Tuesday, June 26, 2018

Knox v Knox 7: How She Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #53 To #69

Posted by Chimera




(Click here to go straight to Comments. Long post.)

1. Series Context

Knox lies?! Anyone who reads here for a while is left in no doubt of that.

Anyone who watched the trial in Italian concluded that. Even her own lawyers concluded that. They publicly requested in 2008 that she stop all her lying.

Numerous sworn witnesses in court, with no dog at all in this fight, contradicted her. Easily identifiable lies now number up in the thousands. They tend to be malicious (how she hates other), and they tend to be narcissistic (how she loves herself).

To close case-watchers they stand out a mile. 

And yet amazingly more than four out of every five critics who reviewed her book on the Amazon site accepted what she said, word for word. And more than four out of every five critics who reviewed the Netflix report accepted what she said, word for word.

Past posts in this series and other series addressed Knox lies at (1) the time of arrest and 2007 hearings, (2) the 2008 hearings, (3) Knox at trial, (4) Knox in prison, (5) Knox at the Hellman appeal, (6) Knox back in Seattle, when (7) she wrote her book, (8) Knox emailing Judge Nencini, (9) Knox in recent paid presentations, and (10) Knox on US media and especially Netflix (with more to follow).

This further 8-part series puts (3) above along side (7) above to show further how it is a really, really bad idea to believe anything at all in Knox’s book.

It was illegally targeted to derail the Nencini appeal. Both Knox and Sollecito took numerous panic actions in 2013-14.

2. Telling Contradictions 53 To 69

53. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

(See here for all full names}

GM:  Now, what happened next? You, confronted with the message, gave the name of Patrick. What did you say?
AK:  Well, first I started to cry. And all the policemen, together, started saying to me, you have to tell us why, what happened? They wanted all these details that I couldn’t tell them, because in the end, what happened was this: when I said the name of “Patrick”, I suddenly started imagining a kind of scene, but always using this idea: images that didn’t agree, that maybe could give some kind of explanation of the situation. I saw Patrick’s face, then Piazza Grimana, then my house, then something green that they told me might be the sofa. Then, following this, they wanted details, they wanted to know everything I had done. But I didn’t know how to say. So they started talking to me, saying, “Okay, so you went out of the house, okay, fine, so you met Patrick, where did you meet Patrick?” I don’t know, maybe in Piazza Grimana, maybe near it. Because I had this image of Piazza Grimana. “Okay, fine, so you went with him to your house. Okay, fine. How did you open the door?” Well, with my key. “So you opened the house”. Okay, yes. “And what did you do then?” I don’t know. “But was she already there?” I don’t know. “Did she arrive or was she already there?” Okay. “Who was there with you?” I don’t know. “Was it just Patrick, or was Raffaele there too?” I don’t know. It was the same when the pubblico ministero came, because he asked me: “Excuse me, I don’t understand. Did you hear the sound of a scream?” No. “But how could you not have heard the scream?”. I don’t know, maybe my ears were covered. I kept on and on saying I don’t know, maybe, imagining…

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 105] ‘’ .... There was a bloody handprint smeared on the wall and a bloody shoeprint on the floor. A blood-soaked handkerchief was lying in the street nearby.’‘

[WTBH, Chapter 21, Page 254] ‘’ ... “Amanda, the investigators are in a conundrum,” Carlo said. “They found so much of Guede’s DNA in Meredith’s room and on and inside her body. But the only forensic evidence they have of you is outside her bedroom. Raffaele’s DNA evidence is only on the bra hook. If you and Raffaele participated in the murder, as the prosecution believes, your DNA should be as easy to find as Guede’s.” “But Carlo, no evidence doesn’t mean we cleaned up. It means we weren’t there!” “I know,” Carlo said, sighing. “But they’ve already decided that you and Raffaele faked a break-in to nail Guede. I know it doesn’t make sense. They’re just adding another link to the story. It’s the only way the prosecution can involve you and Raffaele when the evidence points to a break-in and murder by Guede.”

[WTBH, Chapter 23, Page 274] ‘’ ... Guede’s lawyers must have realized that he was better off in a separate trial, since the prosecution was intent on pinning the murder on us. The evidence gathered during the investigation pointed toward his guilt. His DNA was all over Meredith’s room and her body, on her intimate clothing and her purse. He had left his handprint in her blood on her pillowcase. He had fled the country. The prosecution called Guede’s story of how he “happened” to be at the villa and yet had not participated in the murder “absurd”—though they readily believed his claims against Raffaele and me. One of the big hopes for us was that with so much evidence against Guede, the prosecution would have to realize Raffaele and I hadn’t been involved….’‘

[WTBH, Chapter 23, Page 274]  ... He didn’t look like a murderer. He was wearing jeans and a sweater. It was almost impossible to imagine that he had cut Meredith’s throat. But if he hadn’t, his DNA wouldn’t have been everywhere in Meredith’s room.”

[WTBH, Chapter 27, Page 339] ”Copious amounts of Rudy Guede’s genetic material had been found in Meredith’s bedroom, on her body, in her purse, and in the toilet.”

[WTBH, Chapter 27, Page 342] ‘’ .... Had Raffaele been in the room, his DNA would have been as abundant as Guede’s. It would be illogical to suggest that it was left on a single small hook on Meredith’s bra and nowhere else.’‘

[WTBH, Chapter 28, Page 352] ‘’ ... Guede had stolen! He had killed Meredith! He had left a handprint in Meredith’s blood! He had fled! He had lied!’‘

[Comments] It makes no sense to get AK to “imagine” what could have happened.  And, if as AK says is true, then with all the abundant evidence present, what happened should be pretty clear, they would just need a suspect.  If only police knew who what men visited upstairs…. perhaps Knox could make a list for them ....

[Comments] Just to clarify, all that evidence proves beyond any doubt that Guede did it.  And that evidence was gathered by .... oh right, those CSI who failed to meet those international standards regarding AK and RS.  Makes sense to me.

54. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

GM:  An image of Piazza Grimana, that’s right. Now listen, in the interrogation, page 95, the same interrogation, but the same expression turns up in other places, I can give references if necessary…

[Start of 6:54 minute video segment] ...I asked this question: Why did you throw out an accusation of this type? In the confrontations with Mr. Lumumba (I was continuing and you answered right away): “I was trying, I had the possibility of explaining the message in my phone. He had told me not to come to work.” Perfectly normal things. So, faced with a perfectly normal circumstance, “My boss texted me to tell me not to come to work and I answered him,” you could have just stated that. End of response. Instead, faced with the message, and the questions of the police, you threw out this accusation. So I am asking you, why start accusing him when you could calmly explain the exchange of messages? Why did you think those things could be true? }}
AK:  I was confused.
GM:  You have repeated that many times. But what does it mean? Either something is true, or it isn’t true. Right now, for instance, you’re here at the audience, you couldn’t be somewhere else. You couldn’t say “I am at the station.” You are right here, right now

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[Comments] A very valid point by PM Mignini.  AK can calmly explain a message, yet gets so worked up she imagines other things…..?!?!

55. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

AK:  My confusion was because firstly, I couldn’t understand why the police was treating me this way, and then because when I explained that I had spent the whole time with Raffaele, they said “No, you’re a liar”. It was always this thing that either I didn’t remember or I was lying. The fact that I kept on and on repeating my story and they kept saying “No, you’re going to prison right now if you don’t tell the truth,” and I said “But I’ve told the truth,” “No, you’re a liar, now you’re going to prison for 30 years because either you’re a stupid liar or you forgot. And if it’s because you forgot, then you’d better remember what happened for real, right now.” This is why I was confused. Because I didn’t understand. I didn’t understand why. I didn’t understand anything any more. I was so scared and impressed by all this that at some point I thought What the heck, maybe they’re right, maybe I forgot.
GM:  So, and then, you accused Lumumba of murder. This is the conclusion

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[Comments] It is always this thing or that, and you are either forgetting, or lying?  Well, having read Linda Kuhlman’s book (which has your name on it), I believe that most of what you say is bullshit.

[Comments] So AK would go to jail for 30 years because she is either: (a) a stupid liar, or (b) you forgot?  So is AK claiming she was threatened with false imprisonment for not remembering something

[Comments] Maybe you forgot being a party to a murder?  Not likely.

56. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

GM:  Lapses of memory. Moments where you couldn’t remember things that you had done. “What did I do yesterday? I don’t know.”
AK:  [Laughing] I’ve had that problem all my life.
GM:  What?
AK:  I’ve had that problem all my life. I can’t remember where I put my keys.
GM:  So it happened to you at other times? Explain it to me. You previously mixed up things, didn’t know whether you had dreamed things or they were real?
AK:  No, not that part about the imagination! I would forget for example what I ate yesterday for dinner, yes, that happened to me, but not to actually imagine things.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH, Page 459, Author’s Note]

The writing of this memoir came to a close after I had been out of prison for over a year. I had to relive everything, in soul-wrenching detail. I read court documents and the transcripts of hearings, translated them, and quoted them throughout. Aided by my own diaries and letters, all the conversations were rendered according to my memory. The names of certain people, including friends, prisoners, and guards, have been changed to respect their privacy….

Now that I am free, I’ve finally found myself in a position to respond to everyone’s questions. This memoir is about setting the record straight.

[Comments] AK jokes in Court that all her life she has problems mixing up and not remembering things, yet this book, written 6 years after the fact is supposed to be accurate.

[Comments] What court documents does she refer to?  AK does reference the Matteini decision (fairly accurately) which saw PL locked up, but it was her frame job that caused it.

[Comments] What transcripts does AK refer to?  TJMK has done several, but none are referenced in WTBH

Click for Post:  Dr Mignini’s Very Telling Interview Of Knox Dec 2007 #1
Click for Post:  Dr Mignini’s Very Telling Interview Of Knox Dec 2007 #2
Click for Post:  Dr Mignini’s Very Telling Interview Of Knox Dec 2007 #3
Click for Post:  Dr Mignini’s Very Telling Interview Of Knox Dec 2007 #4

[Comments] Names have been changed to protect privacy?  Really, AK accuses prison staff of harassment and sexual assault, yet changes the names?  And remember, even though Carlo Dalla Vedova and Luciano Ghirga leave her in that hell, she still thanks them in her book.

[Chapter 11, Page 137] ‘’ ... Still, what came next shocked me. After my arrest, I was taken downstairs to a room where, in front of a male doctor, female nurse, and a few female police officers, I was told to strip naked and spread my legs. I was embarrassed because of my nudity, my period—I felt frustrated and helpless. The doctor inspected the outer lips of my vagina and then separated them with his fingers to examine the inner. He measured and photographed my intimate parts. I couldn’t understand why they were doing this. I thought, Why is this happening? What’s the purpose of this? ....’‘

[Chapter 12, Page 149] ‘’ .... I was hit on the head, twice.” I said.  The doctor gestured to the nurse, who parted my hair and looked at my scalp.  Not hard,” I said. “It just startled me. And scared me.”  “Ive heard similar things about the police from other prisoners,” the guard standing in the background said.

[Chapter 16, Page 191] Doctor-patient confidentiality didn’t exist in prison. A guard was ever-present, standing right behind me. This bothered me so much that, as time went on, I skipped a needed pelvic exam and didn’t seek help when I got hives or when my hair started falling out. Whatever happened in the infirmary was recycled as gossip that traveled from official to official and, sometimes, back to me.
How each visit went depended on the doctor, and I was grateful for any gesture that wasn’t aggressive or disdainful. A female physician liked to talk to me about her trouble with men. And one day, when I was being seen by an older male doctor, he asked me, “What’s your favorite animal?”
“It’s a lion,” I said. “Like The Lion King—Il Re Leone.”
The next time I saw him he handed me a picture of a lion he’d ripped out from an animal calendar. I drew him a colorful picture in return, which he taped to the infirmary wall. Later, when he found out that I liked the Beatles, one of us would hum a few bars from various songs to see if the other could name the tune.

[Chapter 16, Page 194] ‘’ ... Luciano looked revolted, and Carlo urged me, “Anytime Argirò calls you alone into an office, tell him you don’t want to speak with him. He could be talking about sex because Meredith was supposedly the victim of a sexual crime and he wants to see what you’ll say. It could be a trap.”

[Chapter 17, Page 197] ‘’ ... Vice-Comandante Argirò broke the news. Instead of his usual greeting—a lecherous smile and a kiss on both cheeks—he stayed seated behind his desk. His cigarette was trailing smoke. His face was somber. Something was wrong….’

[Comments] Read some of this and this and this and this  and decide for yourself how reliable she is as a narrator.and

57. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

GM:  The knives… You started to tremble and cry and covered your ears with your hands. Suddenly. Can you explain why?
AK:  As I said…
GCM:  Tell him if the episode is true, if it happened, how and why.
AK:  All right. The fact that I cried in the house when I saw the knives is true. I cried, because when I entered the house, I had to look around to see if anything was missing that could have been used to kill someone, it made a strong impression on me. It was as if all that time, I hadn’t been able to even accept the fact that she was really killed, Meredith, and then having to actually be inside the house, looking at knives, being actually there, it was as though the people around me…I was there, and they were asking me to look if there were any knives missing. I said “Okay”, but the situation was so heavy, I don’t know, it really hit me.
GM:  So when you looked at the knives, you felt disturbed.
AK:  Yes, I was disturbed, it made such an impression on me.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH, Chapter 9, Page 100/101]
“Everything looks okay,” I said, my voice small and quavering. I felt like a kid who’s terrified to go down the hall in the dark. Distraught, I forgot to check if my own rent money was still in the drawer of my desk.
“Now come back to the kitchen.”
I did.
“Open the bottom drawer and look through the knives. Do you see any missing?”
This is where we kept our overflow utensils, the ones we almost never needed. When I pulled open the drawer, stainless steel gleamed up at me. “I don’t know if there’s one missing or not,” I said, trembling.
“We don’t really use these.”
I reached in, pushed a few knives around, and then stood up helplessly. I knew the assortment in the drawer might include the murder weapon—that they were asking me to pick out what might have been used to slash Meredith’s throat. Panic engulfed me.

[Comment] The crying and ear covering discussed at trial is not listed in the book.  And Knox   knew the assortment in the drawer might include the murder weapon?  Wow….

58. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

GM:  Okay. Okay. Listen, another question. The lamp that was found in Meredith’s room, a black lamp with a red button, that was found in Meredith’s room, at the foot of the bed. Was it yours?
AK:  I did have a lamp with a red button in my room, yes.
GM:  So the lamp was yours.
AK:  I suppose it was.
GM:  Was it missing from your room?
AK:  You know, I didn’t look.
GM:  Did Meredith have a lamp like that in her room?
AK:  I don’t know.
GM:  Now, another question. You told us before, this story about the door, about knocking down the door, that Raffaele tried to break down the door. You said that you tried to explain that sometimes she did have her door locked, you told us about this point. Now, I want to ask you this question: Raffaele didn’t by any chance try to break down the door to get back the lamp we talked about?
AK:  [perfectly calm reasonable voice] No, we didn’t know the lamp was in there.
GM:  You didn’t know that your lamp was in there?
AK:  In the sense that the lamp that was supposed to be in my room, I hadn’t even noticed it was missing. I tried—
GM:  You didn’t see that it was missing?
AK:  No, I didn’t see that it was missing.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[Comment] The topic of the lamp is left out of the book.

59. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

MC:  But from the records, we see that you called your mother—not only from the records but also the pings [?] that you first called your mother at 12. At midday.
AK:  Okay?
MC:  What time is it at midday? What time is it in Seattle, if in Perugia it is midday?
AK:  In Seattle it’s morning. It’s a nine hour difference, so three in the morning.
MC:  Three o’clock at night?
AK:  Yes.
MC:  So your mother was surely sleeping.
AK:  Yes.
MC:  But at 12:00 nothing had happened yet. That’s what your mother also said—
AK:  I told my mother—
MC: —during the conversation you had with her in prison. Even your mother was amazed that you called her at midday, which was three or four o’clock at night, to tell her that nothing had happened.
AK:  I didn’t know what had happened. I just called my mother to say that we had been sent out of the house, and that I had heard something—
MC:  But at midday nothing had happened yet in the sense that the door had not been broken down yet.
AK:  Hm. Okay. I don’t remember that phone call. I remember that I called her to tell her what we had heard about a foot. Maybe I did call before, but I don’t remember it.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 66]
My skittering brain pulled up my mom’s mantra: when in doubt, call. Forgetting the nine-hour time difference between Perugia and Seattle, I pressed the number sequence for home. My mom did not say hello, just “, are you okay? What’s wrong?” It was in the middle of the night in Seattle, and she was worried.
“I’m on my way back to Raffaele’s,” I said, “but I just wanted to check in. I found some strange things in my house.” I explained my reasons for worrying. Then I asked, “What do you think I should do?”
“Call your roommates,” she said. “Go tell Raffaele, and call me right back.”

[Comments] So AK didn’t remember the call in court in 2009, but does remember it 4 years later, in 2013?

60. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

GCM:  So either you had a particular motive, or it was a habit.
AK:  Yes. Well, since I don’t remember this phone call, because I remember the one I made later, but obviously I made that phone call. If I did that, it’s because I thought that I had something I had to tell her. Maybe I thought right then that there was something strange, because at that moment, when I went to Raffaele’s place, I did think there was something strange, but I didn’t know what to think. But I really don’t remember this phone call, so I can’t say for sure why. But I guess it was because I came home and the door was open, and then—
MC:  It’s strange. You don’t remember the phone call, but do you remember the conversation with your mother in prison?
AK:  I had so many. But yes.
MC:  This conversation must have been the one of the 10th of November. Do you remember when your mother said “But at 12, nothing had happened yet.”
AK:  I don’t remember that.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 66]
My skittering brain pulled up my mom’s mantra: when in doubt, call. Forgetting the nine-hour time difference between Perugia and Seattle, I pressed the number sequence for home. My mom did not say hello, just “, are you okay? What’s wrong?” It was in the middle of the night in Seattle, and she was worried.
“I’m on my way back to Raffaele’s,” I said, “but I just wanted to check in. I found some strange things in my house.” I explained my reasons for worrying. Then I asked, “What do you think I should do?”
“Call your roommates,” she said. “Go tell Raffaele, and call me right back.”

[Comments] So AK didn’t remember the call on November 10, 2007, yet she still does remember it for the 2013 book?

61. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

MC:  And in the morning you went out around 10:30.
AK:  Around then.
MC:  You went to get the mop.
AK:  Yes. To take a shower and change, and get the mop, yes.
MC:  But hadn’t you taken a shower the evening before, at Raffaele’s place?
AK:  Yes, but then we made love. So I wanted to take another shower.
MC:  The next day. Not right away after. But the next day.
AK:  Well, we made love and then I fell asleep. Then, the next morning, I wanted to take a shower

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[Comments] Yes, a woman smelling of cat-piss is every man’s dream

62. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

FM:  Of November. November 2.
AK:  Sorry. Dates…
FM:  So, you called your mother three times. Do you remember that?
AK:  I remember calling my mom. I don’t remember how many times. There was so much to think about right then.
FM:  Fine. Do you remember speaking to your mother in prison on November 10th about this very phone call?
AK:  I don’t remember specifically, but probably we talked about it, yes.
FM:  Do you remember how surprised your mother was that you didn’t even remember about this phone call?
AK:  I remember her being a bit surprised that I didn’t remember very well. But in the end I explained to her that there was just so much movement going on right then, so much confusion, and the whole morning was so emotional, and so all the specific things got mixed up.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH] Text not found.

[Comments] Again, AK says that she was mixed up about the November 2007 calls, and that she is still mixed up about it (in June 2009).  Yet her memory is clear in April 2013.

63. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

FM:  Yesterday, you mentioned having a lot of friends, both in the US and in Perugia. Did you consider Meredith Kercher to be a friend?
AK:  Yes.
FM:  Did you suffer from the loss of this friend?
AK:  Yes, I was very, very shocked by it. I couldn’t even imagine such a thing.
FM:  Do you think about her in your daily life, do you think about this friend who was with you in your house?
AK:  Yes, I remember her. But in the end, I only knew her for one month, and more than anything, I am trying to think how to go forward with my own life, so yes, I remember her, and I am so upset about what happened, and sometimes it seems to me that it can’t be real. I don’t really know what to think of this thing. But yes. I suffered.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH] Text not found.

[Comments] AK only knew MK for a month, and she’s trying to get on with her life.  Yet, in WTBH, it comes off as an emotionally devastating loss.

64. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

FM:  And Patrick Lumumba, did you consider him as a friend, or not?
AK:  I saw him, yes, pretty much as a friend, for the short time I had spent around him. I had a good relationship with him.
FM:  In the days spent at the Questura—later we’ll look at them one by one in order—did you ever think that Patrick Lumumba might be guilty?
AK:  Before I was interrogated on Nov 5th/6th, I never thought that.
FM:  So you thought it for the first time on the 5th and 6th?
AK:  Yes, yes.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH] Text not found.

[Comments] With friends like these .......

65. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

FM:  I’ll ask you later about imagination. Now tell me when you changed your mind about Patrick Lumumba.
AK:  I changed my mind when I realized that my imaginings were not really memories, but just imagination.
FM:  When? When?
AK:  The more time passed, the more I felt sure. But definitely, when I was in prison and alone in my cell, I had so much time to rethink about all the facts I remembered, and about the fact that I remembered not having been with him on that night. The more I thought, mamma mia, he’s probably innocent.
FM:  How many days later?
AK:  How many days?
FM:  Weeks, days, hours, I don’t know. The question is: when?
AK:  I already had a doubt when I was in the Questura. But I became completely sure when—at least I was completely sure that I had never been with him, so what everyone was thinking, that it was him, was only because I myself had said something, and that convinced me that he was innocent. But in the end, I just couldn’t know for sure. I could only know that what I myself had said was not the truth.
FM:  And when did this happen?
AK:  When I was in prison, I guess, but I already had doubts—
FM:  But when in prison?
AK:  —while I was in the Questura…
FM:  But when? Can you tell me? A few days later? A few weeks later?
AK:  No, but even this feeling of doubt starting getting stronger, already on the very next day. As soon as I had time to get paper and try to remember things—

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[Comments] Francesco Maresca (the Kercher lawyer) is trying to get a clear answer from AK (as did Lumumba lawyer Carlo Pacelli) as to when exactly AK knew that PL was an innocent person.  And like his predecessor, he gets the runaround.  Interestingly though, his questions are not appearing anywhere in WTBH

66. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

FM:  What do these words mean to you: state of confusion, and imagination?
AK:  The sense I had at that moment, when I was trying to remember things that I didn’t remember—
FM:  I’m not talking about that moment. I am asking you in general. In general, for you, what is a “state of confusion” and what is “imagination”?
AK:  According to me, it depends on the situation. I can only talk about my own experience, which was, that I had to, forced myself—because they told me that I had to remember something else—to recall something else, so I forced myself so hard, that I was trying to imagine the reality that I had apparently forgotten, and I got confused as to whether the things I had imagined were really memories or just imagination. Because they were fragmentary. They were just images of things I had seen in my life, for example Piazza Grimana, that I saw every day, Patrick, whom I saw almost every day. These things, which were fragmented, I didn’t know if they belonged to that evening, to that sequence of events, or that line of reasoning. I didn’t know, and not knowing what was reality and what was my imagination, this was the state of confusion.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[Comments] Wow…..

67. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

FM:  But have you had other moments in your life in which you were in a state of confusion like this?
AK:  No.
FM:  So you’ve had only this experience.
AK:  Yes.
FM:  So this mechanism of the imagination, you only lived through it in this experience.
AK:  Yes.
FM:  And so, only in this experience did you separate and then mix up reality with imagination and fantasy.
AK:  Yes.
FM:  You also mentioned frustration yesterday.
AK:  Yes.
FM:  For your interrogation by the pubblico ministero and by the police.
AK:  Yes.
FM:  What does frustration mean to you?
AK:  I was frustrated because I felt that even if I was giving, it wasn’t being received. For instance, I felt that I was giving and giving, but they always wanted something—always more, and they didn’t want to listen to me. They asked me something and I answered, it was never enough, never the thing that they wanted to hear. So I was frustrated. I didn’t know how to answer any more, because I had already said, repeated, repeated—

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[Comments] so AK only has these moments when she risks being implicated in a murder?  Good to know

68. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

FM:  Yesterday, you said you saw the drops of blood in the sink, in the bidet.
AK:  I didn’t see them in the bidet.
FM:  I’m sorry. Okay. In the sink. And on the bathmat, right?
AK:  Yes, but after I got out of the shower.
FM:  When you used it to get back to your room?
AK:  Yes.
FM:  All right. On the bathmat, you saw drops like on the sink, or…
AK:  No, it was a larger stain.
FM:  A larger stain. Did it look like a footprint to you?
AK:  No. I just saw a stain.

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 65/66]
I wasn’t alarmed by two pea-size flecks of blood in the bathroom sink that Meredith and I shared. There
was another smear on the faucet. Weird. I’d gotten my ears pierced. Were they bleeding? I scratched the
droplets with my fingernail. They were dry. Meredith must have nicked herself.
It wasn’t until I got out of the shower that I noticed a reddish-brown splotch about the size of an orange on
the bathmat. More blood. Could Meredith have started her period and dripped? But then, how would it have gotten on the
sink?

[Comments] So seeing blood in your bathroom is no biggie?  Okay

69. Trial Versus Book

Knox At Trial In 2009

FM:  So the idea of returning to the house to check your friends’ things, was given to you by Sollecito if I understood correctly.
AK:  He…
FM:  He invited you to clarify matters by telephoning?
AK:  I asked him advice about what to do, because I didn’t know what to think. He said “Call your roommates to see if they know anything, if anything happened to them.”

Knox In Her Book 2013-15

[WTBH, Chapter 6, Page 66/67]
My mom did not say hello, just “, are you
okay? What’s wrong?” It was in the middle of the night in Seattle, and she was worried.
“I’m on my way back to Raffaele’s,” I said, “but I just wanted to check in. I found some strange things in
my house.” I explained my reasons for worrying. Then I asked, “What do you think I should do?”
“Call your roommates,” she said. “Go tell Raffaele, and call me right back.
Hearing Mom’s voice calmed me. It can’t be that bad, I thought.
Pm out of the house. Nothing happened. Pm safe. No one’s in danger.

[Comments] At trial, AK says that Sollecito came up with the idea to call the others.  In the book, her Mother did.


Posted by Chimera on 06/26/18 at 05:00 AM in


Comments

[WTBH, Chapter 23, Page 274]  Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito accuse Guede. 

In his documentary, Damien Echols points the blame to one of the fathers of the young boys of the murders.

Innocent people, ( “not even there, guv” )  would just do their best to tell the truth; not redirect the blame.

Posted by DavidB on 06/27/18 at 07:23 AM | #

Hi DavidB

Stateside people still dont realise how far short the accusations of Guede fell - and how much RS and AK quite credibly blamed one another!

Posted by Peter Quennell on 06/27/18 at 04:57 PM | #

If it were only some small details AK mixed up then it could be fairly easily forgiven. 

However, she mixes up: (a) small details; (b) big details; (c) essential elements of the story; and (d) non-sense with the normal.  The book contradicts itself repeatedly, and so does the trial testimony.

I still chuckle about her explanation of the bloody footprints in the hall (from WTBH). 

Sollecito claims there were measuring errors (in Honor Bound).  Okay. 

Knox claims that it was bleach or a cleaning agent. 

Remember, the whole floor didn’t react as if it were so, only the footprints.  So why are AK/RS walking around with bleach on their feet?

Posted by Chimera on 06/29/18 at 03:29 AM | #

Just to add to Chimera about the footprints:

From AK’s email, 4th November: ‘i was freezing. after sticking around at the housr for a bit’

I think Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito’s feet got very sticky with blood on that night.  Still remembering their sticky feet is something I reckon was still on her mind when she wrote the email.

Posted by DavidB on 06/29/18 at 06:17 AM | #

Yes, in response to Peter’s comment here on the prosecutor at the Nencini appeal, Crini was very sharp.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/extreme_superficiality_achilles_heel_of_the_myriad_misstaters_of_the_case_2/#c27588

His reasoning that found Knox guilty was incisive, remarkably clear. And the lion of Perugia (one lion among many), attorney Francesco Maresca who stood for the Kercher family in diligence and extraordinary intelligence and power, challenged Knox on the witness stand about her obfuscations.

She tried to appear confused and overwhelmed by emotions and in a perpetual fog, which she felt would excuse all of her lies. Maresca showed how inconsistent she was, how she used confusion and “imagination” to cloak her desire to not give honest answers. Her sense of reality versus fantasy was malleable. Fantasy and “confusion” caused by “frustration” could come to her rescue at any moment when she was faced with a hard question. Maresca showed how she had never had the problem discerning truth from fiction until she needed to cover up her part in a crime.

Francesco Maresca also bombarded her with questions about WHEN it began to dawn on Knox that her boss was innocent. Knox had accused her boss of serious crimes the moment she came under pressure about Meredith’s death. Knox quickly pointed to a likely male culprit, her boss. Maresca kept pushing Knox to explain WHEN this fantasy of hers, which got her off the hook, faded and when she returned to sober thought and realized she had made it up in her own head (and as a shield for herself, naturally).

She waffled and talked crazy all around an answer, but finally let it slip out that roughly the very next DAY she had returned to her senses and began to doubt her own accusations of the boss. How convenient that she can lose all grasp of reality and roam through wonderland in a mental abyss of smoke and fog and fragments right when it meets her needs, but can return to clarity and sanity a few hours later when not in an interrogation room.

What Knox could not tell Maresca on the stand was that she had simply made up the accusation against her boss to buy herself time to think of a better alibi for herself that might possibly fool the interrogators, whom she had found to have truth and justice on their side and her interview with them was not the cakewalk or walk in the park she had previously imagined it would be. She was no equal to their experience or the pressure to tell the truth, despite a long career of lying and getting away with it in her household and youth.

And Mignini knew Knox would fold when she was taken back to the scene of the crime, the cottage. She surely did. She quivered and quavered and wept and put her hands over her EARS again when she saw the knife drawer. Mignini knew that Knox had never really processed the killing in her emotions, but had put up a mental shield and compartmentalized the entire night of passion.

In the cold light of day she would be forced to realize in sobriety what she had accomplished against Meredith, an innocent roommate, and that without further questions or words of any sort, but in mute reality, she would have to confront her actions of the recent days.

And she lost it. She created dramatics to get herself removed from the situation. Her breakdown was real but she amped up the volume and used histrionics and emotion to beg for pity. She was allowed to leave the kitchen area and the knife drawer. Mignini knows his stuff, he knows people. Her ice maiden façade melted in the fire of truth.

And this was a house she supposedly wanted to return to live in again after a murder and wanted to resume renting it with her previous roommates whom she assumed were as unaffected by the tragedy within its walls as she was! (or was that desire to return to living in the cottage, a lie to throw smoke over how frightened she really would have been to return to living at the cottage? She is a triple crosser and devious to the max, much like Steve Moore, imho)

Posted by Hopeful on 06/30/18 at 12:06 PM | #


Make a comment

If you are reading this please log in to post a comment.

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Knox v Knox 8: How She Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #70 To #90

Or to previous entry How With Myriad False Claims Steve Moore Pushes To Forefront Of Pro-Knox Crackpots