Mourning Meredith

Ten years ago tonight, my friend was raped and murdered by a burglar when she was home alone in the apartment we shared while studying abroad in Perugia, Italy.

When I look back on my memories of Meredith, what I find are beautiful, banal moments we shared in the weeks we lived side-by-side. I remember when we trudged home from the grocery store together, taking turns lugging those heavy four-packs of two-liter water bottles uphill, dodging cars speeding around the tight street corners. I remember sunbathing on the terrace, her reading a mystery novel while I practiced “Hey Ya” on the guitar. I remember sipping espresso together after class while Laura and Filomena, our Italian roommates, watched soap operas. Meredith complimented me for showing restraint, eating no more than two cookies with my coffee. She said she wouldn’t be able to stop herself from eating the whole bag. Once, while out on a walk, I discovered a hole-in-the-wall vintage store, and ran home to tell Meredith about it. We went back together and she bought a sparkly silver dress from the 60s and said she wanted to wear it for New Years back home. I remember when she handed me her camera and asked me to take a picture of her by her bedroom window because she wanted to show her family the incredible view of the valley below. I remember that I loved her accent. I remember the time I wanted to get dressed up and she happily loaned me a pair of her tights, like a big sister. And I remember the last time I saw her, ten years ago today, slinging her purse over her shoulder and waving goodbye to me on her way out to meet up with her British friends.

All these memories feel both very close and very distant. Distant, because I have to dig through a decade of suffering just to reach them. My memories of Meredith are buried beneath the horrific autopsy photos and crime scene footage I saw, the slurs I was called, the death threats I received (and still receive), the false accusations I fought, the years of wrongful imprisonment I endured, the multiple trials and slanderous headlines that juxtaposed our names and faces, unfairly interlocking her death with my identity.

But despite all this, these memories still feel very close, in part because Meredith was my closest friend in a new and exciting time in our lives. But I think it’s also because I’ve never been allowed to mourn her.

There are some people who believe I have no right to mourn Meredith. They believe that I had something to do with her murder—I didn’t—or that Meredith has been forgotten in the wake of my own struggle for justice—she hasn’t. Either way, they feel that Meredith and I are inextricably linked, so it’s simply not fair that I haven’t lost everything, as she has. They are wrong.

This day of mourning belongs to everyone whose lives Meredith touched. And certainly, there are many people who loved and knew Meredith far better than I did. But something Meredith’s friends, family, supporters, and I all have in common is that Meredith’s death changed our lives. It opened our eyes to the terrible fact that, sometimes, innocent people suffer, that their lives can be taken away from them in an instant. We are all driven to do something about it—to speak out against unrepentant killers or incompetent and cruel prosecutors—even though no one can ever give Meredith back her life, or me the years of life I lost to wrongful imprisonment.

I hate it that my memories of her are buried beneath the years of suffering Raffaele and I endured in the wake of her murder. And it’s depressing to know that mourning her comes at the price of being criticized for anything I say or don’t say today. But most depressing of all is that Meredith isn’t here, when she deserves to be. She is painfully missed by everyone who loved her. I miss her, and I’m grateful for the memories of our time together.

Published by the West Seattle Herald 11/01/2017.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

129 Responses to Mourning Meredith

  1. SupremeDecsion says:

    Couldnt help relating the outcome in Italy’s SC as compared to this weeks SCOTUS verdict of denied for the MAM imprisoned.
    How would the Italy case have ended with a Guilty decision by the Italy SC?
    Its scary how the decision can go either way.

    Reading Candace Dempseys Murder in Italy it ends with the guilty trial as it was written so early in the development of the case which adds a eerie ending.
    The MAM case ends without a happy ending. It seems and a SC that probably didnt have time to watch the 3hr interrogation of a mentally impaired juvenile. The Italy case didnt allow the video tape to be known or wasnt even recorded “due to budget cuts” the lying Prosecutor stumbled with words to the reporter. The MAM at least offered a video tape.

    The SC decisions were different of the two cases though.

    Seems Interrogation Reform could be so easily improved and without major overhaul. Mandatory recordings, mandatory time limits/breaks, mandatory legal and/or family present. This is nothing too much to ask is it?
    Obviously video tapes alone dont mean much if no one has time to watch them.

    Amanda, you and Raffaele and pappa Curt Knox and all the family….. got the good decision in the end. Many followed for the near decade to get to the SC decision.

    The MAM kid, who it seems was coerced in the interrogation, didn’t get the good ending. His ending was similar to the Murder In Italy book that ended with Judge Massei. The MAM judges not agreeing, 4- 3 votes, 3 to -4 etc.. nothing is clear but the verdict by the SC.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Audiences saw the interrogation of Brendan Dassey in the Netflix documentary “Making a Murderer”. Videos of his entire 4-hour total interrogation are available:

      You can watch this mentally slow kid trying to please his interrogators by continually guessing at what they want him to say. He has no clue how the murder went down. The frustrated detectives keep contaminating the sessions with more and more inside information.

      The Reid interrogation manual claims that looking down and averting eye contact, like Dassey does in the videos, is an indication of guilt. This is junk profiling. Dassey’s baseline behavior is the same as in the video. It’s what he does all the time. I think it was Steve Moore who gave the example that if Richard Simmons behaved like Brendan Dassey during an interrogation, THEN it would be suspicious because it would be so far off from Simmon’s baseline behavior. Even then, suspicions are not enough to warrant a conclusion.

      The Dassey “confession” details are an impossible scenario for this murder. We end up with the alternate reality of the state claiming different crime theories in the Avery and Dassey trials for the same murder.

      It is unconscionable that Wisconsin authorities will not admit their mistakes, the 7th Federal Circuit Court did not correct them, and the Supreme Court turned their backs on this high profile injustice that the entire world is aware of. Protecting reputations and the system status quo is more important to them than discovering the truth. In reality, the reputation of our justice system is further tarnished.

      There are detectives with integrity who, when they started videotaping interrogations, were shocked to witness themselves contaminating the session with inside information as they watched the playback. They didn’t realize they were doing it. They are open to improving their procedures. The Reid method is finally losing ground.

  2. William says:

    Good luck to Roy Moore today. Looks like he may win. If so, in the Senate he will be a major the voice for protection of young women: from abortionists’ knives.

    • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

      @William. I don’t have an off switch when I see a wrong that is correctable, especially when it is preventable. There are many who would call this a flaw. Long ago, even without the benefit of religions incursion or peer pressure, I admitted that I am prone to flaws.

      Do with my effort as you see fit. I would encourage you to be yourself, no differently then I would encourage it of Marie. But I like her more then I like you. She is more articulate and protective of a narrative, even under the duress of severe complexity that has seen more flaws then one could shake a stick at. If I had to choose between you and her, my choice would be her, no matter how cute you might be. Amanda Marie has proven to me that she’s more careful with a narrative under incomprehensible pressures, while your narratives are spasmodic. The best thing is that we are real, even if it’s wrong. As long as we accept that we are flawed, a conversation is still a viable option. We will get through this. If we don’t, well, then that’s our fault, isn’t it.

      • William Benjamin says:

        This post was heavily edited without my permission. William Benjamin, Quixotic1, Just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk, just-a-guy-out-walk-for-a-walk, an-innocent-bystander and some others I don’t remember is now just-a-spectator-only. Good luck Amanda Marie.

  3. an innocent bystander says:

    I was introduced to the name Meredith Kercher in a substantive way in the spring of 2013. I will never know her nor would I have ever known her. And from what I’ve read about her aside from the enormous degrees of chaotic commentaries, I believe if I had ever met her that I would have liked her. What’s not to like.

    But nagging on is this reality that I shouldn’t know her name. Over the years I’ve poured through so much comment written on her behalf, most if not all unauthorized to use her name, in a pig pile of excuses to serve personal agenda’s. But I admit as an axiom that I shouldn’t know her name. But now that I do I will never forget it.

    But because I do know her name and because I published opinion, I can never travel to Italy ever because I broke the law. Starting in late 2013 I willingly and with forethought impugned the integrity of certain Italian officials connected to Meredith’s case. I did this several times over and over again, knowing full well that they are protected by such opinionated speech. Even though I was in the United States when I did it doesn’t matter. I can never travel to Italy ever.

    Not because I might be charged, because the odds of this are infinitesimal. It’s because I am guilty. It’s the only nation in the Europe where I am guilty of having had committed a crime. It’s the only nation in the world where I am guilty of having had committed a crime.

    If I had the means and less fear of commercial airliners, I would have like to have seen Florence, Rome and Venice. As the birthplace of this western world that I love, this is such an irony. I can’t even go to the Vatican because I can’t get there without being a criminal on my way there. A criminal in my own conscience.

    So I have regrets but I’d do again. Because right is right and wrong is wrong. That’s just a matter of conscience.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      A quote from Doug Preston describing his Italian friend trying to console him:

      “Niccolò, for God’s sake, they accused me of being an accessory to murder, they said I planted a gun at that villa, they’ve indicted me for making false statements and obstruction of justice! They threatened me if I ever return to Italy. And you tell me I shouldn’t be concerned?”
      “My dear Douglas, anyone who is anybody in Italy is indagato. I offer you my congratulations on becoming a genuine Italian.”

      • an innocent bystander says:

        Besides this feeling of guilt I have, I also have a bit of envy. Since interactions with their government is predetermined, it’s one less thing to worry about.

  4. Soletrader4u says:

    Very odd that you make all these claims about “memories” and “how close you were” and yet in the four days after the murder of Meredith Kercher you made a conscious decision to tear out and destroy all your diary entries for the full month of October preceding the crime. She was murdered and you decide to destroy all written records you had of your time with her !!!

    Your claimed innocence is precariously balanced on a pinnacle of lies. Why are you unable to produce any substantiated account of anything?

    • Tom Mininger says:

      “…the four days after the murder of Meredith Kercher you made a conscious decision to tear out and destroy all your diary entries for the full month of October preceding the crime. ”

      Complete and utter nonsense. It’s a feedback loop of guilter fantasies.

    • jerry pdx says:

      Mr. (or Ms.) Soletrader, please send a link to your source of information. Sigh…I ask this question and have observed others asking it also but you guilters almost invariably fail to supply anything of substance.

  5. William says:

    California recently freed an illegal alien Mexican for murdering a young woman in San Francisco. Texas recently executed a an illegal alien Mexican for murdering a young woman in Harlingen Texas. Kudos Texas.

      • Tom Zupancic says:

        Perhaps a question worth addressing is why is American society so unusually violent in comparison to other ‘advanced societies’?

      • William says:

        Tom, I just saw were the POS cop in Mesa AZ (I think) who executed Daniel Shaver, walked. I suspect he’ll go back on the job. Too bad. The vid is available of this unjustified murder by cop.

        Murder convictions were in order for both police officers. If you watch the video you can see them with badges and guns violated arrest procedures. The process is for one officer to hold the weapon out and available while the other approaches, cuffs, and searches the subjects. Of course this is difficult to do if you’re carrying a battle rifle, the AR. Why the infantry rifle? Were they expecting the Wehrmacht?

        Police training teaches cops to use a stern calm voice to lower the tension of the situation. The unfortunate victim here did his best to comply but to no avail because of the out of control shouting by the want-to-be warriors. These two were intent on torture, and I suspect, they were trying to impress the girl concerning what big brave men they were.

        At least the shooter here had to beg and cry for his life at trial. I suspect these two were high and pumped on steroids which causes overly aggressive behavior like one can see in players in the NFL.

    • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

      Interesting. So they freed the Mexican because he murdered the woman. What was he in jail for before he did the murder to get free?

      • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

        William. I believe that you will miscalculate where I’m going to go next. I’m not making light of people dying. You are. A heads up. You respond to protect your position and you lose. Your position is indefensible.

        • William says:

          Just because you assert something is so, does not make it so. How about some basic facts.

          The San Fran illegal Mexican was held by police on a dope charge and that’s the reason he was not turned over to ICE. Later the prosecutor dropped the dope charge but failed to inform immigration police and instead freed the felon onto the streets in compliance with ‘illegal alien Mexicans get out of jail free’ policy of San Fransisco. The Mexican then murdered Kate. That’s basic.

          “I’m not making light of people dying. You are. ” How so? Because I called for justice for Kate? Because I gave kudos to Texas for executing an illegal Alien who murdered a young woman in that state? It’s the law on murder one in Texas which officials followed.

          • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

            Because Kate Steinle was not murdered. She died accidentally.

            You used her death to fulfill an agenda that gave you a sense of empowerment and some form of pleasure that I will never understand. The circumstances of her death were more important then the facts of her death. You bore false witness about Kate Steinle. Whether by intent or omission how’s that not making light of her death.

            * * * * *

            That’s the best I had. But not to be left out of the whole false premise thing, I embedded a false one. Does anybody really ever win these things? Now if you will excuse me I’m going to talk about you behind your back.

            To be clear I am uncomfortable with the ‘theater’ aspects that follows Amanda Knox around like a puppy dog. Or the inverse as the case might be from time to time. I don’t know who this William person is or if William is genuine or contrived. But I must be cognizant that he might be contrived. While many caring observers have warned that Amanda does not know “these” people, I would submit that this William is not a “these” if correct context were an employable individual.

            Even if he was a “these”, I believe the assumption that Amanda doesn’t know that type is rather ignorant comment about what is being advocated for concerning Amanda. I for one believe that Amanda has had a fairly comprehensive schooling on a variety of aspects that “these” “those” people are capable of.

            This assumes that one might have been paying some attention to what was being advocated for, or at least had some ability to memorize it. Because I think if William up there was some self serving Italian prosecutor, with a codified right to omnipotence, within the system obligated to protect that, William Whatever up there would be a feather weight in comparison.

            “Us” and “we” can be words of the greatest comfort as well as the most self destructive words imaginable. I’m very sensitive to how these are used and if it’s fair use. And that’s why I’ve been called a liberal more times then I can count, a word I’ve never called myself.

          • Mark Saha says:

            He was acquitted because the jury found the tragic incident was not murder– it lacked intent. The defense argued that he found the gun under a bench where he was sitting, and while examining it, the gun went off. The shot struck the sidewalk and ricocheted into the back of the young woman. He was found guilty of being in possession of a firearm because he is a convicted felon. There was no violence involved in any of his previous convictions, which were all drug related.

        • William says:

          You never addressed the key issue, the San Fransisco policy of protecting illegal alien Mexicans from deportation. Kate died because of this unlawful act by the city and county.

          At minimum involuntary homicide was justified by the evidence and likely first degree murder as well could have been rendered.

          • jerry says:

            You said the things I was going to say Mark, there’s a lot of rhetoric about this case and outrage at the acquittal but few people realize it was a ricochet shot that killed Katie and that Zarate never aimed the gun at her. I’m of two minds on it, I realize he did not intend to kill Katie and understand he is innocent of 1st degree murder . However, a straight up acquittal is outrageous. We had an accidental shooting in my city recently, a man was cleaning his gun and it accidentally discharged striking and killing a young woman who lived next door. He was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to several years in prison, and he was an American citizen. There was a lot of outrage that his stupid act resulted in the death of a young woman, and it was perfectly justified. He was stupid and didn’t intend to kill anyone but acted recklessly with a deadly weapon. If you do something like that then there should be consequences, irregardless of your legal status. I don’t understand why Garcia Zarate didn’t get some kind of conviction for a lesser offense than murder one, manslaughter at least. I don’t live in California and don’t know the laws there but if they acquit people for this kind of act, whether there was intent or not, then they should be changed. Playing around with a gun on a pier with people about is a dangerous thing to do and Garcia Zarate should have known better. He should spend years in prison then deported and if he ever returns then a longer period in prison.

            I can’t help but suspect the judge/jury felt a need for a straight up acquittal because of the immigration controversy swirling around the case, if they convicted him of anything they may have felt like they weren’t being PC and aligning with the Trump/anti immigrant crowd. The fear of being labeled “racist” can have a powerful effect on people. That’s just conjecture on my part but I still wonder.

          • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

            It wasn’t addressed because it wasn’t the subject. One ricocheted bullet causing a death was the subject.

          • William says:

            Jerry, I agree with most of your comment. The prosecutor went for murder one which in this case did not require malice aforethought.

            In the past I never questioned jury decisions but the OJ trial changed that for me.

            Juries sometimes get it wrong and I think Amanda would agree.

            A comment I think is on target with the fiasco of this case is offered:

            “In any case the Sig is designed to avoid accidental discharges. If the trial had been in Texas most men on the jury would have known that. In San Francisco many fewer would have realized just how improbable Zarate’s story was.

            I actually wondered if the prosecutor even bothered to investigate this and call in a firearms expert.

            A modern semi-auto accidentally going off? Give me a break.

            It simply doesn’t happen.

            Aiming towards a crowd and pulling the trigger is murder. It doesn’t matter if the bullet bounces off the ground.

            Manslaughter would be target shooting carelessly without knowing that people are on the other side of a fence. But he didn’t even get that.

            I bet it is a combination of a weak prosecutor and a jury eager to stick it to Trump. Sickening but I can’t say I am that surprised given the politics. SF tolerates crime and illegals while blaming White America for all their problems. Liberals value immigrants over White women and they naturally resent any sort of “privilege” which in this case would be beauty.”

          • Tom Mininger says:

            And I can’t help but suspect that the prosecution’s incompetent approach was influenced by the political rhetoric swirling around this case, but it is nothing more than suspicion on my part.

          • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

            @William. “Aiming towards a crowd and pulling the trigger is murder. It doesn’t matter if the bullet bounces off the ground.”

            This statement is a fallacy that through pure inference implies that a shooter aiming into a crowd is comparable to the San Francisco case under discussion. It just isn’t. The whole only one shot fired thing is not comparable to what happened in Las Vegas.

            Oh how I would love to live in that world where if it’s a bullet under your control and it causes a death, tag your it. I’m not a gun owner and so I have no reason to own bullets so I’m good with it. But I would not want to live in the slippery slope world of that way of thinking. We have agreed as a society that measurable intent must be taken into account. People are killed by acts of absolute intent, recklessness, negligence, and stupidity.

            Bonney Lake man who shot at car thief is sentenced for death of neighbor he hit instead.

            Ask yourself if this Washington State idiot should be put to death or serve life in prison. At minimum, after he serves his 8 years, I wouldn’t be against deporting him to Texas, but that would be illegal and against his constitutional right to be an idiot in any state he chooses.

            There is a slippery slope to making every one of these acts a 1st degree murder. We would need to build more storage room to house anybody who for any reason killed somebody. And since a person cannot waive their right to die accidentally, there would be less people willing to be police, anesthesiologists, doctors, ski resort operators, automobiles manufacturers, traffic control manufactures, grocery store owners or vending machines manufactures. All of these and more have caused accidental deaths that were many times avoidable, yet not intentional.

            Basically, if you were to get everything you wanted, the result would be anarchy. I for one am against that idea.

  6. Kaare says:

    To let things go. It is natural. Irgendwann muss man die Dinge auch mal ziehen lassen. Es ist ein natürlicher Vorgang.

    • Tom Zupancic says:


      You wrote. “Irgendwann muss man die Dinge auch mal ziehen lassen. Es ist ein natürlicher Vorgang.” “At some point you have to let things go. It is a natural process.”

      True wisdom.

      But how does one do so while existing in an ongoing pale of injustice… ? That is the hard part.

      • Tom Mininger says:

        I think mental health depends on compartmentalizing. Not letting anyone compartment of the mind metastasize into obsession. This is a big challenge for all of us. It’s even bigger for combat veterans (including exonerees). I wish Amanda and her fellow exonerees the increasing ability to cocoon themselves while in their compartments of family, partner, friends, counselors, the arts, sports, stories…

    • an innocent bystander says:

      “At some point you have to let things go. It is a natural process.”

      “Stick your head in the sand and it will all go away.”

      Many have wished Amanda would take this advise. But none more significant or long term as some Italian officials of some notoriety.

  7. Tom Zupancic says:

    What is the travesty that this case really about? The authorities being ashamed of themselves and reacting to protect their authority? … powerful people using sensationalist journalism to promote a self-serving agenda?

    Sure, they did that, but why drag the victim, Meredith Kercher, down too? … and why constantly deny the consolation of justice to her family and friends? … and why launch an all-out brutal assault on her innocent roommate?

    Why not simply solve the crime and prosecute the perp?

    While ego and authority were clearly factors here, it would appear that a different, unacknowledged social reality was central to not just this case, but to many, many others.

    Misogeny (dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women)

    Considering for a moment the emotional impact on a young female exchange student who has suddenly experienced finding her friend and roommate brutally murdered in their shared residence. What, exactly, please… does ‘normal’ look like?

    This sort of treatment of women by the police is ubiquitous

    “Police detectives treated small inconsistencies in her account — common among trauma victims — as major discrepancies. Instead of interviewing her as a victim, they interrogated her as a suspect.”

    “When Sexual Assault Victims Are Charged With Lying”

    What an appropriate response should have been:

    ”victims get immediate help from specially trained advocates”; “The police should investigate thoroughly while reserving judgment. Evidence trumps assumptions. The police should be wary of stereotypes”

    “police should not measure credibility by a victim’s response. Police should not interrogate victims. They should listen.”

    • an innocent bystander says:

      In my opinion…

      Opportunity. To what agenda doesn’t matter. An opportunity to assert whatever is an elixir that needs no objective except for it’s assertion. Opportunity to do wrong opens up possibilities to be rendered later amongst many viable choices; with only one caveat. It must be wrong. Because if it was right, well there’s only one of those types.

    • ATronetti says:

      Maybe it is a culture, among these particular investigators, of “Madonna/Whore.” Ms. Knox was not the “madonna,” and, worse, she was not ashamed of being a normal American woman. So, these investigators, and later, the media, seized upon the sensational storyline. That storyline drove the investigation, not the other way around. Most crimes are pretty simple (serial killers being the exception), and the investigation is straightforward (serial killers being the exception). Criminals are not experts in covering up their crimes, and leave evidence everywhere. In this case, the criminal responsible for the murder left evidence everywhere, not even bothering to clean up.

  8. Mark Saha says:

    Just passing along a song for you …

    My Sister Rose

    Lyrics by Jerome Augustyniak and Natalie Merchant
    Performed by 10,000 Maniacs

    Big plans are being made for my sister’s wedding day.
    We’ll have a ball at the Sons of Roma Hall.
    Family, friends, come one and all.
    First the best man makes a toast to Rocky and my sister Rose,
    “A life of years free of tears. Bottoms up and lots of luck!”

    Polka, tango everyone, cha-cha, mambo Rose and Rock alone.
    Frankie Rizzo and his Combo play on.

    Single girls all hear the call from a crowd at the back wall
    and when the bouquet flies each one tries to be the best catch and next year’s bride.
    Uncle Sam and Uncle Joe take their places in the row.
    They’re standing by side to side for dollar dances with the bride.

    Polka, tango everyone, cha-cha, mambo, Rose and Rock alone.
    “He’s a banker, she’ll be well off now.”

    Sister Rose take your mother’s place.
    Trade your home and your maiden name.
    For a list of vows and a veil of lace made a wife of you today.

    Now they cut the five tier cake, “That Colucci, he can bake.”
    A frosted tower of sugar and flour for the couple of the hour.

    Polka, tango everyone, cha-cha, mambo Rose and Rock alone.
    She was born to wear that gown.

    Sister Rose take your mother’s place.
    Trade your home and your maiden name.
    For a list of vows and a veil of lace made a wife of you today,
    but you’re my sister Rose the same.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      but you’re my sister Rose the same

    • William says:

      Excellent sentiment Mark especially the last four lines.

      Kudos to pretty Deanna and her marriage. May it be a stable and happy one for her and blessed with lots of beautiful kids.

      Charlie Manson (1934–2017)

      Well Charlie, it’s been over three days now and nobody has seen you. Where are you? You said you were Jesus Christ. Were you a fake too? Damn!!!!!

      In Remembrance:

      Well, Charlie Manson’s dead,
      just like poor Sharon Tate.
      Upon his wrinkled head
      above his eyes, the fate,

      of his tattooed Swastika
      is certain, after so,
      so many years. The shiksa,
      pale as November snow,

      with her stab wounds still red,
      has slammed the gates of hell.
      And no, we’ll not forget
      for we recall her well.

      Old Charlie Manson was
      no Krakow Ghetto Jew.
      Deranged, demonic laws
      left him with a loose screw.

      He’d rotted in his cell
      and read Saint Paul per chance,
      while Roman lived to tell,
      though fugitive in France.

      Dearest Samantha Jane,
      sodomized at thirteen,
      forgotten is your pain,
      the venom of our spleen.

      Mulholland Drive

      “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”
      —Sigmund Fraud

      No, it was neither Clinton
      nor Bleistein with a cigar,
      but Weinstein at the bar,
      wanking for Quentin,

      his shiksa catatonic,
      her mouth agape in shock
      at the sight of his shmok.
      Cynical, ironic,

      the movie-maker groaned
      and shot his chosen load,
      thinking it’s what’s owed
      to pale starlets bought and owned.

      Was he misunderstood,
      both horny and Semitic?
      Or was it the esthetic
      of moguls in Hollywood?

      Who cares his deeds were vile?
      In therapeutic heaven
      with bugger-them-all Kevin,
      never will he stand trial.

      This month on November 10, 1975 the ore ship Edmund Fitzgerald went down on Lake Superior with loss of all officers and men.

      • Tom Zupancic says:

        In case anyone is curious…

        Leo Yankovitch Charlie Manson (1934–2017)

        About Counter-Currents Publishing
        North American New Right

      • Tom Zupancic says:



        And feeling…

        As a scientist I couldn’t help but look at ‘the data’ regarding ‘William’.

        Turns out, his comments on this blog began in October, 2016, in response to your blog post on International Wrongful Conviction Day. October 5, 2016 at 19:22.

        What struck me was the immediate, insightful and impassioned response by ‘just a parent’:

        “Amanda: Please, please exclude any further posts from William. I grew up in Mississippi in the 1960s and graduated Ole Miss and have lived in the South all my life. I know his type well and though William is a bit more literate than most, he is an irredeemable bigot. Do not give him a forum, not here. This is a place of some refinement, your place, and his hate will befoul it beyond repair. Please trust me in this, whatever grace of expression or lyricism he may spread across the page, hate is his purpose, and he never rests in his ambition to poke it into every hole he possibly can. There are plenty of other places we can get that; your blog speaks to our better natures; debate yes, but not hate.”

        Truly, your blog speaks to our better natures.

        Not to hate. Looking back at multiple posts by ‘William’, I would have to agree that ‘just a parent’ was exactly right.

        Tom Z

        • an innocent bystander says:

          Hey dude. It’s not my place but I think your wiggin out. Take a break. Go out for a nice walk in a nearby place that’s beautiful. Inhale a few times. This blog is moderated and what I think you forgot, is that objection to the moderator’s choices is objection to the moderator that you were supporting.

          It’s Amanda’s blog as near as we are capable to assuming. But if it isn’t under her 1000% control, I’ll match you to buy her one that is. Deal?

          • Tom Zupancic says:

            I would defer to Amanda on this. She knows and understands well about being misrepresented on the internet.

            Nevertheless, it would appear, actually, that you are the one ‘wiggin out’ here: “Wiggin Out is thinking you see or hear something that’s not real.”

            “when some one has smoked weed and they start to freak out!!!!”

          • jerry pdx says:

            While I probably disagree with William much of the time, sometimes vehemently, I fully respect his right to express what he feels. Nothing gives a blog or any other web news site life and vitality like an unrestricted and uncensored readers comment field. Yes, there are trolls that post mindless obscene drivel but I can live with that and it’s not what is driving this lemming like rush to eliminate or heavily censor reader comment fields. It’s purely ideological no matter what the media policy drones might tell you, and there are two things pushing this: Firstly, the behind the scenes thread administrators are primarily coming from a PC ideology so they want to eliminate is anything that shatters their neat tidy politically correct narratives . Secondly, the powers that be are profoundly embarrassed when readers point out media shortcomings, particularly the hypocrisy and double standards centered around subjects like race and immigration, this has resulted in major media outlets like MSN and CNN to eliminate reader comments. Interestingly, it’s the more liberal oriented new outlets that are eliminating comments, the more conservative oriented ones like Fox News still allow them, which is why I now usually only go to news sites that have unrestricted comment sections. I look at the headlines and scan through the stories then ask myself “What’s really going on?”, then go to the reader comments and find out.
            Amanda’s blog is moderated by her so I’m not sure what, if anything, she is not allowing to be published but the fact that she does allow at least some guilters to post their mindless drivel is something to be respected. It’s the primary reason I bother to come here, a comment field with a bunch of people sitting around agreeing with each other and kissing Amanda’s ass would be the equivalent of watching paint dry.

          • Tom Zupancic says:

            Before there were Millennials, before there was GenX, before there were Baby Boomers, before there was ‘the Greatest Generation’, … there was ‘the lost generation’.

            ‘Lost’ sounds about right, it sounds so familiar. Illusions had been irrevocably shattered. This shit was real. Those ideals we thought we loved? Not so much, it turns out. That was history back then. Is a lost generation v2.0 what we are creating now?

        • just a parent says:


          Yours here added to what has been uncovered since those words were written plus the December 8 “contrived” speculations of just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk have me hoping Amanda before long will post something hotly topical, as it all seems to maybe comprise into firmament an exceptionally provocative notion about which I would much like to orbit and probe. In the wake of “Mourning Meredith” is not the place for it, though, however portentous.

          • Tom Zupancic says:

            Just a parent,

            I agree… this is not the place… the memoriam for Meredith.


            Apparently for some, nothing is sacred.

          • Tom Zupancic says:

            Just a parent,

            As you wrote, if it transpires that Amanda does indeed chose to “comprise into firmament an exceptionally provocative notion about which I would much like to orbit and probe”, it would appear to be likely that I would be fascinated to read and understand what you would write.

    • Tom Zupancic says:

      Thanks Mark,

      so just passin along an old poem

      e e Cummings I Will Wade Out

      i will wade out
      till my thighs are steeped in burning flowers
      I will take the sun in my mouth
      and leap into the ripe air
      with closed eyes
      to dash against darkness
      in the sleeping curves of my body
      Shall enter fingers of smooth mastery
      with chasteness of sea-girls
      Will i complete the mystery
      of my flesh
      I will rise
      After a thousand years
      And set my teeth in the silver of the moon

      • Tom Zupancic says:

        the posts here reminded me of the arts and West Seattle so i added ee cummings too

        Why not? (like duh…)

        A memoriam; Alive with closed eyes to dash against darkness

        Wading out… to rise…

        like Waters, Reds, Writings, Wraps


        • Tom Zupancic says:

          i will wade out…

          “It was a period wrought with pain, grief, isolation, and fear; a period of twisted plots, distorted characters, and overwhelming forces.

          Dawndra’s portraits respond through four phases of distinct aesthetic scenes which together tell an overarching story.

          Waters, Reds, Writings, and Wraps

          Water … I’m bracing myself against the elements

          Dawndra intended the ladder to symbolise a pyre, comparing the treatment of me to witch-burning

          The Reds are crisp and colorful images which rely on symbolism

          I’m in suspended animation. I’m unconscious and vulnerable, precariously still.

          I’m dangling, in a state of flux, paradoxically secure and insecure, certain and uncertain.

          The Writings… opaque, black-and-white images whose lens focuses on a prop. Faded into the background, I’m posed wearily, paused.

          The Wraps are colorful and vivacious images. Where the Waters, Reds, and Writings rightly depict me as passive—because for much of that period of my life, I was severely handicapped and limited in what I could do—the Wraps are my favorite because they depict the part of me that I actually had control over, my internal self, which remained defiantly alive.

          I hold onto the last of what I can hold onto: myself…”

          I will rise
          After a thousand years
          And set my teeth in the silver of the moon…

  9. Tom Zupancic says:

    Since it is essential for so many in finding peace about what happened that night in Perugia to know and understand, perhaps your tribute here provides a way for at least a few to begin to understand.

    Amanda, you wrote, “I hate it that my memories of her are buried beneath the years of suffering Raffaele and I endured in the wake of her murder. And it’s depressing to know that mourning her comes at the price of being criticized for anything I say or don’t say today. But most depressing of all is that Meredith isn’t here, when she deserves to be. She is painfully missed by everyone who loved her. I miss her, and I’m grateful for the memories of our time together.”

    Serial burglar and drug dealer in Perugia Rudy Guede with a known history of climbing up to peoples’ windows, killed Meredith that night. Why he immediately fled the country after leaving his fingerprints in blood and his DNA all over Meredith’s room and on her body, (in addition to his excrement in the toilet in the adjacent bathroom) would appear to be seriously/obviously incriminating evidence to any investigator with a brain.

    As such unfortunate cases go, this one was always quite straight forward. Ie. the serial burglar with this established MOI who left their fingerprints in blood and DNA all over the crime scene before fleeing the country was the perpetrator. It was a burglary gone wrong. In common parlance, this case was a ‘slam dunk’. ‘Open and shut’.

    So what the hell happened? This is where a meaningful discussion needs to go, but briefly, for their own reasons, the ‘genius Perugian team’, led by Guiliano Mignini quickly fixated on targeting Amanda Knox before any definitive physical evidence could be obtained. Based on cultural biases they went after Amanda, determined to incriminate her. As it became apparent when the actual evidence came in how stupid they were, rather than admitting their mistakes, they chose to double down, to ‘save face’.

    What is conspicuously obvious to any rational observer who examines the judicial travesty that ensued in this case is the callous disregard the ‘system’ here held for Meredith and her family. To this day this ‘system’ has made it clear ‘de facto’ that they could care less about the notion of ‘justice’ for the Kercher family. Rather, from early on, this case has been essentially about sustaining the authority of the Italian Justice System.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      To understand why it was so embarrassing for the authorities to admit that their premature conclusion was wrong, requires understanding how straightforward it was to solve this crime, which requires understanding Rudy Guede’s break-in spree during the autumn of 2007:

      Suspicions and hunches are valid investigative leads. As absurd as the staged break-in conclusion is, there was a brief moment in time when it was a valid hunch. The police arrived at the cottage, looked up at the 2nd story break-in window, looked over the break-in room, were told that nothing appeared to be missing, and had no idea that Meredith’s body was behind her locked bedroom door. A valid suspicion that this might be a civil scam for insurance money. But the Chief immediately turned this suspicion into a conclusion in his mind.

      Then comes the discovery of the body with stolen phones and rent money. Time to consider a burglary gone horribly wrong, and check-out the known local burglars. The authorities were under intense pressure to solve this high-profile case quickly. We understand this. The atrocity came shortly after when the evidence nailed Guede but…

      The more you study wrongful conviction cases around the world, the more you understand the constant threat of suspicions and hunches turning into premature conclusions at any point in an investigation. Reputations go on the line with these conclusions.

      • David says:

        Yes. When I recently read Amanda’s book (the first book I’ve read about the case but I don’t expect it to be the last one) it immediately caught my attention that the crime was committed by a known burglar around the 1st of the month. Also it was a long weekend (actually the Thursday was the holiday, All Saints’ Day, but much like Thanksgiving in the US that essentially made for a 4 day weekend). So one might expect the rent money to be collected at that point but not yet handed over to the landlord. A good opportunity for a burglar down on his luck to seize some easy, ill gotten cash. The rape and murder were far more heinous but were opportunistic crimes that occurred when Meredith was unexpectedly found at home–he probably thought everyone would be out of the house for the weekend or at least the evening.

        I also noticed that Filomena, not Laura, handled the initial negotiations with Amanda when she was first renting the room. If Filomena handled stuff like collecting rent money to pass on to the landlord, this might explain why Filomena’s room was ransacked and not Laura’s or Amanda’s. The burglar/killer was just enough of a peripheral member of their social circle to know how details like this worked in that household, and was expecting to find the November rent for the unit, in case, in Filomena’s room waiting to be given over to the landlord.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          Primary motive: Burglary
          Secondary motive: Sexual assault when the opportunity arose.

          • People are always getting in trouble for things they never did;I ask God to help them.

          • an innocent bystander says:

            Secondary motive… not a given. Not even near to any conclusion primarily because there is too much to suggest that the sexual assault component was post fatal injury.

          • Tom Mininger says:

            Innocent bystander:
            WARNING: Graphic description follows.
            A vicious struggle to control Meredith with Guede leaving DNA on her. The mortal neck wound inflicted with her jacket still on. It was blood soaked.
            Aspirated blood from the neck wound on her bra and body as she was being sexually assaulted (clothes removed while still alive).
            Guede leaves his bloody fingerprints on the pillow he is positioning the victim’s hips with. He leaves touch DNA inside her.
            There is a probable semen stain on the pillow that prosecutors and judges have always refused to allow testing on. A High School student could at least put it under a microscope to determine if there is sperm.

          • an innocent bystander says:

            Tom Mininger. Yeah. The bra. And then attention was drawn to the bra clasp. Switch and bait? Not one iota of anything that came out of that forensic lab can be taken for granted. Not one until each one has been reasoned using tenacious rigor.

            My first obligation is to be supportive to the emotional health of Amanda Knox. I feel like I’m violating her right now because this is on her dime and it shouldn’t be.

            But… nothing spreads faster then a juicy rumor. I was warned in an email years ago to be careful kayaking because this one was caught off the coast of Seattle.

          • an innocent bystander says:

            @Tom Mininger. I dislike leaving hanging chads, so this late addition is for posterity.

            I do not discount that a sexual assault took place. I have issues with the sexual assault conclusion that more or less could be following a guided tour and a path of least resistance, following cues from the forensic conclusions that can’t be wholly trusted, because those people intentionally left so many memory holes and lies by omissions.

            There is a large time window that the sexual intrusion could have taken place. The bra indicates evidence of a component of sexual assault taking place in a 5-10 minute time window. The visualization of a sexual intrusion taking place as a matter of opportunity within that time window makes no sense.

            There is also an issue of Italian law which is based in archaic codifications from the late 1800’s. The spirit of the law historically relies on perpetrator intent. Another issue is how sexual assault is interpreted in relationship to that time window. And from here on out because of a justified lack of trust in the forensic investigation, the ordering of events cannot be taken for granted. Ordering of events is a very powerful tool that can be used, which is proven to be quite effective to sway opinions, understandings and courts. Prospect Theory proves this which is why I’m careful with ordering since there is only one true ordering and for some reason the prosecution and investigation saw some essential need to mess with that.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          Burglars throw a rock through a window for 2 reasons. The first is to test if anyone is at home. If there is a response to the smash and clunks, they flee. The second is to reach inside and open the window latch. This is strong evidence that Guede was in the flat when Meredith unexpectedly arrived home. The rock/window break-in was already a Guede MO by Nov. 1.

      • an innocent bystander says:

        I see the point of political embarrassment of being some factor, but I am not sold on whether or not that was an undesirable factor as you suggest. There are historic examples of where being an embarrassment to rational thought appears to have an empowering effect. Embarrassment as a modal of control or entrapment a coordinated impoverishment of reason can be beneficial to an objective and usually those objectives that benefit the few. I’m really not into that type of thing because I’m the other percentage. That plus I’m not embarrassed to be a right is right and wrong is wrong kind of human, despite suggestion that that might not be efficient.

        Deep in your idea of avoidance of embarrassment there lurks a kernel of thought that suggest with a subtlety that an embarrassment in of itself capable of being a domineering control function. Your comment presumes that this political embarrassment was immune to being an intentional objective.

        Keeping in mind that I can presume of you are a right is right, wrong is wrong kind of person the same as me I ask how logistically would this embarrassment have presented itself? That’s a billion dollar question and as such a bit above our pay grades or abilities. It’s uncomfortable to look at that possibility but it has been proven that the path to rationality by definition absolves itself of pleasure responses (or un-pleasurable responses just the same) on the path to a logical truth.

        For me the nightmare scenario about extradition wasn’t that it would be honored or not. It was that Italy would poison it’s own verdict so badly that an extradition request had to be refused. And I believe that’s a scenario that’s worth looking at as a potential prospect as measured by Prospect Theory (c.1979) potentially seen as an intentional act or strategy. One that would have no bering if the Hellman court wouldn’t have allowed Knox to escape to her home.

        That refused extradition request would have immediately maximized public conflict and the hit counter on Google would have been broken for an extended period of time. The conflict in itself would have developed large revenue streams with many entities positioned to rake it in. Some of those entitles are large media conglomerates and are probably responsible for the disinformation campaign. Some of the large worse offenders have ownership of the copyrights to Mickey Mouse. There are three examples worthy examples I can point to on my ABC shit list.

        1). The Dowd thing on the day after Nencini’s poisoned verdict. (ABC)
        2). Barbara Walters claiming that a confession exists that doesn’t. (ABC)
        3). My local ABC affiliate KOMO-TV running a piece on Knox’s interview with a “body language expert” that delivered a determination that she didn’t lie in the ABC Sawyer interview the hour prior. That kind of stuff that assumes people who watched it are stupid and by inference promoted a distrust in people who are not but yet ill-informed, in a promotion of the very interview that they were promoting. (ABC)

        All of this and more to further promote the issues of Knox as “the unanswered questions”. All this and me going WTF is happening? A point that through direct observation I observed that the darling was wondering too. Just as bewildered as somebody twice her age with some substantial SAT scores suggesting an aptitude to rationality, and some personal experience in looking an inderstanding of the ways that evil can manifest.

        So I was wondering exactly just how would this embarrassment you suggest have been communicated to the wider public? By the same entities who would be raking in the cash from promoting the conflict? Because all I saw that we truth tellers had was GroundReport with 5,000 to 9,000 reads per article and so many of those were repeats all enamored with sneering and smearing in the comments section. So much so that most weren’t even reading the essays they were commenting on.

        Are you sure that the omnipotent permanently tenured officials of Italy gave a flying **** about being embarrassed? Or was the atmosphere more about that the promotional scheme that was stating that it didn’t matter whether she did it or not.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          imo there were different incentives involved for turning a burglary gone bad into a femme fatale fantasy. For the authorities it was protecting their reputations. For the media it was profit. For we imbibers of the media it was the titillation of this archetypal fantasy. Both Mignini, from his previous case debacles, and the media have know-how eliciting (as you put it) “predictable pleasure responses” from us.

          Americans don’t understand how often objective evidence is also abandoned in US courtrooms in favor of who can tell the best story. It was providential when Judge Hellmann rejected all the creative narrative in Amanda’s case and declared that the Italian Constitution was the law of the land.

          I’m going to cheat and generalize your “So I was wondering exactly just how would this embarrassment you suggest have been communicated to the wider public?” into “How do we communicate the systemic problems in our justice systems and proposed fixes to the wider public?” This is a war being constantly waged by The Innocence Project, and other concerned organizations and citizens. I invite readers to research it. There actually are some real investigative journalists with integrity in our world.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          If you’re asking/claiming that Italian government officials were promoting the fantasy for profit along with the media… I don’t know.

        • Mark Saha says:

          Innocent Bystander:

          The “embarrassment” in this instance derived from police and prosecutor arresting three innocent people before crime scene forensics was completed, driving them through Perugia with headlights flashing and horns honking, and declaring “case closed” in a sensational press conference, boasting of having solved the murder in five days. When forensics was completed, the results contained no trace of any of the three arrested people at the scene, and identified the true culprit by his bloody fingerprint.

          Nina Burleigh writes that Italians have an expression for this level of embarrassment, which in Italy is akin to the cuckolded husband:

          “To admit they had been wrong was not an option. ‘The imperative which they implicitly obey in all their decisions,’ wrote Barzini, of his fellow countrymen, is no farsi far fesso – not to be made a fool of. To be fesso is the ultimate ignominy, as credulity is the unmentionable sin. The fesso is betrayed by his wife … falls for deceptions and intrigues. […]

          “By filing slander suits against not only Amanda Knox but also her parents, by kicking them while they were down, the Perugians reminded the world that vendetta is an Italian word.” [Burleigh, The Fatal Gift of Beauty, pp. 305-6.]

  10. an innocent bystander says:

    Justice was not served for Meredith Kercher. Instead her death was used as an opportunity to defile the victim and entrap many into irresistible lies. Her death used to supply predictable pleasure responses as unwarranted attention was placed on the character of Amanda Knox.

    Before crime scene evidence had been processed the subtext was and became, that Meredith had engaged into a sexual tryst with two young men she barely knew and a flatmate that she didn’t like, and died. The investigation proceeded from this subtext to substantiate that Meredith was a slut.

    There is no evidence of this except for ever changing allegations that changed as soon as the former allegations were proven wrong. Allegations ever changing for a public consumption, for a public that has the memory of a gypsy moth.

    It was all wrong but I can’t deny that this strategy of assassinating the character and the honor of the victim did work for a decade. It did not however work on me.

    I absolutely would prefer to remember Meredith Kercher through the recent testaments of her sister Stephanie and through the journalism of Amanda Knox. Those testimonies sound right to me and should never be made to feel compelled to stop trying to explain that justice was not served for Meredith Kercher, because it wasn’t.

    • Mark Saha says:

      Innocent Bystander:

      You must bear in mind the prosecutor’s motive in creating your scenarios was to save face by involving two of the three innocent people he had arrested. Perversely, the Kerchers were encouraged to retain civil attorney Francesco Maresca, who participated in the attacks on Knox and Sollecito for eight years, and displayed Meredith’s lurid crime scene/autopsy photos in court to support the Kerchers’ claim of 4 million euros civil damages from each. The Kerchers, in addition to the tragic loss of their daughter, were shabbily treated as fesso by prosecutor and police. They still refuse to admit this and have never apologized to Knox and Sollecito.

      • an innocent bystander says:

        I disagree that this pre-packaged analysis of Dr. Mignini’s motives is a certainty. But no doubt this idea of avoiding an embarrassment to protect the cultural belladonna of Italian reputation is the least path of resistance.

        Unfortunately this presumption does not explain as much as it should, especially where it all went next.

  11. Michael J Butler says:

    I know the feeling of losing someone close to me from murder. A good friend of mine was murdered by her fiance nine years ago. Like those who knew Meredith (like yourself Amanda), I know the loss, the anger, the depression, the sadness and the need for justice they felt for there friend/family member. Also like you Amanda I have wonderful memories of my friend (Bipsy) and how she touched my life as she did with so many others who knew her, and I will always cherish those memories of Bipsy as you should always cherish the memories of you have of Meredith. We were both very lucky to have the friends we had and it was very tragic (and still is) to lose them to such a violent crime as murder. Hold on to those memories Amanda although Meredith is no longer by your side, you still have her in your heart. One more thing, as long you always remember Meredith and never stop loving her, you will always have your friend Meredith. May she rest in peace.

  12. the Truth says:

    For many people this case resonated and I can still recall reading that little small paragraph piece on the online news. It grew and grew in something Ive never seen before with online global, media and open court documents and forensic leaks to the internet.
    Was it good it was brought out into the light or was the media the filth that created it?

    I guess in short, it still seems unresolved and unfinished as if justice wasn’t served for Meredith , Raffaele, yourself and family and friends.

    Hopefully peace will continue to come to everyone. You should be free to speak your mind now, theres no more Migninni or Napoleoni and courtrooms to attack.

  13. William says:

    Off topic but this is Remembrance Day: The eleventh hour, the eleventh day, of the eleventh month.

    The Last Post

    Freya [Stark] e Vera [Brittain], la forza delle donne. Due donne incredibili.

  14. Tom Zupancic says:


    Mourning is hard. As you said in your moving tribute, “This day of mourning belongs to everyone whose lives Meredith touched.” But I would add, it is not simply one day… it is every day. And as you said, “something Meredith’s friends, family, supporters, and I all have in common is that Meredith’s death changed our lives. It opened our eyes to the terrible fact that, sometimes, innocent people suffer, that their lives can be taken away from them in an instant.”

    Clearly, what has always been difficult for some to understand is that there were multiple victims in this tragedy. The victims of an unrepentant killer; Meredith, her family, and her friends, and also the victims of incompetent and cruel prosecutors and a dysfunctional legal system; you, Raffaele and both of your families.

    So while you courageously write, “We are all driven to do something about it—to speak out against unrepentant killers or incompetent and cruel prosecutors—even though no one can ever give Meredith back her life, or me the years of life I lost to wrongful imprisonment”… in following the social media response to your kind words, I have to wonder.

    Meredith was tragically lost. The justice system then failed. The innocent were abused; the unscrupulous and guilty were rewarded.

    I completely get it when you say, “I hate it that my memories of her are buried beneath the years of suffering Raffaele and I endured in the wake of her murder. And it’s depressing to know that mourning her comes at the price of being criticized for anything I say or don’t say today.”

    In the end, it is truly sad to find how few on the internet have said (as you did), “But most depressing of all is that Meredith isn’t here, when she deserves to be. She is painfully missed by everyone who loved her. I miss her, and I’m grateful for the memories of our time together.”

  15. Katy says:

    I’ve studied and taught abroad several times, and I never stop marveling how close I feel to the people I lived and studied and worked with, even if it wasn’t for very long. There’s something very special about the first month or so in a new country. Time seems to stretch out; weeks feel like months, and even the tiniest, most ordinary moments seem golden and magical. And you get close to people very quickly, because they’re sharing those moments with you. I’m sorry you lost your friend, and I’m sorry you weren’t allowed to mourn for her.

  16. Avrom Brendzel says:

    Amanda, your sensitive essay “Mourning Meredith” is a fitting reminder of your friendship with Meredith Kercher. It also reminds us of the harm inflicted on you, and Raffaele, by unethical Italian authorities – police, prosecutors, and some judges – who violated Italian laws and Italy’s obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights in their wrongful actions. And it also reminds us of the malicious words and threats of the “altruistic punishers”, trolls, and hoaxers who have attacked you and Raffaele, and continue to do so even though you and Raffaele were finally and definitively acquitted of the crimes against Meredith in March, 2015.

    Looking toward the future, I am pleased that the November, 2013 application you and your lawyers lodged with the European Court of Human Rights, claiming that your conviction for false accusation against Patrick Lumumba was unfair, has advanced to being a “noteworthy pending case” listed in the ECHR Country Profile for Italy. This is the ECHR’s Country Profile summary of the case:

    “Case communicated to the parties in April 2016
    This case concerns criminal proceedings in which Ms Knox was found guilty of making a false accusation. The offending statements were taken while she was being questioned in the context of criminal proceedings for the murder and sexual assault of her flatmate. The applicant was accused of implicating another person whom she knew to be innocent.
    Ms Knox alleges that the criminal proceedings in which she was convicted were unfair, relying on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (a) (right to a fair trial – right to be informed promptly of the charge), (c) (right to legal assistance), (e) (right to assistance from an interpreter), Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the Convention.”

    The case-law of the ECHR states that a person may not be convicted based on statements she made while being interrogated without a lawyer present, or statements made while in custody when denied access to the counsel of a lawyer. The Italian authorities violated those provisions of Italian law, the European Convention and ECHR case-law, as well as other provisions, in your case. I believe that the ECHR, when it judges your case, will find in your favor and rule that Italy must, according to its treaty obligations under the Convention, allow you to request a retrial with all Convention rights respected. Since all the alleged evidence of “false accusation” was generated by coercion against you by the police and prosecutor, it would not be admissible in a retrial. If the Italian judiciary acts fairly and in accordance with Italian and ECHR law, you would necessarily be finally acquitted in the retrial of the false accusation charge.

    I hope that the ECHR will be able to schedule and judge Knox v. Italy soon, to further your exoneration from your wrongful conviction of false accusation.

    • Tom Zupancic says:


      Thank you for your articulate and informative comment. You clarify a number of fundamental points. Most importantly, as you explain, the actions of the Italian investigators during the late night interrogation of Amanda were flagrant violations of both Italian law as well as international conventions on basic human rights. That is, it was the responsibility and legal obligation of the Italian investigators to provide Amanda with a lawyer that night and also to provide an impartial interpreter; not Amanda’s responsibility to ask for them.

      The law does not expect some innocent civilian to know about Italy’s legal procedures. Rather the law requires those in authority to follow the laws.

      It is useful to note, as you point out, that even some Italian judges chose to ignore these law as the case proceeded. Fortunately for the concept of justice, Italy is bound to the ECHR; the European Convention on Human Rights. These judges will now be judged by a higher authority.

      As Avrom articulates so well, “The case-law of the ECHR states that a person may not be convicted based on statements she made while being interrogated without a lawyer present, or statements made while in custody when denied access to the counsel of a lawyer. The Italian authorities violated those provisions of Italian law, the European Convention and ECHR case-law, as well as other provisions, in your case.”

      Perhaps it is no surprise that some on social media have trouble grasping such basic logical concepts. But it is social media after all. So go figure.

  17. Amanda, on today’s decennial of your 4 year judicial kidnapping by a berserk self-publicist Italian procurator , I wanted to recommend a reading from nearly 30 years ago by the late LA Times staff reporter David Shaw who won a Pulitzer for his series of articles on the abject failure of the print and broadcast media regarding the McMartin Daycare School hysteria of the early 1980’s, the template for many such social panics to follow. Raymond Buckey spent 5 years on remand; his mother and wheelchairbound grandmother, school founder Virginia McMartin were also jailed at one time. The articles are easily found online. Tell me if the following excerpts from Shaw’s articles don’t resonate with you:

    “More than most big stories, McMartin at times exposed basic flaws in the way the contemporary news organizations function. Pack journalism. Laziness. Superficiality. Cozy relationships with prosecutors. A competitive zeal that sends reporters off in a frantic search to be first with the latest shocking allegation, responsible journalism be damned. A tradition that often discourages reporters from raising key questions if they aren’t first brought up by the principals in a story.

    In the early months of the case in particular, reporters and editors often abandoned two of their most cherished and widely trumpeted traditions–fairness and skepticism. As most reporters now sheepishly admit–and as the record clearly shows–the media frequently plunged into hysteria, sensationalism and what one editor calls “a lynch mob syndrome.” On so volatile an issue in an election year, defense attorneys maintain, that helped make it all but inevitable that the case would be prosecuted on a scale greater than the actual evidence warranted.”

    Check it out,


  18. Sam Allison says:

    Shakespeare noted that “[S]ome are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon ‘em.” (Malvolio, Twelfth Night) I think you fall into the final category, Amanda, having developed into one of the most Christ-like people I know as a result of your ordeal. I recognize that you are fully human, however, and fully entitled to the complex mix of emotions you express in this text. I wish you and the family, friends, and memory of Meredith peace.

  19. just a parent says:


    I really like this post, especially “beautiful, banal moments.” It carries a whiff of the mystical, which is where lyricism hides. More, I do not know how anyone could have struck a better balance; you know what I mean. Well done.

    For each of my kid’s undergraduate years I kept a hardcopy file of various items I wanted to retain – grade reports of course, certain emails, news articles, an occasional photograph. From November 2007, his freshman year, either the first day of that month or a few days thereafter on his birthday (can’t certainly remember which), I have a photograph from an artistic website to which he occasionally posted. Taken in the day’s gloaming not far from where you gave a talk in Chicago, he captioned it with these words: “Outside my dorm . . . . The snowflakes were so big they were more like snow feathers. We all ran outside before dinner to catch as many in our mouths as possible. I love being a child.”

    Never does my mind go to that file that I do not contemplate your parents, which you may be sure even for this complete stranger is one very profoundly humbling sensation.

  20. Lawrence Wilson says:

    And the truly sad part is there are still people, even in the face of indisputable truth, that still believe Amanda is guilty. The whole thing was moronic from the start. And as new evidence came in the prosecutions story changed. That had to be a huge red flag. Very much like the Darlie Routier case which I have studied for many years and have found absolutely nothing that supports the states ridiculous story. What I did find is plenty of msnufactured evidence and a great deal of omission. Suddenly very important evidence was never mentioned in the trial.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Yes, for Americans who watched in horror as Italian prosecutors and judges kept changing the motive and modus operandi in desperation, trying to contort Amanda and Raffaele into a burglary gone bad crime scene, rather than face the blood evidence, DNA evidence, and that the release of Guede in Milan, upon Perugia police request, doomed Meredith days later, it would be a mistake to believe it only happens there.

      What goes on behind those Kodak moments of Innocence Project lawyers celebrating with a client who has just been exonerated after decades of wrongful imprisonment in the US? The norm is that prosecutors oppose post-conviction DNA testing at great taxpayer expense, forcing ongoing court hearings, rather than allowing a straightforward test that will either confirm guilt, or exclude the accused, often IDing the real perpetrator. If a test is done and clears the accused, you would not believe the denial that kicks in with some (not all) prosecutors, who continue to fight tooth and nail against exoneration, creating theories every bit as zany as Amanda’s prosecutors. And there are only a tiny fraction of cases where DNA is available for testing.

      I recommend Ohio Innocence Project director Mark Godsey’s Facebook group “Blind Injustice” and his book by the same name for. Godsey is a former Federal prosecutor who understands the power that confirmation bias has to create alternate realities.

      I’ve found myself laughing at the bra strap clasp collection video, CSI Stefanoni’s perjury that human blood found downstairs was cat blood, Judge Massei’s explanation for how Raffaele’s giant kitchen knife made it to the cottage, Judge Nencini’s description of A and R’ supernatural ability to clean their invisible DNA from the murder room while leaving Guede’s invisible DNA behind… Then you catch yourself and feel awful. Meredith, Amanda, Raffaele and their families are real human beings.

      • Tom Mininger says:

        The passage from this article:

        “…the notion of Las Vegas fly exceptionalism underpinning them, elicited quizzical looks from each of the scientists. “I’ve never run an experiment here,” Anderson told DiGiacomo, “but I don’t see why it should be different than anywhere else.” (Off the stand, Anderson commented to Lobato’s lawyers that if there was any indication that Vegas was somehow different from the rest of the world, entomologists would have flocked to the city to research the phenomenon.”

        reminds me of the line that if Amanda and Raffaele could clean their DNA while leaving Guede’s behind, the best DNA experts in the world would have flocked to their doorsteps demanding to know how they did it.

  21. William says:

    An excellent honour and tribute to the memory of Miss Kercher. By all indications the very pretty Meredith was a wonderful young woman who was sure of herself, serious, loving, warm, kind, fun loving, and fun to be around. She was human and had failings like we all do. Certain things got under her skin for sure. I suspect Meredith was much like her older sister; sophisticated, reserved, and well spoken.

    The way I look at it Amanda’s trouble with the authorities came because she would not shut up and could not stop writing. The golden rule when dealing with cops is the five words: “I have nothing to say”. Or, as it were, “name, rank, and serial number” only. If your flatmate turns up murdered, and you are the only other occupant in the house at the time, then you become the primary target for investigators. Never lie to cops or try deception on them. Remember as well that cops can lie to you but you cannot lie to them. That’s the way it is in the States and likewise in police organisations in the West. A young woman of twenty in a foreign country, and toking weed, was ill-equipped to deal with the reality in which she found herself.

    Over the years, off and on, I’ve looked at the evidence in the case and much of it is damning indeed to Amanda. Conversely, some key evidence leans in her and Raf’s favour. If you are staging a break-in, don’t do it where only spider man would have the advantage, and in sight of the public, and requiring two climbs. The balcony to the cottage is hidden and is such that a reasonably fit 70 year old man could hoist himself up to the isolated entrance. The glass in the break-in room scattered toward the inside consistent with a rock thrown from the outside thus carrying glass inward. How would breaking the glass from the inside cause this? Never explained.

    Amanda had a good reason for shutting off her cell phone saying she wanted to save the battery. What was Raf’s reason however? If they planned a murder, leaving their cells on at Raf’s apartment while they went on the mission would support said alibi that they stayed in all night.

    Amanda too had a good explanation for why she wanted to shower at the cottage claiming Raf’s bathroom was a bit dodgy. Besides, at the cottage Amanda had all her ‘girl stuff’ that women always cart around.

    Yet other evidence lines up against Raf and Amanda and it seems very solid. I likely would have voted to convict but on lesser charges, but, I could have voted ‘not proven’ as well because of shaky evidence the state produced such as that above.

    There are solid web-sites out there that go into minute details concerning the evidence. One such site is TJMK which presents the prosecution side of the case. I have no argument with that site yet I find the many commenters’ personal attacks on Amanda detestable and hate-filled. The moderator disallows contrary opinions.

    Amanda’s four years in prison was justified because of her false accusation of Patrick, which the Dagos, or the Top Wops, upheld.

    Amanda have some kids. The last time you mentioned this you said it’s a financial issue. Hell, Chris seems like a worthy chap who could find high paying employment in Alaska’s ANWAR since Trump opened it up for drilling and production.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      Coerced confessions are a systemic cause of wrongful convictions and we know now how they happen. Amanda was badgered for 53 hours over half a week during a period of trauma, increasing sleep deprivation and the paranoia that comes along with it, in a language still foreign to her. The finale was the illegal “unrecorded” coup de grace finale in the middle-of-the-night complete with police lies, threats, suggestions, the bungled interpretation of a text message between A and Patrick, and a police interpreter masquerading as a “mediator” “helping” her to “remember”. Amanda signs incriminating documents typed up for her in Italian. This is Mind Rape and I recommend googling Richard Leo, Saul Kassan and Mark Godsey to learn how often this guilt presumptive interrogation technique ensnares the innocent around the world. It’s an epidemic. Promising news is that the Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates law enforcement group has stopped training detectives in the disastrous Reid interrogation technique.

      Amanda writes a note to police that day (Nov. 6), as she struggles to regain her sanity, warning them not to trust anything she said during that torture session. She needs help and they use it against her. Don’t let anyone cherry pick lines from this note. Read the entire note and understand the context.

      Meanwhile Mignini denies legal access to A and Raffaele so that only he gets to prepare for the first hearing on Nov. 10. A’s lawyers meet her at the hearing and tell her not to speak because they don’t have a clue what’s going on. After the hearing A tells them she has no idea what happened to Meredith. Yet she will be blamed for not retracting her accusation against Patrick

      This treatment of A would have been forgivable if the authorities owned up to it as soon as the evidence arrived nailing the cat burglar Guede. Instead they doubled down into a railroad job, complete with conflicting police testimony about the treatment of A, with no recording presented. (They do however have tens of thousands of worthless recordings in this case.)

      http:// the-interrogation

      Retired FBI violent crimes investigator Steve Moore,who knows interrogation firsthand, asks us to consider the following. Take a typical 40 hour work week that many people work. Imagine that for every minute of those 40 hours you are asked the same questions over and over and over again. This is not even taking into account Amanda’s trauma, the late night questioning designed to increase sleep deprivation, and the struggle with a new language. Your 40 hour work week ends. What would your mental state be? Then comes the final assault at night. This causes temporary insanity and was used effectively by North Korea against American soldiers back in the 50s war.

      Amanda I’m so sorry for the bad memories this must cause, but we try to at least use these tragedies to prevent future ones.

      • Tom Zupancic says:


        Thank you for your articulate post describing how the Perugian authorities abused Amanda and violated her fundamental human rights. Self-serving Prosecutorial Misconduct and Yellow Journalism are the essence of this case.

        What is conspicuously obvious to any intelligent observer is that neither the prosecution nor the press ever gave a rip about Meridith Kercher. Truth? Justice? You got to be kidding me.

        From the very beginning this tragic event became a vehicle for the unscrupulous to promote themselves. And they went for it.

        Sadly, their sorry legacy endures.

        • just a parent says:


          Spot-on, man. You and Mr. Borthwick pretty much nail it, and I’ll have to be content with y’alls characterizations of personages and methods, as Ms. Knox some time back would not let post certain usages I preferred. But then I didn’t really expect she would, indeed she wouldn’t have measured up to my opinion of her if she had. Still, I sure did enjoy writing it.

      • William says:

        We are all doing ‘Monday morning knee taking’ here. I wasn’t there and neither were you. I don’t speak Italian and my guess is neither do you. However, we do have court testimony and now some good translations.

        The 53 hour interrogation the record debunks. The night of Amanda’s confession she had voluntarily come to the police station. She confessed after a short time under questioning and her loose talk and behaviour in the waiting area was used against her. In fact one of the Wop Cops asked Amanda why she was there and not home resting since the police didn’t call her. Good question. Sane people avoid such places if they can.

        The actual total interrogation time was around 15 hours. Anyway, the court ruled that the police had acted against protocol thus the following ruling. (

        The Supreme Court ruled that

        1. the 1.45 am statement could be used as evidence for calunnia but not for the murder charge,

        2. the 5.45 am statement could not be used at all, and

        3. the handwritten memoriale of November 7th would be admissible for both the calunnia and murder charge.

        Amanda’s handwritten note was allowed since it was voluntary and not taken under stress. Ditto her e-mail explanation.

        Steve Moore? Don’t make me laugh. He’s not credible. In my opinion he’s a liar and a bullshit artist. Ole Steve pops up on TV crime show discussions from time to time to blow it out his ass and make a few dollars.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          Please be aware that the wiki you link to is edited by the self proclaimed Messiah Jesus Christ “Man from Atlan” from the planet Atlan.

          A timeline of Amanda’s “softening up” from Nov 2 – Nov 6:

          • William says:

            I’ve reviewed the web sites you referenced.

            The “Man from Atlan” claiming to be Jesus Christ can’t be. Charlie Manson is.

            Anyway, I find a good resource. I quoted that site reference the Italian Supreme Court’s dismissal of the admissions of Amanda due to police mistakes. So, the mistreatment of Amanda, so called, was nullified by the high court. This took and arrow out of the defence’s case. Did that website lie?

            As I have time and inclination I read the translations of under oath testimony. The female Wop Cop relates that Amanda was not mistreated or hit. I believe the interpreter backed this up under oath. Of course they could be lying. Cops do lie but if caught misleading the court, consequences are rather unpleasant.

            On the night of Amanda’s ‘confession for Lumumba’ the aforementioned female cop testified that she ‘corrected’ Amanda’s behaviour in the waiting area of the Cop Shop and asked her why she was even there. Is this a lie? The real questioning didn’t begin until some 10 PM. Point is, and my larger point is, Amanda should not have been so eager to interact with the police. And, significantly, that time Amanda volunteered to be at the gulag with the cops can’t be charged to the total time she was beaten with rubber hoses, fists, and subjected to headlocks, hair-pulling, boiling oil, the rack, and etc, as the Steve Moore would have us believe.

            I picked up in the testimony a bit of compassion the cops had for Amanda. The female cop said under oath that she was sanctioned for letting Amanda walk around free to the restroom and to the canteen when she should have had Amanda in hand-irons and placed in a cell.

            Mignini too seemed to see in Amanda a young woman who slipped in and out of reality and indicated he had some compassion for her. He must have had the thought that Amanda was not ‘all there’. This is backed up by Dago investigators who observed Amanda slap herself on the head and rock it back and forth. Seems I read somewhere that Amanda also hit her head on the wall at the police station in frustration and disbelief at the realisation that she was indeed in deep kimchi.

            To Amanda on her thirtieth.


          • Tom Mininger says:

            O the tangled web we may weave in place of recordings. There are over 39,900 recordings in this case because Mignini and these police were obsessed with the practice. Wiretapping is a national sport in Italy. The anger ensuing over the murder of 2 prominent Italian prosecutors in 1992 by the Mafia removed restrictions on state eavesdropping. Alas, nothing for Amanda, Raffaele, and Patrick’s final sessions.

            There was a recorder in Amanda’s room, and Giobbi admitted that he was in a “control” room coordinating the dual interrogation of A and R.

            Giobbi also proudly announced that Amanda told them what they already knew. In other word’s we manipulated her into naming Patrick. Ooops. That wasn’t our fault. Blame the kid.

            To prosecute for slander without providing recordings is devoid of honor.

    • Brian says:

      Your observation that “the golden rule when dealing with cops is the five words, ‘I have nothing to say’ ” may have some validity in certain circumstances. In a situation like the one Amanda found herself, I suggest these eight words would have stood her in much better stead: “I don’t understand you. I want a lawyer.”

      • William says:

        The five words are valid in all circumstances, hot shot, don’t be so dismissive. The eight words you suggest mean essentially the same thing.

        It’s good to realise that when one is talking to Mr. or Mrs. Cop, one is actually talking to the Crown, and the Crown can crush you like a grape, and will.

        I do think however, the Dagos pulled a serious fast one on Amanda reference her cell phone. As near as I can tell they seized it before she came under arrest. It’s muddled whether she gave her cell to the police voluntarily or under coercion. I’m thinking the cops merely said something like ‘hand it over’. If so, they conducted an illegal search by coercing evidence. Without the phone they had no case and Amanda would have never pointed to Lumumba and all things that followed to her detriment. So, was the court’s case built on the sand of a search not authorized by a warrant? Seems so.

        The perhaps illegal seizure of the phone leads to her arrest and gathering of other evidence pursuant to that arrest such as cell records. Cell records particularly were damning to her alibi.

        Based on this illegal gathering of evidence (i.e., the phone), the case should have been thrown out. A warrant for Amanda’s arrest might have come anyway due to evidence police gathered later. But by that time she’s back in the States where extradition would be unlikely.

        The following video is a damn good one about keeping your trap shut. There’s lots of resources on the net reference this subject. If one is concerned he should discuss it with a criminal law-yah (aren’t they all?) . The vid, 12 reasons…., is long but worth the effort. Pay attention to number 1 reason in particular.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          No, cell records confirmed Amanda’s alibi. The prosecution and Judge Massei want you to go with the 2 – 3% instead of the 99%.

          The best server cell towers at the cottage (Via Pergola 7) were Piazza Lupatelli GSM11107 and UMTS55201.

          The best cell tower for Sant’Angelo Park where the stolen phones were recovered was wind cell 30064. It handled 99% of calls from Sant’Angelo Park and only handled 2 – 3% of calls from Via Pergola 7.

          The tower which handled the 10:13 pm MMS message on the stolen phone was wind cell 30064.

          This is overwhelming evidence that the phone was in Sant’Angelo Park at 10:13, not still at the murder cottage as the prosecution and Judge Massei contended. This means the murder occurred before 10:13 contradicting the prosecution’s much later TOD.

          Given the fact that Meredith did not have another chance to call her mother after her 8:56 attempt and the fact she hadn’t taken her jacket off yet after returning home is strong evidence that she was attacked soon after 8:56.

          Suppression of the human blood evidence found in the downstairs apartment also indicates Rudy Guede took the time to change clothes downstairs after the TOD.

          • William says:

            Investigators used the cell records to bounce against Amanda’s and Raf’s statements to reveal holes in their interview answers concerning where they were and what they did, and, in addition, these records surfaced other anomalies that allowed police to question their alibi’s.

            Cell records revealed that Amanda was in contact with a drug dealer before and after the murder. That drug dealer was convicted due to the police being able to trace him via cell records from Amanda’s phone. This was, by the way, the hook the Italians would use to extradite her from the States; her association with a drug ring.

            Me thinks you missed my larger point. The confiscation of Amanda’s phone and it’s subsequent search seemed to violate the rights of individuals from illegal searches and testimony against themselves. In the Sates the fourth and fifth amendments.

            If it’s true that the Dago investigator reached out to Amanda and demanded, as was reported, ‘give me the phone’, took it and began to search the calls, this is a search without authorization from a court. Now it could be presumed that Amanda may have volunteered and acquiesced to the search, yet she was intimidated into it by the aggressive cops. Honest judges, (there are a few) dislike ‘legal searches via cop intimidation’. Being in a foreign land and unfamiliar with the language, she may have felt compelled to not resist the search. She was only twenty and alone.

            The phone seizure occurred before her arrest and based on illegally seized evidence within the phone she suffered and illegal arrest. I can’t believe the case wasn’t pitched in less than 24 hours and Amanda freed. Even her hand written confession was the result of ‘the fruits of the state’s poisoned tree’.

            Without the phone, the cops had only discrepancies between Amanda’s and Raf’s alibi’s. Not enough to sustain an arrest.

            I’m sure the defence raised this point and argued for dismissal, but did they?

            The Pizza men of the supreme court did a chickenshit thing indeed. They dismissed Amanda’s ‘confessions’ as unusable but they allowed her accusation of Patrick to stand against her. WTF? They needed a reason to hold Amanda while the police got their shit together, and, to placate the public. To use a Yankee term, it was very ‘shoddy’.

            Perhaps the supreme court had an ‘oh shit’ moment when they realised that Amanda should not have been arrested at all and dumped the case.

            So, you see, tracing the cell signals as they bounced off this or that tower, the moon, mars, and the surrounding hills is really irrelevant. The state had no legal right to the records.

            Would Amanda have been arrested later? Likely based on what I thought was excellent basic police work at the crime scenes gathering solid evidence.

            The TOD for Meredith was difficult to establish. The scientific evidence indicates around 11 PM. The Hell-Man court, however, did have a good point about Meredith not reconnecting with her mom. He placed the TOD earlier, based on circumstantial evidence, and at a time when Amanda and Raf were watching a movie.

            Hell-Man was overturned. I think Meredith didn’t reconnect because she dropped off for a nap. After all, she was a young woman who had had a busy party time and was surely exhausted. She fell asleep with her clothes on.

            And, it may be true that Guede did have a rendezvous with Meredith as he consistently has said. He arrived at that time.

            How about some real performing art. The dragster in the vid accelerates from 0 to 100 in 1/8 of a mile. It’s a 1934 V-8 Flathead Ford running with two four-barrel carbs and a blower. Super sounding engine. Great rebuild work.


          • Tom Mininger says:

            The planet Atlan celebrates you. So when will Amanda be charged with “her association with a drug ring”?

            The Guede rendezvous with Meredith claim is an insult to her memory. Not even the prosecution would go there.

          • Tom Mininger says:

            The original Amanda phone record lies were spread to deflect attention away from the long awaited court appointment of independent experts, who would obviously go on to debunk the prosecution’s DNA “evidence” against A and R. This was a police pattern for years, to time the lies with important court hearings.

          • Ann Blankenship says:

            “The scientific evidence indicates (TOD) around 11 pm”? Really? What “scientific evidence” would that be? Kercher’s stomach contents don’t indicate a TOD that late, not even close.

            And let me get this straight – Meredith didn’t reconnect with her mother because she “dropped off for a nap”. Sure…and “with her clothes on” no less. Oh but wait, Guede perhaps “did have a rendezvous” with Meredith and “arrived at that time”. What time would that be? About the time Meredith was dropping off for a nap? No? Then please give some actual time estimates to flush out this oh so interesting reconstruction.

          • Tom Mininger says:

            No, there is no scientific evidence indicting TOD was “around 11 PM”. The prosecution and Judge Massei were trying to contort TOD to fit their hard-of-hearing “earwitness” behind her double glazed windows.

            The group waiting with their broken down car and the tow truck driver (roughly 10:30 – 11:30) were too inconvenient for Massei’s musings, so he completely left them out of his motivation document.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          Though I think your website recommendations for Amanda’s case are awful, your youtube site on protecting your rights when approached by the police has a lot of truth in it. Good cops and bad can fixate on the wrong person. Unfortunately, it tends to be repeat offenders who have become most aware of their rights.

    • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

      “which the Dagos, or the Top Wops, upheld.”

      Once again you just can’t help yourself can you. You had to go there. No self restraint. No voyage past that pleasure response. “Dago” and “wop” are ethnic slurs intended to be used toward Italian people FROM Italy. Not Italian people IN Italy.

      The following is a transcript from the opening monolog from SNL S43 Ep3 a few weeks ago by Pakistani-American actor and stand-up comedian Kumail Nanjiani that articulates my feelings better then this… judging people by the content of their character, not the color of their shin, white guy, could have ever thought of.

      Kumail Nanjiani.

      “… which brings me to my problem with most racism. Here’s my problem with most racism. It’s the inaccuracy. That’s what bugs me. I’m like… do the research! Put in the work! You will see the benefits!

      I’ll give you an example. If someone yells at me, ‘go back to India’, I’d be like that guy’s an idiot. But if someone was like… ‘go back to Pakistan which was part of India until 1947 and is the home to the world’s oldest salt mine’, I would be like… that guy seems to know what he’s talking about. I’ll pack my bags.

      Just because you’re racist doesn’t mean you have to be ignorant. An informed racist is a better racist.”

      • William says:

        ““Dago” and “wop” are ethnic slurs intended to be used toward Italian people FROM Italy. Not Italian people IN Italy.”

        Wow what a genius! Have you discovered the secret to cold fusion yet? No? Oh I see, you’re the virtuous one, pure of motive and thought and clean as the wind driven snow. In other words, just-a-gay-out-for-a-walk…with his head stuck up his ass. Bugger off.

        • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

          Sorry. I didn’t mean to hurt your feeling. But thanks for taking the effort to respond. I am in fact buggering off but not because of you. I’m buggering off because extradition is off the table. I should have buggered off exactly when that happened.

          But while I have your ear, here’s a real quote from a real person that I have known for a long time.

          “Look ****; it doesn’t matter whether she did it or not. We live in a global economy and we have agreements with that nation. I’m sorry but that’s just the way it is.” (beers around a campfire August-2014. The question of extradition was about 6 months away best guess.)

          I can’t accept the premise because I can’t understand where this ideology comes from. But I do know it’s been echoed from many. Maybe you could explain it to me in a better articulation then it’s owner can because they are not so bright when it comes to explaining their logic. They stand by it to this day, but they can’t explain it. They think that it was right and I think that there was nothing right about it. Were deadlocked into disagreement for life as far as I’m concerned.

          Do you think that it was right? And if so why.

          Thanks in advance.

          • Tom Mininger says:

            Treaties between nations, including extradition treaties, should be taken very seriously. But keep in mind that Amanda’s extradition hearings in the US would have been very embarrassing to Italy. Without an Italian judge presiding, the wanton disregard of Italian and European law by police, prosecutors, and judges could be discussed openly.

            This will also be the case in Amanda’s upcoming European Court of Human Rights hearings.

          • just-a-guy-out-for-a-walk says:

            Tom. From what I can discern and I am far from being a legal scholar, that one extradition hearing guaranteed by US law would have been quite innocuous. Just a matter of insuring that Italy had filled the paperwork out correctly. The primary question before that federal judge would have been, was Knox convicted by a court with the proper jurisdiction. It would not have been a fact finding mission, nor would Knox’s representative have had any right to present evidence at that hearing. That would have been at the federal judges’ discretion and the outcome purely political. A throw of the dice.

            I could write more but to the point, I don’t see what could have been presented at that hearing that would embarrass Italy anymore then it had already agreed to be embarrassed by a really screwed up situation.

            I know ultimately they did the right thing and I understand they were caught in the erroneous judicial truths implied from Guede’s fast track trial. In the US for right or wrong we have the right to adjudicate any verdict and revise it in favor of better evidence. Italy doesn’t have that safety mechanism. Their final decisions are codified as perfect by their law even if they are not.

          • Tom Mininger says:

            I agree that the hearing would not have been about presenting evidence.

          • Tom Mininger says:

            Yes, I’ve tangled myself up with what’s appropriate US extradition hearing material vs. ECHR material. Double Jeopardy would have been brought up. The US has it, but has extradition treaties with countries that don’t or define it differently. My understanding is that there is a US clause stating that a person acquitted of a crime cannot be extradited for the same crime. This would cause the argument over what acquittal means. “She was released and allowed to come home” vs. “in Italy she was not finally acquitted”.

            Perhaps a few of these broken laws would have been appropriate at a US extradition hearing:

            So much speculation in a case with such hard evidence and hard evidence of absence available.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      The site you link to is run by an anonymous blogger who uses the alias “Edward McCall”. The main editor of the site is Naseer Ahmad, who is the self proclaimed Messiah “Man from Atlan” from the planet Atlan. He is also Ergon the astrologer, although why a God needs to bother doubling as an astrologer I don’t understand. He does accept donations for his “healing”.

      Ergon also runs one of the Amanda hate sites. Amanda-hate was a cottage industry and he staked his claim. There is still a market niche for this hate but I think it has subsided dramatically. The Daily Mail scandal rag can still exploit it big-time periodically (like this week).

      Talk about twist of fate. If the investigators had interviewed all the flatmates, including the downstairs boys, and cross-referenced a list of flat visitors with known local burglars… the Daily Mail would not have profited over the misery of human lives surrounding this case. If the Perugia police had not told the Milan police to release Guede after they caught him, Meredith would still be alive today.

      Amanda was paranoid by design from sleep deprivation and not knowing if whoever killed her flatmate might be after her. She insisted following Raffaele everywhere and he was called to the police station. Inspector Giobbi testified that he planned to interrogate them both that night anyway.

      • Tom Mininger says:

        I want to clarify that although the hate market has subsided in numbers, there are still a few very disturbed people out there who cannot let it go. As Amanda says, she still receives death threats.

    • jerry pdx says:

      Damning evidence? So Raffaeli shutting off his cell phone and Amanda showering is “damning” evidence against them? Why don’t we separate between two types of evidence. Physical, forensic evidence and then “theoretical/circumstantial evidence”. There was no forensic evidence tying either Amanda and Raffaeli to the murder itself. The only physical evidence pointed to one man: Rudy Guede
      Faced with trying to prove a case with no forensic evidence the prosecution magically finds two bits of dna, one allegedly from Raffaele on a bra strap, that was left sitting for weeks on the floor, and a knife pulled randomly from a cutlery drawer and allegedly had Meredith’s dna on it. Both bits were so small they required extraordinary efforts to get a genetic profile from and the results were successfully challenged by the defense, that “evidence” was not even cited in the ISC final report.
      So yes, we have damning evidence, to the prosecution, that in no way could Amanda or Raffaele have been involved in the murder of Meredith. As stated by the ISC, it would have been impossible for A&R to have been involved and left no trace and impossible for them to have done a selective cleanup.
      So what do we have left? Exotic theories about multiple attackers, faked break ins and questions about two confused naive young people misremembering details of a very chaotic and traumatic moment in time.
      What is irrefutable is the physical evidence, the rest is a prosecution trying to build a case out of nothing.

      • Tom Zupancic says:

        jerry pdx,

        You said it perfectly. In effect… the Prosecution’s case disproved the Prosecution’s case. Irony is a bitch.

  22. Tom Mininger says:

    Thank you for sharing Amanda. The police may have prevented us from ever seeing the pictures of your friendship with Meredith, but they can’t stop you from painting these heartwarming memories for our mind’s eye.

  23. just saying says:

    Third world habitual offender.The blood is on the police and local authority for not confining Rudy from society.

  24. Kenneth Janeway says:

    Hi Amanda…An excellently written Tribute to Meredith describing your time, and relationship, with her. It is good to see you smile and have some degree of normalcy after the tragic journey you have travelled. – Best, KJ

  25. Stephane G says:

    A beautiful tribute to Meredith and to your friendship. Thank you for sharing your feelings on this sad anniversary.

    Mourning is something that mainly takes place in the intimacy of our hearts and our memories, two things that nobody can deprive you of.

    • Klaus, Germany , Stuttgart area says:

      I’d second to what you are saying. At least to what affects me like losing a close family member for example.
      I consider this intimate mourning as the first natural step.
      However to share memories and express one’s grief with someone that is too distant to directly contact or
      that has known reservations towards the mourning person it can be more beneficial to publish one’s thoughts in the
      hope that distorted perceptions will fade over time.
      Of course this can be construed to long for attention, but on the other hand it shows the willingness to show genuine empathy. And reaching out to show empathy is never without risk but in most cases utterly rewarding.

      • Stephane G says:

        Thank you for your answer and explanation, Klaus. And although it seems to me that mourning and showing empathy are actually two different ideas, I now realize I may have confused « mourning » with « grieving » since we use the same word (« deuil ») to describe these two concepts.

        It is my understanding that you need to grieve to integrate the reality of a loss and move forward, and to mourn to cope with your feelings and heal that grief.

        I remember the conversation we had here about funerals and rites and I believe in the importance of facing the reality and the experience of a loss in its internal meaning. I am also not convinced that there is an “appropriate” way to externalize our feelings and express our thoughts, except for the satisfaction of social conventions and expectations (remember the misinterpretation of Amanda’s reaction after Meredith’s death and its consequences), especially when other relatives don’t expect or don’t want you to join. In other words, I think you can mourn your own way and without them. Mourning well is mourning honestly. That is: expressing all your true emotions and feelings. I think it can possibly be achieved through writing, or any kind of artistic or creative expression.

        Now, I also realize that Amanda has simply not been allowed to share the memory of Meredith with those who knew her, and to offer her support or show her empathy and her compassion, and that she may surely suffer like anyone whose will to give love was – and still is – ignored or even rejected.

        • Tom Zupancic says:

          Stephane G and Klaus

          Wie geht’s. Bitte verzeih mir. Ich habe nur ein wenig deutsch gelernt. (Hello. Please forgive me, I have only learned a little German). Aber (but) you both articulated such valuable and fundamental points here so well that it seemed useful to comment further.

          Language, meaning, and intention. Mourning and grief. The experience of loss. How to understand?

          Stephane G, you explained it so well, “Mourning well is mourning honestly. That is – expressing all your true emotions and feelings.”

          How will people understand you? But what can people ever understand about someone else anyway?

          Empathy and compassion. Not everyone has that. Still, I would like to believe that the will to give love has an intrinsic value.

          • Stephane G says:

            I’ll second that and I do believe it definitely has one. But I also believe that, sadly, not everyone is trained or prepared to receive and welcome the love he or she is given, or even to recognize it for what it is.

            And btw, your German sounds really good. I’m sure Klaus would agree. 😉

        • Tom Mininger says:

          “I am also not convinced that there is an “appropriate” way to externalize our feelings…”

          It’s painful to read over original trial transcripts from DNA exoneration cases where prosecutors accused the defendants of emotional under-reaction or over-reaction after the crime, and the juries were entrusted to weigh this worthless “demeanor evidence”.

          Science has exposed many different flaws in judicial tradition. Study after study shows that we are no good at lie detection by observing demeanor. About the same accuracy as a coin toss. Yet it is part of the human condition to believe we are. imo demeanor evidence should go the way of The Inquisition.

          Mark Godsey has a good paragraph on Amanda in his “Blind Intuition” chapter referring to her interviews on the big American mainstream TV networks. “Experts” lined up to study her voice, eyes, and facial expressions to determine whether she was guilty or innocent of murder. Then commenters all over social media weighed in with their “analysis”. Ridiculous.

          • Stephane G says:

            That’s right. I haven’t read Mark Godsey’s book yet, but I remember these reactions and the pseudo expertise of self-proclaimed « human lie detectors » and the like… Nonsense.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      I apologize for the change of topic here, but I wanted to ask Europeans about a line I read on Facebook the other week claiming, that in some European countries, lawyers are rotated between the positions of prosecutor and public defender.

      Do you know if France and/or Germany do this? I want to learn more about this topic because unchecked confirmation bias and the dehumanization of suspects by all-powerful prosecutors is a big problem in the US justice system (and Italy).

      • Stephane G says:

        Hello Tom. I’m not sure enough about other European countries judicial organization and prefer to let my fellow European citizens answer for their own country. But no, things don’t work that way in France. First, because we don’t have public defenders employed by the state as you do. The system here is based on the “commission d’office”. If needed, a defense attorney (a liberal professional) is assigned by the Chairman of the Bar Association who chooses him from a list of volunteers. Unless he’s really indigent, the defendant has to pay the fees but can be granted a legal aid if he can’t afford it, as a consequence of the article 6 of the ECHR (equivalent of the right to counsel from the 6th amendment).

        Magistrates, including prosecutors, are public officials named by the President of the Republic and the Garde des Sceaux (the Attorney General) under a special status that, unlike most of other officials, protects their independence, whereas defense lawyers are liberal professionals.

        So, not only do prosecutors and defense lawyers have a different professional status but, in spite of a common basic university curriculum, their academic training is also quite different (please allow me to skip the details, here or this post could be very long). I’m afraid such a situation would then be technically impossible, as things stand today.

      • Klaus, Germany, Stuttgart area says:

        Tom, I am sorry to say that I can just sum up what I’ve read about that topic since my university studies were in a different faculty.
        What I read is that in becoming part of the legal profession there is a time between the first
        and the second state examination where those students need to work together sometime with a judge, sometime with a prosecutor and sometime with an attorney to receive practical training. After the second state exam they seem to be able to choose what to do.
        I have never heard of a mandatory rotation system between prosecutors, judges or laywers in Germany. However having finished that second state exam should enable them to switch between the different professions in principle.

      • Tom Mininger says:

        Thank you Stephane and Klaus.

  26. Thank you, Amanda, for sharing those loving thoughts of your flatmate and friend. It may be some comfort that Meredith’s senseless killing, and yours and Raffaele’s unjust imprisonment and fight for justice changed other lives too. Belatedly as a retired doctor living near Perugia, I awoke as did others at the end of your first trial to the fact that I might be in a unique position to do something. There was doubtless some guilt that 30 years before I had not acted on behalf of an innocent patient of mine, Stefan Kiszko, who was framed and convicted in England for the murder of 11 year old Leslie Molseed (see ISBN 9781909976351). Becoming involved in your fight for justice led me to an understanding of the psychopathology of violent crime and unjust retribution so often inflicted on innocent bystanders. And the way in which effective public prosecutors, selected for their lack empathy, may target the innocent within faulted and medieval systems such as we see in Italy, the UK and USA (see for example Darlie Routier on Death Row in Texas). In the case of Italy there are major structural failures in the system which give too much power to one individual, and allow the innocent to be sucked into a judicial black hole from which there is usually no exit. Current instances are the convictions of Massimo Bossetti; of Olinda Romano and his wife Angela Rosa Bazzi; and of Sabrina Miseri and her mother Cosima Serrano. Like yours, these are all cases driven by incompetent and/or malicious prosecutors, the press and TV shows, suspect-centricity, Italy’s love of the convoluted story and the need after a brutal murder to convict at all costs.

  27. Tom Zupancic says:

    While the memory of this tragedy brings so much sorrow, the memories of the good things truly count. So while so much was lost, perhaps in the end the good can bring us hope.

  28. Albert (R. Calleros) says:

    Yo siempre he admirado tu resiliencia a la luz del asesino brutal de tu amiga Meredith. Yo te deseo lo mejor en todos tus esfuerzos futuros. (I have always admired your resilience in light of the brutal murder of your friend Meredith. I wish you the best in all your future endeavors.)

    Albert (R. Calleros)
    Anaheim, CA, USA

  29. Vicki says:

    Hi Amanda,
    I am sorry you lost a friend and were never really able to mourn her. Remember those memories of her, not one person can ever take them from you. I hope you are doing well and looking forward more than backward. Best wishes.

  30. Kevin says:

    A beautiful tribute to a wonderful friend you had for all too short a time — and just the right reflection on the way your mourning for Meredith and your fight for your own freedom are inextricably linked.

    For any 20-year-old to embark on such an exciting journey as a year abroad in Italy and then have it cut short by the tragic murder of a close friend and roommate is, by itself — even without being accused, vilified, prosecuted, imprisoned — a terrible ordeal to endure. Sometimes, when I think of your story, I feel like the loss for you is not only the obvious – four years of wrongful imprisonment (and four more years of legal jeopardy) — but also that you were simply robbed of the time and space needed to deal with, “My god, my roommate was murdered … I’ve lost a new friend … and it could have so easily been me … ”

    So it’s gratifying – to those of us in the general public, who have no right to expect any part of your personal story to be made public — to see nonetheless how well you’ve survived this ordeal, to witness your continued development as a thoughtful, intelligent writer — and, on this sad anniversary, to share your memories of Meredith.

  31. David says:

    Hope you are holding out OK Amanda on today the day of this sad anniversary. Best wishes to the memory of Meredith!

Comments are closed.