Even her stepfather was not sure whether she should go to Italy, because she was not mature enough to be in a foreign country alone. She was jealous and self centered. She was jealous of Meredith and had a hard time controlling her impulses. Sometimes the the objective evidences are not present, but Amanda's body language and immature behavior was enough. She was laughing in court and was disrespectful by not taking Meredith's death seriously.
After that had happened, you can tell by Amanda's facial expressions that she is guilty (for she looks very different than before; it is not the traumatized face). She was drunk that night, and when she went into the bathroom, she didn't notice the blood or get shocked until after taking a shower! When her friend died, she really didn't show her shocked expression normally (imagine if that happened to your friend). Amanda got 4 million dollars for killing Meredith!
Why does she need a different story for every different kind of audience? She told her family and the general public she was badly treated, she testified in court she was well treated. She told her family and the general public the police gave her Patrick Lamumba's name, she testified in court that they didn't. Why does she continue to act as if she has been wronged when she admits to lying in a murder investigation? Why does she need a PR campaign to claim there was no evidence when there are thousands of pages of evidence and court documents? Why does she want to tell her 'story ' in a book when the only place it matters is in court? How dare she talk about needing closure? She thinks she can get away with murder by writing silly narratives that give a better impression of her than is true. Please read her email full of lies written days after the murder where she practices her alibi story, or look up Amanda Knox talking dolls on youtube, to get a sense of how many lies this woman has told. She wants 'closure' so she can write 'the end' on her ridiculous mess of stories. She comes across as a disturbed individual. Her only defence is 'it couldn't have been me, I'm a nice girl'. That is not a defence.
There is a saying in America: The truth about a liar is that a liar can never remember his own lies. And that's why I'm sure Knox is guilty. She couldn't remember her own lies, so she made up new lies. That's what guilty people do. And the fact that she lied, flat-out lied, about her alibi is damning.
Mike Tucker, author of 1931
Visiting Scholar on Counterterrorism, US Naval Academy
Why would an innocent person admit to being present at the murder of a friend without being tortured?
That kind of thing can happen with mentally defective subjects and children under the age of 16, but Knox was/is a reasonably intelligent and extroverted 3rd year university student in her twenties.
Knox's behaviour has been commented on by numerous experts. Google psychopath and Amanda Knox and there is some interesting commentary.
In the documentary, "Amanda Knox: the Untold Story", the forensic expert commented on Knox's prison diaries (which were unethically leaked). He said that she was a complete narcissist; in some places she compared herself to Helen of Troy, apparently; and she was under the delusion that everyone was coming on to her.
Her ex boyfriend, Raffelo Sollecito, wrote in his book that she lived for the moment. That tells you everything about her motivations: she didn't have a clear motive. They were high, and something very bad happened. She's GUILTY, and it shows every time she's onscreen. Why does her PR team insist on putting her up as a smart girl? Her vocabulary is horrible and she's a terrible liar.
I agree with all the evidence and have no doubt she was involved somehow.
Someone held the poor girl down, but why hasnt rudy guede made any concrete statements
concerning her and her BF involvement. Many americans say the italians were simply "anti american" if that were the case why did they sentence a man from italy (her BF) and another from ivory coast?
A number of things indicate the guilt of Amanda Knox. She implicated an innocent man, glass was found on top of clothes (indicating that it was staged), drug users are known to be unstable, she had an association with Gude and she also acts guilty. Innocent people do not get anxious or change their stories.
The staged burglary and clean up is enough to point the finger fully at Amanda being involved. Who else would have done that? She had the key, the mop, the knowledge of the house, the time, the reading lamp, the relationship with Meredith. Why would anyone clean up if they were not involved.
Her own confession putting herself at the scene
The false accusation against her employer
The subsequent changes in her account as she was arrested
The mixed blood spots
Her table lamp locked in the murder room
The different accounts of the locked door
Both cell phones turned off
The DNA evidence implicating her and her boyfriend
The staging of the murder scene..False break in..Moved body..Covering body
Her dubious account of her activity the morning after the murder
The witness who saw her and her boyfriend overlooking the cottage on the murder night
The shopkeeper who saw her when she claimed to be in her bed sleeping
The 3am call to her mother which she denied making
Her overall behaviour after the murder
- "They were drunk, they were on drugs, and they wanted to have an orgy" - puritanical prejudice, "Reefer Madness".
- "She implicated an innocent man" - 20-year old innocent abroad, interrogated all night, without a lawyer, in a language learned for 6 weeks, browbeaten by police (who failed to make a tape), psychologically "broken" until acquiesced in police theory must have met a man who she texted (mistranslated an English idiom), and had traumatic amnesia
- "Someone held the poor girl down" - Guede admitted was an accomplice, maybe scared (how long before he got stabbed in jail?)
- "Many americans say the italians were simply 'anti-american'" - media sensationalized demented prosecution theory of rape orchestration by men in thrall to her sexual power
- "She is plainly a psychopath! She stutters, pauses" - Survived terrible ordeal that should fill people with rage at the injustice, and crush the the spirit of most of us. How should she speak?
- "The break-in was staged" - possible, but scene so contaminated (no photos of window shutters, Filomena disturbed glass as retrieved laptop). Guede and accomplice may have staged to divert suspicion since he had a connection to the house.
- "Knox's blood mixed with Kercher's appears in the hallway" - her DNA (not blood) was in the house because she lived there (!!)
- "It contains pictures of the crime scene" - lurid shots (shown in a prosecution last-gasp stunt) of a phenolphthalein reaction not blood
- "knife taken from Sollecito's drawer. The DNA evidence on that knife was questioned" PCR tests are so sensitive (amplifying few molecules of DNA) contamination can occur terrifyingly easily. Forensics withheld full documentation until the appeal
- "Knox did cartwheels" - no she didn't (splits). Lecherous policeman asked her to show her yoga moves.
- "The knife found in her boyfriend's kitchen had just been cleaned with bleach" - no it hadn't. A policeman picked it at random because thought it looked "clean", and that knife didn't fit the wounds anyway
- "several neighbors saw Amanda and her bf out and about around the location" - no they didn't, that evidence fell apart (wrong night)
- "Computer records on the bf's computer -- show there was zero activity" - computer actually gives (some) alibi for most probable time of death (unknown because bungling police didn't take body temperature);
- "only Meredith and Amanda had a key to the apt that weekend" - Guede's own account says he talked his way in (he'd visited apartment below before).
- "cleaning of the scene" - no evidence scene was cleaned, just police concoction
- "True Justice for Meredith Kercher" - the sick f&%$s who put that stuff together are the really twisted minds in this story
- "Forensic evidence proved that at least 3 people were involved" - two people. Two. One still unknown
- "Explain the need to buy bleach?" - no evidence she bought or tried to buy bleach (receipts didn't show that)
It's pretty funny how 90% of the people vote yes are basing this off emotions rather than FACTS. You know like the fact that there was no DNA evidence for her, oh right emotions and how you "feel" should over rule facts right? Yeah no. Another thing is people pointing out her sexual desires as part of being guilty, it's just like the Jody case in which the defense tried to use his sexual preferences into something that could be a "possible" reaso to why she had to kill him in "self defense" give me a break. If sexual desires is a way to determine sheathed you are guilty for something than everyone who has read the best seller shades of grey or whatever is automatically guilty.
I don't know how this could possibly be real life. There is ZERO evidence convicting her of murder. Not even one solid piece. How do those policeman still have their jobs? They need to be seriously investigated for because it seems the entire department is corrupted. How embarrassing it must feel to be so publicly incompetent at fulfilling your job. This was a witch hunt from the beginning and Amanda was made an example. It's disgusting.
After reading her book, looking the evidence and following both the trial and appeal it is obvious the prosecution way overstepped and in the interim has tried to save face. You simply can't judge people on reactions because EVERYBODY reacts to situations very differently. Everything I have seen is completely normal behavior for a naive little girl thrown into a world she had no business in. For her to have been a psychopath there would have been signs in her earlier life. Instead, Amanda was a model student and a good person with morals. Nothing shows up to contradict these facts.
Come on, 2 college kids do a thrill killing in a place one of them lives?
Rudy bolts from the country and she stays put.
Doesn't make any sense
She has little to no DNA in the room the murder took place. It couldn't have been scrubbed or Rudy's DNA would have been gone too. They have their murderer, why do they persist in going after these 2 .
People tell me I have little emotion. I do , just my face doesn't show it. That's the way I am .
I can be torn apart inside and not shed a tear. Some people are like that. It doesn't mean anything, all you Internet physiologists don't know what your talking about. Its has nothing to do with empathy or anything else. This is why why we have to be Guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Isn't it obvious These 2 kids were trying to put distance between them and the murder, so they wouldn't be suspects ? Being naive kids they lied and said the wrong things and implicated themselves. Just like children do.
The Italian justice system is more of a railroad system, they want a conviction and will do anything they have to, to get it.
It's impossible to link her to the scene. I still believe in that your innocent until proven guilty. Evidence was mishandled and nothing links her to the murder. You just can't accuse someone of a murder with no evidence. If her DNA was found on or around the body I might feel differently.
This isn't even close, but it's a testament to how easily sometimes police and prosecutors can coverup their mistakes by simply accusing and providing evidence that doesn't even withstand a cursory examination. A "murder knife" which doesn't match the wounds and tests negative for blood found a quarter of a mile away from the crime scene in a drawer? "Bloody footprints" that tested negative for blood but the prosecution tried to hide in court? "Mixed DNA" which amounts to swabbing in a resident's sink where one couldn't avoid getting their DNA on it if they tried? A bra clasp obviously a contamination risk found with traces of about four others that was videoed the day of discovery but apparently left there and "found" six weeks later when the prosecution was running out of evidence and happens to be the only trace of either innocent in the murder room when the real murderer left evidence of himself all over it?
Absurd, which is what happens when a nutcase prosecutor already convicted of abuse of office while pursuing a nonsensical theory that a long inactive serial killer was really the work of a satanic cult, filing bogus charges on twenty or so people before finally being stopped. Shortly after he takes a mundane rape murder by a known burglar and pretends to find "evidence" of pagan rituals and therefore must be the work of a couple of college kids his police take into the backroom and interrogate until they're, confused, broken and incoherent and he gets them to sign nonsense statements to implicate another innocent which he refuses to release for 20 days despite them recanting the same day and multiple times subsequently.
Add to that a plethora of mistakes and outright lies fed to the press that live on through hate sites dedicated to taking the freedom of the two innocents rather than admit they were duped by the police lies and tabloid press. This was a very straightforward burglar surprised in the act who fled the country and was identified by the evidence he left all over the room, while nothing of the three arrested was found--until they came up with that dubious contaminated bra clasp when they were facing having to release everyone and admit their bizarre ritualistic orgy scenario was complete nonsense.
FBI agents John Douglas and Steve Moore both strongly opposed the obviously fraudulent conviction and campaigned for the innocence of Raffaele and Amanda. The court appointed Italian independent experts delivered a devastating report on the junk DNA science and the entire forensic case, in accord with about ten other DNA scientists who came forth to protest the perversion of science practiced by police and accepted by the first court.
The residue of that disgusting tabloid smear and the transmission of outright lies, mistakes and irrelevancies produced by the police and prosecution lives on at dedicated hate sites to this day, and it appears many of them have already infested this poll. They should be ashamed.
There was no evidence in the beginning and there is no evidence now. Rudy Guede is the only one responsible for Meredith's murder. His DNA, bloody footprint, break in (just like the same MO he used in prior burglaries) proves it. Italy cant accept that they made a huge mistake convicting Amanda & Raffaele. This is an attempt to save face.
There is no evidence Knox was involved at all. No scientific, no witnesses, no cctv, no DNA, all while they both have a quite strong alibi.
The prosecution made use of drug addled bums and proven liars to make a case...But that facts remain they is not one reliable piece of evidence linking Knox to this crime. No motive, no prior history. All while the very common crime of a interrupted robbery turned rape and murder against a single rather smallish girl is indisputable. Volumes of evidence exist that proves this is exactly what happened...And it is no mystery as to who did it...His name is Rudy Guede. His DNA is found on, and inside the victim. Also on her clothing, her purse. His shoe prints in her blood, his finger prints also in her blood, his palm print also in her blood...
How dumb do you have to be to not understand this? Oh wait those who voted yes probably think the government took down the twin towers also ....Right?
Italy "lost" the interrogation tapes. The Prosecutor has a shady past. None of Amanda's DNA at crime scene. Prosecutor claims she cleaned the crime scene with bleach: How does she clean her own DNA and her boyfriends but not Rudy's? There is too much DNA that can not be observed by the naked eye. She was advised against getting a lawyer by the prosecutor. She wasn't fluent in Italian, therefore was mis understood several times. The Italian Supreme Court acquitted her once, so they obviously saw that something wasn't right. With taking her to court again, they're trying to save face and not admit that the prosecutor is an idiot. Because there was unidentified DNA, the saddest part about this is that one of Meredith's killers is still out there.