” that Rudy commited the crime along with others, and 3 – Amanda’s conviction for slander against Lumumba that supposes she deliberatly lied at one moment, and therefore that she knew he had nothing to do with it, and so that she had to be there one moment or another to know it was false (!)

          So, after a quick look, it seems we end up with a weird description of the situation, with Amanda and Raffaele definitely innocent for the crime, but also with Rudy likely murdering Meredith with the help of a pair of we-have-no-idea-who, while Amanda was playing Monopoly or whatever in the next room, probably with Raffaele (because she did not call him), or maybe she paid a visit to the house some time in the middle of the night with no apparent reason when she was in contact with Meredith blood that she washed… (hence the mixed DNAs in the blood in the bathroom). So the previous definitive rulings can be upheld. Et voilà !… “Supporters” will agree to the main conclusion and “guilters” won’t celebrate with their cheap sparkling wine but may raise a glass of orange juice to something…

          One thing is absolutely sure : the judges damned this day of november 2nd when the perugian police and justice created what will surely remain one of the greatest mess in italian history of justice ! And they tried to close this crazy case once and for all, hoping people will move to a different story as soon as possible.

          But as someone on IA underlined, this may also be a milestone in this same history. It was the day when judges in Italy had to learn the true meaning of the expression “guilt beyond a reasonnable doubt”.

      • George Bains says:

        I’m sorry but if the couple were in the house and did nothing and reported nothing then they should be in prison for manslaughter. Meredith could still be alive if the people present had acted. Amanda is a very lucky woman to be free, her actions are called “joint enterprise” anywhere else in Europe and she would certainly be convicted of murder for being present in the house in the UK.

    • or...maybethis says:

      A small office in Seattle was hired to deal with media interview requests quite a ways into this farce. That’s hardly Madison Avenue.

      Contrast this with daily slander by the Daily Mail; a BBC program timed around the third trial; press conferences from the prosecution; oh, and didn’t the prosecution’s case get presented in a movie starting Kate Beckinsale? I’m sure the Kercher family, who work at the BBC and the tabloids, had plenty of people feeding them this false information because it sells.

      In many cases there is an absence of forensics. In this case, there wasn’t so much an absence of evidence as there was evidence of absence. I’ll stick with science over wild speculation, thanks.

    • Tom Zupancic says:

      The Italian Court’s final report is a classic example of the limitations and flaws of the Italian Justice system superimposed on an honest effort on their part to get it right and do the right thing. Briefly, given the fundamental Italian doctrine of judicial infallibility, the present court was forced to accept and accommodate mistakes made in previous trials, even though those decisions were wrong, because these incorrect conclusions had previously and ‘infallibly’ been publically declared to the world to be correct.

      • Tom Mininger says:

        Excellent points Tom. Through the years forensic lies became judicial truths.

        Here’s another excellent comment I read:
        “The court had the task of explaining their ruling while also including reasoning that protects all involved. Their report shows the flaws of a system in need of reform. They should not feel the need to protect others involved. They should not feel the need to protect their prior rulings. They should follow the facts as they know them to be at that given time. They should stand up and say the system got it wrong. Of course, no one ever admits they were wrong, so we get reports like the one Luca is describing now. We will never hear the exact words we want to hear. Far too much damage has been done.”

    • Som Nathan says:

      @HelenaP, what you say, “legally innocent”, “judge shopping”, “counsellor pressure” are terms coined by you alone, and wierd ones too. And these are all your opinion. Kerchers have been misled by prosecution from the very beginning and then they in their turn stoked the flames of hatered towards AK & RS.
      But now, this is all over. Amanda and Raffaele are legally, materially, physically innocent. Period. Rudy Guede brutally raped and murdered MK that is the ground reality. If RH appeals (hope he does), his 30 years jail sentence will be reinstated.

      • I would only add that you are being too generous to the Kerchers when you say that they were misled by the prosecution. In fact, their own interests converged in an unholy alliance with that of the prosecution: the Kerchers, with indeed strong ties to the tabloid press through father John, had one aim only (as I’ve written elsewhere) – to “keep Meredith’s name alive”. With the help of the DM leading the pack of UK tabloids, the lurid tale of a Halloween sex crime featuring two telegenic lovebirds, became not only a great way to maintain a hold on the headlines, but incite international interest and inflame prosecutorial passion for “justice”. The Kercher’s may be forgiven some insanity in the immediate aftermath of coming to terms with the brutal slaying of Meredith, by all accounts a very nice person. However, enough time has passed now that reason must prevail. The courts have finally conceded to reality. Now it is the turn of the tabloids, and the Kerchers. They owe Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox big apologies.

  23. Erin says:

    I don’t know you, but as a woman from Seattle who spent ten years overseas in my 20s, I relate to you. I am so very happy to hear that this has finally come to a close. I hope that you are able to heal and use your experience and inner strength for the benefit of others in similar situations.

    I wish for you a full and happy life. While things have not turned out as you imagined, I hope that you nevertheless have a life full of love and beauty.

  24. Kay Taylor says:

    Such a tremendous outcome, finally…You are a force, as is your family. This is also a great victory for women everywhere, will be a case that is studied for eons, and hopefully will inspire reform, especially in Italy. Wishing you a lovely life, you’ve more than earned it…and best to your remarkable family and close friends, who have held you up, through an unbelievable ordeal. Also, kudos to the legal team…; ~ }

  25. Nathan Kuhlman says:

    It says a lot that your site allows comments from your detractors, while your detractors’ sites very much appear to suppress those of your supporters. For that matter, all those comments, which probably I should not be reading, illustrate that the level of thinking in evidence among the General Public is shockingly low. I shudder to think what is meant nowadays by a ‘jury of your peers.’

    I will refrain from trying to recruit you for my causes. All I will ask of you is that you take the energy to heal properly from the trauma to which you have been subjected by various institutional and individual malefactors, and that you live in your coming years the life that you should. Revenge optional.

    Congratulations on freedom.

  26. Francesco Talarico says:

    Dear Amanda,
    It’s a great day for you. With a so clear verdict it ‘s like to be innocent again and again.
    I heard and that you feel like Alice out of Wonderland. I agree with you ….. indeed wou were as brave as Alice to deal with everything! Instead of losing yourself in this bad dream (barely a teen-ager when all started) you has been able to enhance your identity of woman ready to fight not only for herself but for everyone’s right. Maybe, without this bad adventure this metamorphosis wouldn’t have happened ….”Great achievement is usually born of great sacrifice (N.H.)”
    All the best for a bright future
    Francesco Talarico

  27. Colette says:

    I would really like to send a book to you. Your memoir touched me greatly. Is there any way I could get that to you?

  28. Diane Krstulovich says:

    Ditto, ditto, ditto to the many wonderful comments left earlier. FINALLY, you really do have a new life.

    I can’t even imagine how this feels for you. Looking forward to your great future.

    THANK YOU to you, your friends, family and supporters for teaching us all undying lessons about faith and love and courage. PRICELESS!!!

  29. Pingback: The Marasca Report: Italy’s Exoneration of Amanda Knox -

  30. Hilde Baert says:

    Congratulations, Amanda!
    You were your own best defense!
    I admire your attitude, especially since the Florence fiasco.
    You showed dignity and pluck!
    In my eyes, your attitude has been: ‘Look, I try and live like a girl in her late twenties. Finished school, started out as a columnist, found my voice, discovered what I want to write about. And found my partner. I won’t be distracted by life’s difficulties.’

  31. jaap says:

    Congratulations! Great news that finally the highest Italian court has put a definitive end to this shameful epsisode, using terms that nobody can misunderstand. It was about time and I am still amazed that the same court just a few years ago was not so convinced and sent the case back to the Florence court of Appeals. Probably this has to do with the specific legal technicalities of cassation jurisprudence but nevertheless it is difficult to understand.
    I wish you a lot of luck with your efforts at the ECHR. It is a pity that your lawyers were not able to take apart the slander accusation but I guess this was a deliberate choice dictated by process tactics. Anyhow, cheers for you and Rafaelle and I am glad that you will continue your support for the wrongfully accused because I am sure that somebody with your tenacity can achieve a lot!
    Best regards from the Netherlands, jaap

  32. Shirley Anne Mather says:

    Amanda, I am beyond happy that this terrible ordeal has finally ended for you and Raffaele. God bless you and good luck with the rest of your life. Shirley x

  33. Heleen says:

    You are an example of how strong people can be! So impressed that you did not let this awful, awful experience destroy you. So good you are going to use this to help other people in these situations. Wow!

  34. Simpson says:

    congratulations from an American who has lived in Italy for 14 years. I followed the trial closely and understand your tragic ordeal more than you can imagine. I still fear living in a country whose legal system is a holdover from the Catholic Inquisition, and where habeus corpus does not exist, and where people can be thrown in jail only because they are perceived to have possibly committed a crime. You know very well that no one in Italy will pay for their mistakes and purposeful twisting of the evidence; is is sad but true. This culture is not based on personal responsibility and accountability for one’s actions, because it is too easy to go to a priest and ask for absolution of sins and never have to seek justice. Italy has 500 or more years of this tradition, after the Counter-Reformation. I hope your ordeal will also lead you to look at what the Roman Catholic culture has produced in Italy, and fight for the 60 million here who have to live under this nightmare “justice” system. Thank you.

  35. Vicki says:

    Congratulations, Amanda! Best wishes to you and Rafaelle for much deserved happiness that has been so long denied.
    Meanwhile, I plan to keep reading your blog. You are one helluva writer and I hope to see you publish more.

  36. Lyn Duncan says:

    So very very happy for you Amanda!!

    “We are stardust
    We are golden
    And we’ve got to get ourselves
    Back to the garden”

    The whole world is your garden now…and keep shining sweetie!

  37. Fran says:

    Dear Amanda,
    I am so happy to hear this news. I followed your case closely. I knew you were innocent from the very beginning. Shame on the Italian government for putting you through this horror. God Bless You. You are so strong, what a wonderful family and friends you have who have supported you from the very beginning. They and I believed you and prayed for you through these long years of injustice. Thanks to your lawyers, fighting and fighting for your release. Wishing you the very best, always.

    • Matthew McKenna says:

      Bring a Civil Suit as soon as Possible. You CAN do it in an American Federal Court.
      We have a lot of Foreign Investments/Bank Accounts.
      Plenty of International suits here. Happens all the time.
      Don’t listen to anyone who does not understand.
      Look at all the Tabloids that you can find, I am sure there are over 50
      or so. Your Right, to get back your Good name.
      Do It !

  38. Alix says:

    I hope you know there are strangers out there who never doubted your innocence regardless of what the Italian CJ system said. Regular ordinary people who could see you’d nothing wrong. This was a huge loss-loss to everybody involved, especially you and the Kirchners. Hopefully, everybody involved can find the necessary strength to move on.

  39. Zo Van Eaton-Meister says:

    Congratulations on your exoneration. I can only imagine what you have gone through. Are you familiar with Saturn returns? I’m not that into astrology myself except for the undeniably powerful pull of Saturn. It takes 28 yrs for it to circle the earth & the effects are profound & positive. Even without the immensity of recent events in your life, most people get refined clarity for what they will & will not tolerate in their lives, especially in terms of interpersonal relationships.
    On another note, are you familiar with Mark Furguson? He was an officer in LA whose life was temporarily destroyed by the OJ Simpson trial. He then turned his misfortune into a very positive force & has devoted his life to the pursuit of justice.
    It sounds like you are doing the same. Very inspiring. Live free or die, great words to live by. Be well! Don’t let the turkeys get you down 😉

  40. Patricia H. says:

    Dear Amanda,

    Finally! The light of truth is written indelibly for all to read. You and Raffaele have passed through the fire and now we want both of you to have a life of peace, happiness, and success. Best wishes always bright artist and to your incredible families, you are the best of the best. Love and continued healing to all for this grave injustice now made right.

  41. Sue O'Connor says:

    My husband are so happy that this terrible ordeal is over for you! We just couldn’t believe our eyes and ears. We never thought you were guilty for one minute – no one else with a brain and common sense did either. We wish you a wonderful life, full of all things good and joyous! God Bless!

  42. It was obvious what the inept police of Perugia and the inept and corrupt Megnini did. I hope you and Raffaele receive much money to repay your debts, and the debts your families incurred because of those cops and Megnini. Vergogna a loro!

  43. Justice prevails…..slowly. Prayers for you and yours

  44. Suzy Shattered says:

    I am so happy for Amanda that the Italian Supreme Court has declared her innocent. I always felt Amanda was innocent due to a complete lack of evidence. When Nancy Grace decided to crucify Amanda in the media, I decided I would never watch her again. She lost many viewers, forever, over this case alone. I hope nobody ever treats Nancy’s daughter, Lucy, the way she treated Amanda.

  45. Peter says:

    All the best to you as you move on in your life.

  46. Thomas Jones says:

    Amanda Knox Is Guilty Her Supporters Are Deluded Amanda’s Dna Is On The Murder Weapon I Rest My Case.

    • Duke says:

      They never found the real murder weapon and Amanda is 100% innocent.So is Raffaele

    • Kate says:

      Your ignorant and “airtight” conclusions about the real truth of this case (not to mention the obviously decent nature of this extremely credible and well-spoken young woman) is not only idiotically stated, but is also incorrect.

      Please get your facts STRAIGHT next time, before you personally rush to indict an innocent human being. Unless you’re the sort of a**hole who enjoys doing that sort of thing.

    • Tom Zupancic says:

      Actually Giuliano Mignini is guilty and his supporters are deluded. The medical examiner determined immediately that the prosecution’s fabricated case was impossible (and got himself fired!). Go figure.

      • Steve White says:

        I assume you mean by stating the state of digestion proved Kercher died at the time Knox and Sollecito were shown to be at his place?
        Yes, that was an aspect of the case that Anne Bremner’s brother, a doctor, was posting about, that got very little press in the US. The firing especially would have been good to report, but very little was done – I feel if you look at the US reporting, even though it eventually exposed the flaws in the case, it was weak, lacking a lot of important facts, being vague about others.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          Could you direct me to any good material about Dr, Lalli’s findings on state of digestion? It’s hard to find info about this.

        • Tom Zupancic says:


          Yes. And obviously the purposeful, irresponsible, and incompetent action of lead investigator Giuliano Mignini to prevent the medical examiner from making an accurate determination of the time of death is inexcusable and indefensible. That said, I am further referring to the finding by the medical examiner that the wounds were made by a small knife such as a pocket knife. (The investigators knew this conclusion BEFORE they randomly pulled the kitchen knife from Raffaele’s kitchen drawer; a knife which could never have inflicted the observed wounds.) These are just a few examples of the incompetence and willful indifference to understanding the truth of Mignini and the people under his direction; reprehensible behavior that has now been publically articulated to the world by the highest legal authority in Italy. It is about time.

  47. Rich Delahanty says:

    Thank God that it’s finally truly over for you! Now have a wonderful life!

  48. Karen Javier says:

    I’ve kept up with your story, read your book & am now so very happy for you that its finally over! Will you return to Italy? God bless you, Rafaelle & your families!!

  49. Anne alesauskas says:

    Free at last!!! I have followed from the beginning and am so happy for you that you have finally been cleared! Peace to you now.

  50. Pingback: Italian Court Threw Out Amanda Knox Murder Conviction Because of ‘Glaring Errors’ and ‘Contradictions’ in Prosecution’s Caseceleb News | celeb News

  51. Shaina says:

    I’m so very glad this is finally, definitively a closed chapter for you. I cannot begin to imagine what it must have been like to live that, with your whole life and liberty up for consideration. It was clear from the start that factors far beyond “justice” were at work during this circus sideshow.

    No one would blame you if you wanted to shut it all out forever, but it’s wonderful that you feel able to turn the horror into something positive by helping other people who have also suffered miscarriages of justice. It speaks to your character, Ms. Knox.

    Especially here in America, people of color particularly are incarcerated for reasons that often have very little to do with actual justice. I hope you will be able to use your public image and power to help change that. I wish you the best of luck and all happiness.

  52. Joe says:

    Amanda, its’ good to hear the Italian courts officially recognize the wrong which comes from imprisoning someone for so long, for them only to be found not guilty. I read through your websites, and while I am struggling to put this to words, I commend the useful resources on your website–particularly the justice section. There are many websites out there purely for self promotion, but yours contains information that serves a greater cause.

  53. Diane Militello says:

    Amanda, you don’t know me and I don’t personally know you but…I could tell you were innocent of any wrongdoing by the way you conducted yourself, and your demeanor through this horrific ordeal. I think I represent many people here in the U.S. and around the world in this sentiment. May you have every future happiness for the rest of your life.

  54. Thor Klamet says:

    It will be interesting to read the English translation, eventually. It does not seem to be a fully rational statement as they apparently did not include the fact that Lumumba was injured by the police and not by Knox. In fact, if I understand correctly, they actually stated the opposite.

    The fact that the Knox/Sollecito case combined the outrageous politics of the Earl Washington case with the obvious coerced confession of the Anthony Yarbough case with the absurd pseudo-science of the Todd Willingham case and was nevertheless taken seriously by so many otherwise-responsible people likewise makes me despair of our ability to be rational.

    I wonder if Diane Sawyer will someday apologize for saying, with a straight face, “Did you kill Meredith Kercher?” The intelligent veteran reporter had access to countless experts and therefore no excuse. She extended objective reporting to a fantasy. It was insulting.

    What truly gives me pause at this moment is the fact that Amanda and Raffaele were actually lucky to serve only 4 years.

    Nevertheless, perhaps we should be happy that the human race might be making slow progress. I will therefore toast Mr. Marasca tonight for his partial rationality and simultaneously thank God for small favors.

    And here’s to you, Amanda. And Raffaele.

  55. Julie Jorgensen says:

    Imagine in your mind that you have about a 100 or so God parents, aunts and uncles, etc. around the world. None of us are truly related to you but we feel we’ve walked through a bit of fire with you and your family. We will always keep an eye out and an ear to the ground to see what you are up to and to hear about how life is treating you. You will forever be in our hearts and we will be there in spirit to cheer you on toward each new adventure. We can’t wait!

    • just a parent says:

      Damn right, sister.

    • tomboy says:

      My sentiments exactly. Hearing Amanda plead for her future life and freedom for ten minutes was heartbreaking. Few innocent people in this world have had to do this with so much at stake.

  56. Sam says:

    Finally, this gross MOJ is somewhat acknowledged and corrected, though the traumatic years you, Raffaele, your families and friends have had to endure and suffer because of many a wrongdoer can never be fully erased. I’m still angry, and want all those responsible for this gross perversion of justice to be dealt with by the heavy hand of the law, but thats a whole other rant for another time.
    You are and always were innocent – hold your head up high and enjoy a soul-deep happy future. All the best lass.

  57. MParent says:

    Lets hope the culprit is found and truly proven guilty for this crime, sorry this gal had to suffer this B.S.

    • Som Nathan says:

      That culprit Rudy Hermann Guede is in jail, though on a reduced sentence instead of life.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      The media (and I mean mainstream as well as tabloid) never focused on this, but we can follow Rudy Guede’s 5 week burglary spree, including rocks, knives, and 2nd story windows, right through Filomena’s window on November 1, where he murdered Meredith, left his bloody prints, his DNA inside of her, cut his knife hand fingers like OJ did, then went out dancing where he spent her money, before fleeing the country.

      Guede is just not profitable.

  58. Tammy White says:

    So very happy and thankful that you were both found completely innocent FINALLY (which so many of us knew right from the start). May you live your life freely and happily now and enjoy it to the fullest! xoxo

  59. Dear Amanda,
    Thank God! I have prayed for your release over and over and kept you in my thoughts and prayers. As a mother of a young man who has spent 20 years in prison for a crime that he did not commit, I felt extra sympathetic and attentive to your case.

    My son, Dustin (Dusty) Turner was convicted of murder 20 years ago and the perpetrator confessed in 2002. Dusty has been found innocent in two courts, but the AG has appealed his case each time. Dusty was involved at the beginning in way that should have given him 1 year in prison, he was an accessory after the fact. He was blind sighted by his Navy SEAL swim buddy when he killed the young lady with my son. Then talked my son into lying for him and helping him hide the evidence. Unfortunately the decision my son made at that point in his life has cost him all of his youth. If you can please go to his website and check out the facts. There is a documentary made on his case and there has been several people that wanted to make a movie, and in May, 2 producers went to meet him. My phone number is (812) 824-4764 and cell is (812) 360-7304. Any and all help given will be appreciated.

  60. Elaine Sauer says:

    Congratulations- there are no words to express the horror of watching you, your boyfriend and your families go through this horrible situation and the loss of your room mate and her poor parent getting brainwashed by these prosecutors.
    Like many I can only wish you all good things. And that this has given you an amazing path going forward.
    May you have enough, be enough in all you do.

    If I can share some parting words from my husband: Stay the hell away from Italy.
    Time to toast your very bright future! Cheers.

  61. Terry smith says:

    Best wishes for you and Rafael ! So very glad for you both! Be well & be Happy! Good Luck!!!! GOD BLESS. From Indiana !

  62. Matt Lemieux says:

    Amanda, I am so happy that the court has formally realized what we knew all along. God bless you.

  63. Leah F. says:

    Hi, Amanda,

    I’m an Orthodox Jew and I wanted to let you know that there is a special blessing we say when we hear good news from which others as well as oneself will benefit. In English, it goes like this: “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who is good and does good.” I just said that blessing on hearing this news/reading your post expressing thanks for the Marasca Report. So glad you have finally been full exonerated. May God bless you with joy and many blessings from Heaven and grant you success wherever you go and in pursuing justice for others who have also been wrongfully accused. I often feel that there is no justice for anyone in this world and that the only justice we can hope to receive is in Olam haBa/the World to Come. But your case has proven me wrong and renewed my hope and my faith in humanity.

    Wishing you the very best from Baltimore, MD,


  64. Benedict Dugger says:

    Congratulations Amanda for this day. I knew your family through your younger sister who played soccer on our team and followed your events from afar, hoping that justice would prevail.

    Best wishes with moving forward and making a difference for others who have been wrongfully accused. It takes a team of caring and steadfast individuals to make that happen.

  65. Amanda, I cannot tell you how happy I am for you!
    At the time of your arrest, I was graduating high school and was late in following your story, but once I did – I was was quick to start digging into details & so absolutely afraid for you. As I read your book, I cried throughout much of it. How you wrote something so horrible for you in such a classy & mature way made me idolize you & your writing. You’ve come out of this with what seems like so much love for the world instead of allowing this to make you bitter. I admire you in many many ways. Thank you for being someone that I can look up to! Your strength & maturity have given me such a different way to look at the world around me.

  66. I was not aware of your story until I was thumbing through the different articles on my IPad. I always enjoy reading exceptional good stories on my IPad . So I come here and the next thing I know I saw some articles and different tidbits about your story. I started reading it and got really intrigued so I wanted to read your whole story..If you could email me back , I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you and God Bless. Linda Hardison

    • Cinnamon says:

      Her book is very worth reading – there’s a new, post-exoneration version out. It would probably tell you everything you want to know.

  67. Wendi says:

    Huge congrats Amanda Knox! I always believed in your innocence…not just your ‘not guilty’ but your INNOCENCE!

  68. Barb Riley says:

    Congratulations! We cannot even begin to imagine all that you have been through! Please know that over the years, I have been praying for you, that God sustain you through this terrible trial and all the years of suffering. Please know that we have lifted you up and asked for peace of mind and heart, protection of your spirit, and a hope for the future. So glad to hear this news!

  69. Gary Knapp says:

    I always felt they had the guilty party in jail the whole time. That they cut a deal with him to persecute you was immoral, particularly by the prosecutor and the sensationalistic media. I sincerely hope you will be able to put this behind you and move on to a fulfilled life. Best wishes.

  70. Darlene says:

    I have kept you and your family in my prayers I am so happy for you all. May God continue to bless 🙂

  71. Debbie Taylor says:

    I have followed your ordeal. My heart has broke for you and your family & then it rejoiced with you. Today I rejoice with you again. I am sure you’ve been told to be gentle with yourself. I am so happy for you and those on your team! I am also impressed with your character. You deserve nothing but the best in your future. God be with you.

  72. Gary Grant says:

    Justice finally! Amanda and Raffaele, trust the loving wisdom of your hearts and have great life. Peace Gary

  73. Diane Miller says:

    I’m so happy for you, Amanda!!! At last the nightmare is finally over & you’re at peace.

  74. Amanda,

    We should also remember judge Hellmann, who acted with such integrity and was punished for it. It’s wonderful that you obtained justice, and I am very glad one of your goals is to help others who have been falsely accused, there are plenty of opportunities.

    Wishing you all the best, and well done for coming through all this with such dignity and even style!


  75. james says:

    Hopefully all the pressures and weight is lifted and you can start a fresh page. Adversity is a great teacher. The future is yours to shape and you are a fighter – put all you have learned to good use.

  76. tara golden says:

    Congratulations, Amanda. I know its been a long nightmare for you and your family. I am glad that this report clears you once and for all. May you find peace and happiness.

  77. Molly Kilfoyle says:

    Amanda, you are vindicated! Thank God. You are a strong person and you will use your strength to help others who have been wrongly accused and convicted. God bless you and your family.

  78. Som Nathan says:

    Amanda, Congratulations to you and your family on your complete exoneration. This trial has made you strong and that shows in your writing. All the VERY BEST for your future.

  79. Pilar says:

    I want to apologize and ask your forgiveness. I was not sure about your implications in this case. May the life give you peace, happiness and may this experience make you a person who change the world in a very positive way. All the best to you!

  80. Richard Grady says:

    An absolute travesty of justice. A real stain on the Italian justice system. And two extremely lucky people literally get away with murder.

    What a twisted world we live in.

  81. Pat says:

    Congratulations, Amanda and Raffaele!

  82. bart says:

    You are very much loved in this world. Enjoy your life!

  83. Shannon D says:

    I am extremely pleased and relieved for you that this nightmare is finally over and your vindication by the Italian court system has come to pass. I followed this case very closely and never once did my confidence in your innocence waiver.
    I imagine that such a trauma has done quite a bit of damage, to your heart, mind, psyche, trust of people and systems, but many people throughout the world believed in your innocence and the miscarriage in the Italian court system. Thankfully it has reached the highest levels and you can fully exhale, I hope. Wishing you everything beautiful the world has to offer…you sure deserve it.
    Your West Coast Ally,


  84. Liz says:

    All the best from South Africa.

    I came to know about this trial quite late – on the day you were released from prison. I became intrigued and read up everything I could. I am shocked by the miscarriage of justice that took so long to set right and must have been so expensive to set right. I’m thrilled that sense and truth prevailed in the end.

    I sat up late in March this year waiting for the verdict and was so pleased to learn the outcome. I don’t know Italian, only enough to have been able to understand the Italian news that flooded Google moments after the final verdict. I can’t imagine how you must have felt, if I think how ecstatic I was in the moment to hear the outcome.

    Well done for fighting and going the distance. I wish you all the best and if anything, this should give you the strength now to know that anything is possible with enough will and that you have what it takes to achieve amazing things in your life. You’ve already proven that! Good luck and all the very best for the future.

  85. Pingback: "Foxy Knoxy" Amanda Knox gets $4m book deal from HarperCollins - Page 48

  86. Barbara Reiner says:

    When I read what the Supreme Court in Italy documented my eyes filled with
    tears. Anyone following the case from the very beginning had to know you
    were both innocent. The hell you had to endure was so unfair. You’ve come
    through it and I just want to be one more person to wish you smooth
    sailing from hereon out. YOu are strong and smart and fortunately come
    from a very supportive family..and everyone can now breath easily.
    God Bless.

  87. Ernesto J. de la Fe, Esq. says:

    Dear Amanda:

    The unanswerable question in my mind is: “How could this all have happened?” and yet errors and injustices like the ordeal that you endured seem to happen every day in one way or another.

    I congratulate you on your strength, endurance, character and vision. I celebrate your freedom and wish you a long, peaceful and honorable life, full of happiness, joy and fulfillment.

    Best regards,
    Ernesto J. de la Fe,
    Miami, Florida

  88. Carla says:

    God Bless you! I had no doubt of your innocence right from the start. Can’t imagine what you’ve all been through!
    My sympathies to the family of your lost friend as well!

  89. barb says:

    Amanda, I never had any doubts that you were innocent.. Everything happens for a reason and it will reveal itself in your future life.. I wish all the best to live a full life of content and happiness.

  90. DJinAL says:

    So incredibly happy for you! As others have said, this is long, long overdue!
    I pray you can put this behind you, (if that is possible) and look to a bright and fulfilling future.

  91. Paul Carr says:

    “More than justice has been done. Right has been done.”
    The Winslow Boy, 1948, London Films, British Lion Films, staring Robert Donat.

    • Rob H says:

      Actually, “The Winslow Boy” IS the Amanda Knox case! Of course, the boy concerned was accused merely of stealing a postal order, but the development of the story, the sensationalist handling of it, the reputations on the line, the sheer wrongfulness of his and his family’s treatment at the hands of relentless authority…..I am sure Amanda would enjoy reading it – and the ending is a real, measurable and thoroughly moral victory for truth and justice.

  92. Mark Scott says:

    The first lucid statements regarding this case to come from the Italian justice system since the Hellmann motivazione.

    Justice only partly served, though.

    The arrest and prosecution of yourself and Raffaele was instigated and sustained in the worst faith imaginable, and the perpetrators have yet to be held accountable. Quite the opposite – the solution to dealing with Mignini was ‘promoting’ him out of the way, and he doubtlessly continues in his affluent (if not lavish), publicly-funded lifestyle, close to a very comfortable retirement.

    Then there are the likes of certain Daily Beast (nee Newsweek) and Daily Mail “journalists” who willingly and gleefully tried to assist him in putting you in jail for decades by repeating what they knew were lies, IOW libelling you (the hack for the Beast hiding behind protestations that those calling her out were “shooting the messenger”).

    Will they now pen articles in which they are duly apologetic, and make an effort to clarify the truth for the readership they mislead for years? That is, of course, a rhetorical question.

  93. Karen Damron says:

    Your dehumanization by the media during your trial enraged me! You were just a girl, powerless against a cruel and seemingly untouchable prosecution team. It is impossible to imagine having been in your shoes during that horrible time. I read almost obsessively every bit of information that was reported, certain in my belief that the irrationality of this prosecution would be seen by the world and that you would be acquitted. It seems that, with the eyes of the world on them, that the prosecutor would be impeccable preparation of his case. Instead, he was like a caricature, allowing the world to form a generalized opinion that Italian law is archaic. I think that most of the citizens of his own country are embarrassed by the way your case was handled.

    This report, at last, puts it to rest. I wish you peace.

  94. Joseph W Bishop says:

    Best wishes Amanda for a great future!

    If you’re interested in miscarriages of justice going forward, here is an important case to look at.

  95. Carol Stott says:

    This is long overdue. I think that you and Raffaele have handled one of the most horrific situations anyone could be asked to deal with – and with a dignity that does you both absolute credit. Well done Amanda. The world has done its worst. Now go enjoy your life.

  96. congratulations and now live the life you deserve. I read that you will help others wrongly accused. Please watch the film target of opportunity and help Dustin Turner a navy seal trainee wrongly convicted and now in jail for life-a tragedy….I heard Dustin story ,met his family and found I couldn’t believe overzealous prosecutors could do what they did ! As a daughter and sister of lawyers I had to get involved.Please hear his story-tragic and help us get Dustin out of the Va jail he sits in….

  97. TS says:

    As something of a “Legal Eagle” myself. It seems very difficult that your innocence, guilt and innocence are not fully questionable. What is the saying “Guilty by Association” ? However you were involved in this terrible situation certainly should be concerning for all of humanity.

    • Som Nathan says:

      @TS- you are misguided like many. The ground reality is different than your perception.

    • DW says:

      She was “involved” in the crime only because she was the girl’s roommate, and the one who returned to the apartment first after the murder occurred. It wasn’t unreasonable of the police to consider whether she might have been involved, but she wasn’t. Rather than a criminal investigation, they conducted a classic witch hunt.

  98. Avrom says:

    Congratulations to you, Amanda, and to Raffaele, for the exoneration from the Court of Cassation, detailed now in their report.

    I wish you much success with the ECHR review of the remaining part of the case, your wrongful conviction for calunnia, and any other redress you seek to pursue.

    I hope that with this injustice over you will enjoy happiness and success!

  99. Hugh Stevens says:

    This is wonderful news indeed: I am so pleased for you and for Raffaele and for your friends and families.

  100. I was so relieved to hear that you will be helping others who are falsely accused. Starbucks is selling a book “Just Mercy” by a lawyer who tries to defend people without good legal protection and who finds so many are wrongfully convicted – all profits go to the Equal Justice Institute. And “The New Jim Crow” is filled with stories of unfair justice.

    I know personally someone who was falsely accused and luckily had good lawyers, was acquitted 100% but risked living 20-75 years in prison. I was drawn into the trial, testified in his defense a high risk to myself. Even with my relatively minimal involvement, I know how difficult it is to come out of that with emotional strength not bitter rage. He said even his friends assumed he must have been involved in some way because why would people make up lies against him. Well, they did. I saw the evidence and read the trial transcript. A year after his trial, he still heard a man at a restaurant talking about how he must have been guilty and just got off with technicalities – he confronted the man, asking him if he had been in the trial and studied all the documents – and if not, why did he think he could judge the case.

    You’ve been through desperate years. It is so easy to let false accusations fill you with justifiable rage and bitterness at betrayals. I hope that focusing a light on others who are falsely accused will bring transformative revenge and free you to live fully. Good luck.

  101. Cheryl says:

    I am pleased that you have finally been found innocent. I have read a lot about the case, and was astounded by all the ways the Italians could violate what most Americans and Canadians consider rights. I hope that this is the end of a terrible journey for you.

    From Vancouver, BC, Canada

  102. Cinnamon says:

    All the best to you, Amanda.

  103. Rolf Allan Helm says:

    Amanda, ti auguro il meglio, e io sto con te ora e per sempre.

  104. Clive Wismayer says:

    Great day. Best wishes and good luck, Amanda.

  105. Nick Green says:

    Newscaster on the radio this morning in the UK: ‘In light of this report, how is it even possible that they were ever convicted?’

    It does make one furious. It’s not as if the facts have changed between now and back then.

    Congratulations once more.

  106. Travis says:

    Hi Amanda, I am so happy for you that what must have been an overwhelming burden having been lifted over you. I have followed your case from the early days and am from Seattle, too. When 24 and traveling in Europe I was unjustly arrested in Spain and released after only 24 hours having slipped a note out to a Spanish doctor friend who called the police chief in Barcelona to get me out instead of deporting me for supposed “vagrancy”. Anyways, though one day is nothing compared to the burden and suffering you have endeavored, it made me feel for you and have prayers for you (and realize the power of the police to take your freedom, I have done my best to never have another encounter with police anywhere and learned how you have no rights in foreign countries). On the day you flew back to Seattle the news people were up in Kerry Park and I knew it was for you. I’m so proud of you for how you seem to be overcoming this Kafkaesque nightmare. I too graduated from the UW (International Studies), and for years have wanted to reach out and let you know that you have supporters who can feel your pain and give you support. I encourage you to continue living in love and moving forward. I just saw an interview with you in the Guardian (actually the most I’ve seen you speak), and was very impressed by how you seem to be coming along. Good luck, and now that your name is cleared, as Bob Marley said, “If your not feeling good, travel wide.” You have to get back on the horse. You are not your past, you will do great things. I believe in you, the attention you got was for the wrong reason, but for some reason you got it, now you get to do something with it.

  107. Len D says:

    Congratulations. It sounds like they got the important items right but they still can’t understand (or don’t want to understand) what a forced confession is. I hope to read an english translation to get a better understanding.

    Good luck with your future and your goals.

  108. My breath stopped for a second when I saw the headline on NBCNews. I didn’t understand what the exact position Italy had decided. When I read the article I was so relieved, I was moved to come in and I say am so grateful. There is so much tragedy in this world. I hope now that this brings you piece.

  109. Stephane G says:

    So much for dietrologia and trashoïds. Congratulations again for your new life, Amanda, and thank you for sharing those moments.

  110. DENVER says:

    Hey Amanda,
    I am so happy for you and Raff!
    In your young age you’ve already done so much to change the world;
    Now you can go back to just being the girl-next door. *smile*
    I’ll share this song with you for a girl that meant so much to me, the meaning is part of your journey in life now too.

  111. JLS1950 says:

    Glad only to see that you are free of this nightmare. Go – live your life with the purpose that God in His Wisdom leads you to. We are blessed merely to see this end.

  112. Alex says:

    Being falsely accused was Alfred Hitchcock’s greatest fear in life, a prevalent theme in his movies.

    Seeing all this unfold in the news over many years was far more torturous than even the most dramatic film.

    I’m glad the nightmare is over, and that Italy’s highest court cleared your name.

  113. Tom Zupancic says:

    Hallelujah! that was all I could think of today. Hallelujah, Hallelujah, Hallelujah!

    So I could not help but link my main man Gregor Handel

  114. Bob Magnetti says:

    Wow! This day finally got here.

    Good luck in all your endeavors which seems to be taking off as evidenced by your writings on this blog.

    Bob Magnetti

  115. Gina says:

    So happy for you, and for your family and friends, Amanda!
    Now, look forward and have a wonderful life!
    xox Gina

  116. Dopre says:

    Oh Amanda!

    I am so very happy for both you and Raff. You both deserve a life of peace and happiness after all the hell you have gone thru.

    Go on and do good work. We will be there cheering you on!


  117. Robin Ripley says:

    I have closely followed your case, Amanda, since the bizarre nonsensical accusations entered the headlines in 2007 and I knew then that the charges against you and Raffaele had no grounds. This day has been along time coming, indeed, and you have been in my thoughts and prayers throughout. I have been impressed with your steadfastness and resilience and your intentions now to work on behalf of the innocent. May you be blessed in this new part of your life that now begins.

    Robin Ripley

  118. C. J. Roffis says:

    Hi Amanda,
    Nobody should ever have to go through what you had to endure. When Jim Lovering explained the intricacies of the case to me a while back, nothing could be clearer than your innocence. I wish you a long and satisfying life.

  119. Matthew says:

    Congratulations. Though I’m sure the final acquittal, itself, took most of the weight from your shoulders, having the highest court in the Italian judiciary validate your innocence in such unambiguous language must have brought you a good deal of relief, as well.

    May you have a prosperous and fulfilled life.

  120. PK says:

    I’m so glad for this news. You deserve a full closure. Best of luck to you, as your life can now move forward with this awful chapter done, settled, closed.

  121. Ken says:

    20 years ago I was wrongly accused of a series of awful crimes and it took 8 very long months and an arson by the plaintiff before the court dismissed all charges as ‘unwarranted and unnecessary prosecution’. It was a far cry from your experience but I completely understand the roller coaster of emotions you have been put through. Very happy for you Amanda.

  122. Helen and I wish you many years of happiness, Amanda.

  123. DW says:

    Amanda, you go!! You are a very impressive person. I am very happy that both you and Rafaelle are able to move on with your lives now. You can’t get back the time you lost, but at least, Italy has fully admitted that you simply had nothing to do with Meredith Kercher’s death. It was an awful thing, but neither you nor Raffaele were ever even remotely implicated. It is good that they’ve admitted not just that you were both innocent, but that the entire thing was effed up beyond all recognition from the first hours of the investigation.
    Congratulations once again.

  124. Kevin says:

    So happy you can move on from this unfortunate tragedy. May Peace and God’s love be the driving force in your life. Finally, I know you are hopeful that somehow Meredith’s family can find justice.

  125. Dan says:

    I have no way to fathom the emotions this must bring. Many of us questioned the evidence and the choices made to prosecute; but you lived the terror of their decisions. Enjoy tomorrow, the next day, and all that is in front of you.

  126. Mary Davin says:

    From day one I firmly believed your innocence and I was truly disgusted with the Italian judicial system that took so many years of your life away. I read your book of memoirs and was further
    angered at your suffering for so many years. You are truly a brave and strong person to have withstood such injustice. I wish you and your family peace and tranquility and a wonderful life ahead!

  127. Jodie Leah says:

    I knew from the first moment I saw you On the TV …within the first days. Your innocence glowed within you. I knew I had to jump scream and yell for the rest of the world to hear that you needed help. …. I am glad I followed my heart. I wish you kids a life filled with Peace Love Prosperity and Happiness…. <3

  128. Amanda says:

    I am also Amanda, and 27. I have followed this story (with what feels like) with you since the beginning. I could never imagine what you’ve been through, especially locked away from your family and your freedom all that time. You and your family are a true inspiration to injustice everywhere. Should we ever cross paths I would be honored to shake your hand.
    Your friend in Atlanta,


  129. Ron G. says:

    Congratulations, Amanda, on your full and final vindication. I think that most of us here in the U.S. knew and understood, from the outset, that the whole case against you was a total load of BS, but it is nice to see that (at least at the top level) the Italians at least have the dignity and integrity to admit that they made a mistake.

    I’m 100% sure that you are doing the Right Thing now to dedicate yourself to the cause of others who have been wrongly accused or convicted. To the extent that you succeed in this, your tribulations will not have been in vain.

    I have what may or may not be an obvious suggestion for where you can start: Julian Assange.

    As I say, most of us… here in the US at least… could smell the fact that the case against you was just plain trumped up from the get go. If you look into it, you’ll see that the exact same smell is emmanating from the Swedish case against Assange. Months after the actual events, TWO different women who he has allegedly wronged, both decide to go and file complains with the same prosecutor’s office on the exact same day? I don’t think so. It does not pass the smell test.

  130. Gary Fox says:

    i cried every time I heard about your story
    Now, I have no reason to cry for you!
    Best wishes & I hope all your dreams come true.

  131. camip14 says:

    Congratulations on this final exoneration. From the first time I read about this it was always my opinion that the Italian court was looking for a scapegoat and they had no concrete evidence of any wrongdoing on your or Raffaele Sollecito’s part. May you now be able to live the life of peace and happiness and simple normalcy that you have been denied for so many years!

  132. Vittorio says:

    We had absolutly no doubts on your innocence, here in Italy. This trial was and remain a shame for our country, thanks to Mignini`s desire to take center stage. The man of lost causes.

    • Thomas says:

      I would hate to have been in her situation.

    • Amber Walker says:

      I read “The Monster of Florence” in 2008, written by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi. They wrote a spellbinding book, trying to find the killer of, if I remember correctly, about 16 people. They were “lovers” and killed in pairs around Tuscany. Anyway, they wrote extensively about what a bungling idiot Mignini is, but also terrifying is how much power he has in Italy. They know he draws on the “Satanism” card, and cults, etc. when he has nothing else to point fingers at. He should be retired immediately. He actually should be put to death, what with all the people he has falsely accused. My thoughts of your innocence were from day one, when I heard who was the prosecutor was. You, and Rafaelle have endured the most horrible of times, and now they are finally over. You can return to what will hopefully be meaningful lives. Take care, Amanda, I’m sure your life will be a success from now on.

  133. Pingback: ‘Stunning Weakness,’ ‘Glaring Errors’ Cited in Amanda Knox Acquittal – | Stylish Gadget Sale

  134. Karen Pruett says:

    May you have many happy years.

  135. Elaine says:

    Dear Amanda,

    My thoughts and prayers have been for you during the last few years. I am so glad that you were finally declared innocent. Know that many people have believed so. May you make a real difference in others lives in the coming years.

    Elaine in Nashville

  136. Steve Moore says:

    Justice at last! Much love from Michelle and Steve.

  137. Alain Destresse says:

    Is there anyway you could sue the Italian jurisdiction?

  138. bestwishesAandR says:

    I’m sure eventually an English language translation will be put up. I did a quick scan with online optical character recognition to convert to text and then Google translate, which is apparently not so great as I’m sure most of you know.

    There are a few points that stand out to me: The most significant is that “all of the allegations/charges” are patently false. There is even a section that seems to say that the media corrupted the right of Amanda and Rafaelle to a fair trial; and it seems to pay particular attention to online media, if I read that correctly. Several sections seem to really take the forensics and the alleged motives to task. I’m really not sure if I read the slander section correctly; sadly, that seems to say it is upheld and there is nothing the European court will/can do about that.

    It’s a lot of very dense legal wording in a language I’m not familiar with, so I won’t try to translate more than that and take this as you will. But I’m glad for A and R that the “media” was held to account in the report. Congratulations seems somehow odd to say; I’ve always believed the statement “justice delayed is justice denied”. Today is certainly better than yesterday.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Yes, they thumbed their noses at the European Court of Human Rights before the trial has even taken place, but it’s important to move that slander topic out of Italian jurisdiction where the behavior of the Italian authorities can be discussed honestly.

      That’s funny. Blaming the media instead of the criminal behavior of police and prosecutors. Instead of blaming professional judges who are duty bound to ignore the media.

      Still I’m grateful for what this court did on March 27th, giving 2 innocents back their lives.

    • Rob H says:

      I’m not sure what the report has said about callunia, but if it has asserted that the ECHR can do nothing about it, then it is wrong. Convention law dictates that the court must find for Amanda, that her trial for callunia was unfair as a result of a lawyerless interrogation and the use of statements obtained at that interrogation to convict her. Such a judgement will compel, eventually, the Italian judiciary to set aside the guilty verdict. Italian law obliges its courts to vacate guilty verdicts upon a finding of an unfair trial at the ECHR (which includes pre charge and pre trial interrogations without benefit of counsel).

    • wcitya says:

      How kind of you to try, thank you.

      Amanda Knox is not to be pitied, anymore. I believe she & Raffaele Sollecito suffered through this ordeal, as did their family & friends because someday she will be there for someone else who is unfortunately caught in the web of injustices of justice! The strength, love & support of those people meant the world to her I’m sure.

      She is strong & smart & she is a survivor.
      May she be blessed in life from here on in.

      I hope that Meredith Kercher’s family can come to some closure as well. But I’m certain not finding her murderer will always weigh heavily on them

      • Cinnamon says:

        Her murderer is Rudy Guede – the only person to leave DNA on Meredith’s body – and he is in prison.

    • Liz says:

      Hopefully we can read a full translation soon. I have some Italian which has left me wondering about some of the points made in the report. The report seems to indicate that a lone assailant was ruled out. It also strongly implies Amanda was at the cottage during the night and washed her hands of blood she came in contact with. It certainly is confusing after the initial criticism of the investigators.

  139. Sarah H says:

    My best wishes to you and Raffaele and both your families. What an ordeal. I’m so happy it’s finished with such a definitive conclusion.

  140. I played a small role with many of your friends and allies, and who fought for your innocence. I am sure I speak for many of us when I say that you many of your supporters who will help on any efforts you make on behalf of other innocent people wrongfully convicted. I am certainly available. I am so glad I to see this end for you and Raffaele and I look forward to seeing what you both do with your lives. You are both people it was well worth supporting. Your basic decency and humanity was obvious to anyone willing to look beyond the sick tabloid stories.

  141. Al Semple says:

    Very well Put Amanda. Al and my buddy julie

  142. Jennifer says:

    Congratulations — It’s about time it’s over for you. I hope you’re able to move forward with a private life.

  143. Norman Chidambaram says:

    Good luck with you life and in the achievement of your goals.

  144. Barry Patrick says:


    I’m really pleased for you that this farce is now finally all over. There is no way you got a fair trial in Italy. Looking at it from what I seen and heard, the prosecution case seemed to smack of desperation, determined to prove you were guilty, come what may. That’s just my view, and I don’t know anywhere near all the facts. Looking at the evidence, I am of the opinion that where I live, a case like that would never have come to trial. Swings and roundabouts is what you might call the trial process.

    I hope that you are able to move on from all of this. I hope that you will be able to help others who have been wrongly accused. I’ll say a prayer tonight before I go to bed. Good luck and my very best wishes to you.

  145. David Weiser says:

    Very happy for you and glad that you can finally live a long and happy and more stressless life.

  146. Don Stimson says:

    Congratulations, Amanda. This has been too long in coming and doesn’t make up for the ordeal you went through, but at least it is a good, forceful repudiation of the prosecutions misguided and wrongful pursuit of you (and Rafael). I wish you the best of luck going forward.

    Don Stimson

  147. Brittany says:

    May the rest of your life be beautiful and enjoyable to the fullest.

  148. Michael Wiesner (Smith) says:

    This day was too long in coming, but it is finally here!

    It may be time to change the cover pic on this site, with the caption “Fully Exonerated.”

  149. Francell says:

    May God Bless you. You can’t change the past, but you are in charge of your future. Be happy and healthy.

  150. Sue Newman says:

    As an avid supporter of your innocence since the first trial, and one who has continued to support you I do believe in the power of prayer. May you find peace and happiness as you move forward in your life and become a witness for others wrongly convicted. God bless you and your family!

  151. Marla Singer says:

    Congratulations, Amanda! You and Raffaele have come through the nightmare now. Best wishes from Baltimore 🙂

    Will you help us be able to read this at some point? I’ve spent the last 4 or 5 hours with my 25-lb dictionary and an auto-translated version, but it is slow going!

  152. James Casey says:

    The Italian Supreme Courts full exoneration of Amanda Knox is OUTSTANDING news!

    Any chance she’ll return to Italy to gain the closure of being a FREE, Visiting American there?

    Jim Casey

    • Brian says:

      For Amanda to revisit Italy any time in the next few years would be too risky. There are still enough Italians who believe in her guilt, and too many police who are angry at being humiliated by her exoneration.

      All it would take would be one person to plant some drugs in her hotel room and tip off the police, and “here we go again!”

      I hate to have to say it, but — be careful and circumspect, Amanda.

  153. Joan James says:

    I cannot tell you, Amanda, how delighted I am to hear the words “I will now begin the rest of my life…”!

    In November of 2007, we sat in a hotel room in Siena, Italy after a long day of sightseeing, sipping a glass of wine and very absent-mindedly watching an Italian TV news program. We were both too tired right at that moment to get up and switch to CNN Int’l even tho neither of us speaks a word of Italian. I don’t know what exactly got my attention…possibly your expression which my partner described as “totally traumatized”. That was my introduction to you and Raffaele. We weren’t even sure what had happened but we knew it was bad. In the couple of days we remained in Italy we managed to put some of it together and we were both shocked and confused. I got a tabloid from the kiosk in Malpensa Airport before we boarded our flight home.

    There are so many times when I think how close were to you when this all came down and even tho I know there’s probably nothing we could have done, it still nags me, so the fact that the end is finally here is particularly good news for me.

    Anyway, to make a long comment short, we just wanted to let you know that we have always supported you and Raffaele and are so very, very happy and relieved that you are now finally free. You have such passion and such a talent for expression. We are enjoying your articles and look forward to more of them. We are particularly intrigued by where your life path will take you from here as we both believe you will do something extremely interesting and very likely important (no pressure here, huh :o}.

    Again, our best wishes to you. Have the most profoundly wonderful life you possibly can!

    Joan James & Gibb Sober

Comments are closed.