MKLiesKnoxBook

Overview: This page exclusively covers the 500 or so zombie lies in Knox's English-only 2013 book. See this page for Knox's zombie lies to media and paying groups.

Category: Examples 477-518

12. Knox Book Lies 477 To 518

Posted by Chimera

1. Overall How The Afterword Misleads

#477 [2015 Afterword]

Again Knox goes on and on about how there is no evidence against her or Raffaele in the ‘‘murder room’‘, or the ‘‘murder scene’‘. This is false and seriously misleading for several reasons:

#478 [2015 Afterword]

While Knox predictably misconstrues the evidence against her, she doesn’t talk about the other things we would like to see addressed.

Of course, in this new addition to her book, Knox doesn’t talk about any of the hard evidence (of a non forensic nature). She doesn’t address any of the multiple false alibis that she and Sollecito gave.

Amanda Knox”¦ Trapped, In Her Own Words

Raffaele Sollecito”¦ Trapped, In His Own Words

#479 [2015 Afterword]

Knox does briefly mention the false accusation against Lumumba, but again reiterates that it only happened due to police pressure. A stunningly stupid thing to say, as she is facing a calunnia trial over exactly this issue. But that is not disclosed.

Updates: Sollecito’s Trial For Vilipendio And Diffamazione, Knox’s Trial For Calunnia #2

#480 [2015 Afterword]

In this new afterword, Knox fails to mention that the Italian magazine, Oggi, got into legal trouble from publishing parts of her book.

(1) The Oggi Article Which Conveys To Italy Knox’s Claims Of Crimes Oggi Is Now Charged For

(2) The Oggi Article Which Conveys To Italy Knox’s Claims Of Crimes: Our Claim By Claim Rebuttals

#481 [2015 Afterword]

Knox also fails to mention Sollecito’s current legal troubles over his own book which also made many false claims.

The Sollecito Trial For “Honor Bound” #1

The Sollecito Trial For “Honor Bound” #2

The Sollecito Trial For “Honor Bound” #3

The Sollecito Trial For “Honor Bound” #4

The Sollecito Trial For “Honor Bound” #5

#482 [2015 Afterword]

Knox leaves out that this may not be the end (probably to secure the next publishing at this time).

A Shaky Castle Of Cards At Best: The Long-Term Fight For Legitimacy Begins

A Shaky Castle Of Cards At Best: The Long-Term Fight For Legitimacy #2

#483 [2015 Afterword]

Knox writes positively about Sollecito, but leaves out his ‘‘bride-shopping’’ efforts and anger at her.

Interview Part 1 With Kelsey Kay About Her Sad Experience With Serial Exploiter Sollecito

Interview Part 2 With Kelsey Kay About Her Sad Experience With Serial Exploiter Sollecito

#484 [2015 Afterword]

Knox omits Sollecito’s various efforts to throw her under the bus (Mr. Honour Bound wants to save himself), most amusingly. Sollecito’s line since the Florence appeal is that he doesn’t really know where Knox was that night.

Sollecito Suddenly Remembers He Wasnt There But Cannot Speak For Knox Who (As She Said) Went Out

Spitting In the Wind: Sollecito News Conference Backfires On Him AND Knox - What The Media Missed

Sollecito On Italian TV: Seems RS And AK Selling Out One Another Is Gravitating To A Whole New Plane

#485 [2015 Afterword]

Knox leaves out the resentment and bitterness she herself feels toward ‘‘Mr. Honour Bound’‘.

Seeds Of Betrayal: In Interview Knox Reveals To Italy Her Considerable Irritation With Sollecito

#486 [2015 Afterword]

Knox leaves out that Guede said after the March verdict that he will push for a new trial.

In Big Complication For Cassation Guede Demands New Trial To Prove He Was Not “Accomplice Of Myself”

#487 [2015 Afterword]

Knox still spends more time talking about her sex life in the early chapters than Cassation 1, Florence, Cassation 2 combined.

#488 [2015 Afterword]

Knox lies, and distorts much of the body of facts. Her recollections are totally unreliable despite all the malicious quotes.

#489 [2015 Afterword]

Knox leaves out any information on the upcoming adventures of her, Sollecito and Guede. She acts like this is settled.

#490 [2015 Afterword]

The paperback was released June 9th, the same day her 2nd calunnia trial started in Florence. No coincidence I’m sure.

#491 [2015 Afterword]

Much of the ‘‘I love my family’’ is fake and contrived and is contradicted by (1) her moving out of her mother’s house at the first possible instance and (2) complaints about her father..

2. Dissection Of Specific Knox Claims

Here are dissections of the new part of Knox’s book. Not all of it is included, just the most blatant stuff.

#492 [2015 Afterword]

My friend and co-defendant, Raffaele Sollecito are innocent, but the past 7 1/2 years have shown that innocent people can be wrongfully convicted. And that some minds will not be changed by the truth.

Well, Patrick Lumumba came close to being wrongfully convicted, as a result of your statements, remember that?

Some minds will not be changed by the truth? Well, maybe Edda and Madison, they noticeably backed away.

#493 [2015 Afterword]

We’d been through one lower court trial, two appellate trials, and a decision by Corti di Cassazione. We had been found guilty, innocent, and guilty again.

Finally, Knox seems to understand the difference between a trial and an appeal. Those verdicts were all only provisional, under Italian law.

#494 [2015 Afterword]

My hopes had been high during my first trial, in 2009, but Raffaele and I were convicted amid a media circus.

Yes, there was a ‘‘media circus’‘, but it had nothing to do with Knox being convicted. Strong evidence, and a cold, sarcastic, evasive demeanor on the stand is what did her in.

Italy Shrugs: Why The Defendant’s Testimony Seems To Have Been A Real Flop

This Testimony Does Not Seem To Have Gained Much Traction Here In Italy

#495 [2015 Afterword]

But our first appellate trial, in which ended in October 2011, resulted in a clear and unequivocal finding that we were innocent, setting me free, and allowing my immediate return to the United States. The presiding judge, Claudio Pratillo Hellmann, had renewed my belief that innocent people are ultimately vindicated.

Hellmann also spoke the infamous and telling words: ‘‘The truth may be different.’‘

Hellmann released Knox even though she had a pending calunnia trial, for falsely accusing the police of brutality.

The prosecution didn’t get to present any evidence at all at this ‘‘new trial’‘, so it was very one sided.

Just to be clear, this was a defence appeal. The prosecution did not ask for it.

#496 [2015 Afterword]

In Italy, every case is reviewed by the Corti di Cassazione before it is officially closed. It seemed impossible that just seventeen months after we were found not just not guilty, but innocent, the justices would reverse the decision and send the case back for a retrial—especially since our appeal court-appointed experts rejected the prosecution’s handling of, and conclusions from, the DNA evidence.

Well, in this case the prosecution had valid reasons for asking Cassation to annul the Hellmann verdict. More on that later.

The Massei trial court in 2009 saw all the evidence, and concluded guilt. Hellmann only saw the cherrypicked pieces of evidence the defence contested, nothing else.

Cassation didn’t ‘‘send the case back for a retrial’‘. They allowed you to file another appeal. Big difference between the two.

C&V were not “independent” experts, they worked with the defense, and in fact were not really even experts as was later shown. Consultants should not have been allowed at the appellate level.

#497 [2015 Afterword]

In fact, the DNA evidence cleared us conclusively. It was straightforward: people leave DNA—lots of DNA—wherever they go. None of my DNA was found in my friend, Meredith Kercher’s bedroom, where she was killed. The only DNA, other than Meredith’s, belonged to the man convicted of her murder, Rudy Guede. And his DNA was everywhere in the bedroom. It is, of course, impossible to selectively clean DNA, which is invisible to the naked eye.

Very little usable DNA normally gets shed. There was even very little of Guede’s DNA in the room, in fact, and the entire room was not fully swabbed.

Knox’s DNA wasn’t found in Meredith’s bedroom, but your blood was found mixed with Meredith’s in Filomena’s room, (where the ‘‘burglar’’ broke in), and in the bathroom, where a killer cleaned up.

And while DNA might not be in the room, the alibi witness, Raffaele, has his on Meredith’s bra clasp.

It is also impossible to clean bloody footprints in the hallway, luminol brings them right out.

Even if defence claims about a few pieces of DNA had been valid, still it did not clear Knox conclusively. It still doesn’t explain so many things: false alibis, false accusations, confusing accounts of your movements, shutting off your phones, and the other forensic evidence that was ‘‘not’’ in the appeal.

#498 [2015 Afterword]

We simply could not have cleaned our DNA and left Guede’s and Meredith’s behind. Nor was any trace of me found at the murder scene: not a single fingerprint, footprint, piece of hair, drop of blood or saliva. My innocence and Raffaele’s was irrefutable. Like my legal team, I firmly believed that Corti di Cassazione would affirm the innocence finding.

First, Knox’s shoeprint (a woman’s size 37), WAS found in the room, so that is not true.

Knox’s lamp, wiped clean of prints, was also found in Meredith’s room and Knox was struck dumb trying to explain that.

Again, Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp, which had been cut off.

Bloody footprints (matching Knox and Sollecito), had been in the hallway, and cleaned. Luminol revealed them.

Sollecito’s footprint in Meredith’s blood was found on the bathmat. It was unquestionably his.

The Incriminating Bathroom Evidence: Visual Analysis shows the Footprint IS Sollecito’s

An imprint (a clear one), in blood, on Meredith’s bed, matched a knife found in Raffaele’s home.

Knox’s blood was mixed with Meredith’s and found in the bathroom and in Filomena’s room.

Knox associates only ‘‘forensic’’ evidence, but omits many other types of circumstantial evidence.

There was no trace of Guede in Filomena’s room, where the ‘‘break-in’’ took place, or on the ground or wall where he ‘‘climbed up’‘.

Again, Knox associates only ‘‘forensic’’ evidence with the guilty verdict , but omits many other types of circumstantial evidence.

#499 [2015 Afterword]

But in March 2013 the high court ordered yet another trial, directing the next appeals court to re-examine certain aspects of the case. My world was shattered again. The court gave 3 primary reasons.

Cassation didn’t order a new trial, but did give her the opportunity to appeal again. Not the same thing.

Cassation gave many reasons, we’ll get to that. But to focus on yours ....

#500 [2015 Afterword]

The first concerned the supposed murder weapon. The independent experts had found there was no scientifically reliable proof that Meredith’s DNA was on it, but there was one micro-trace of DNA they deemed too small to test. Based on the prosecution’s claim it could prove to be Meredith’s DNA, the justice’s said it should be tested in the new trial.

So, these experts deemed it too small to test, and therefore never actually did try to test it? Some experts.

If a victim’s DNA could be on the murder weapon, that is a great reason to test it.

This is not a retrial. It is Knox and Sollecito’s appeal.

#501 [2015 Afterword]

Second, during Guede’s appeal in 2009, the theory that there were multiple attackers worked in both the favour of the prosecution and Guede’s defence, which was aiming to reduce Guede’s sentence. Neither Raffaele nor I could present evidence at that trial, so no evidence was presented that there was a single attacker. In our hearing Corte di Cassazione said that Judge Hellmann had not properly factored in the findings of the court sentencing Guede that there had been—

Yes, strange that Knox can’t introduce evidence in the trial of someone she claims not to know.

It was more than just Guede’s appeal in 2009. Judge Micheli in 2008 at the fast track trial, the 2009 appeal, and the 2010 Cassazione appeal all ruled that Guede was involved, but most likely was not alone. Hellmann ‘‘should’’ have factored in the findings of the top court a year earlier.

#502 [2015 Afterword]

—this in spite of the fact that the only forensic at the murder scene belonged to Guede. The court directed that the new trial must account for the other alleged attackers.

Knox repeats her 2 main lies: (a) Forensic evidence is the only type that matters; (b) The ‘‘murder scene’’ is exclusively Meredith’s bedroom, not the whole house.

Again, it is not a new trial. Knox and Sollecito have been allowed to redo their appeal.

#503 [2015 Afterword]

As for the third issue, the high court noted the Judge Hellmann looked at each piece of circumstantial evidence and found each to be unreliable. The court directed that the circumstantial evidence should be reviewed ‘‘as a whole’’ in the new trial.

Again, it is not a new trial, it is an appeal.

But otherwise, Knox is actually correct. Cassation was very critical of how ‘‘piecemeal’’ and disjointed Hellmann seemed to view the evidence. Cassation said that evidence should be considered in a way that best explains everything.

However, Knox seems to have preferred the disjointed method.

#504 [2015 Afterword]

My lawyers argued that this was like saying zero+zero+zero+zero=one. Nonetheless the court ordered another trial.

This is getting repetitive, but Cassation did not order another trial. It allowed Knox and Sollecito to redo their appeal.

0+0+0+0=1 is a red herring. Cassation thought that Hellmann considered everything to be unreliable because he viewed everything separately. As a whole, the evidence makes sense, but only when trying to come up with (separate) explanations does Hellmann make sense.

Cassation was also critical as Judge Hellmann only considered a few pieces of evidence, rather than everything that was presented at trial. Perhaps if a judge is to throw out the prosecution case, he/she should actually review it all.

Hellmann, while finding Guede unreliable, chose to reframe the time of death based solely on Guede’s statements.

Hellmann allowed Alessi and Aviello to testify for the defense, despite their history of making false claims.

Hellmann was critical of Antonio Curatolo, (who saw them together), and without cause found him to be unreliable.

Hellmann twisted parts of Marco Quintavalle’s testimony (who saw Knox in his shop the next morning).

Hellmann claimed Knox’s calunnia against Lumumba was due to duress, caused by a long interrogation. This came despite the testimony in the 2009 Massei trial (and admitted by Knox herself), that she was treated well. See, this is what happens when you have a one-sided trial. Hellmann then increased Knox’s sentence for calunnia from 1 year to 3.

Speaking of the calunnia, Knox doesn’t mention this at all, but Cassation found that it was in fact done to divert attention from herself. But this is left completely out of her ‘‘afterward’‘.

Cassation was critical of Hellmann for cherry-picking his facts. Now, ironically, Knox does the same thing with her summary of Cassation’s verdict.

A Summary Of The Cassazione Ruling On Annulment Of The Knox-Sollecito Appeal

#505 [2015 Afterword]

No legal process was issued to request my return to Italy for the 2013 appellate trial in Florence. My lawyers presented my defence in my absence.

It is expected that all accused will attend their own proceedings, especially when this is their own appeal.

Is this just a confusing way of saying she couldn’t be forced back?

Knox hit the talk shows claiming she is innocent, and afraid, and despite her $3.8 million book deal, can’t afford to go back.

Questions For Knox: How Do You Explain That Numerous Psychologists Now Observe You Skeptically?

Knox didn’t skip out of fear of prison officials, or the drug dealer, Federico Martini, that she got locked up, did she?

Yes, Knox’s lawyers did present in her absence. Judge Nencini wrote it up as ‘‘FAILED TO APPEAR’‘.

#506 [2015 Afterword]

The new court-ordered test of the knife revealed the source of the trace DNA. It was not Meredith’s, it was mine, likely left there when I used to cook in Raffaele’s kitchen, as I had in the days before the murder. This reconfirmed the independent experts’ earlier finding that the knife was not the murder weapon. I wasn’t surprised, but elated. This was the only new material evidence the prosecution presented and it undermined their case. Without new condemning evidence, everything was on track to clear us and finally end this nightmare.

Yes, it was Knox’s DNA, in a groove in the handle. The issue wasn’t whether it was used on Meredith (her DNA was also on it), but whether it could definitively be linked to Knox.

Knox’s DNA on a knife used to kill Meredith is actually pretty strong evidence.

The only new material evidence?

On her May 2014 interview with Chris Cuomo, Knox claimed the evidence presented ‘’ has been proven less, and less, and less’‘.

The Cuomo Interview: Why This May Be The Last Time Knox Tries To Argue Innocence On TV

On her own website, Knox claims ‘‘NO’’ new evidence was introduced at this ‘‘trial’‘.

#507 [2015 Afterword]

It made what came next even harder to stomach. On January 30, 2014, the Florence court found Raffaele and me guilty again. The court fell back on the multiple-attacker theory, even though there was no evidence to support it.

Hard to stomach? Perhaps this is why Knox skipped her own appeal.

Why Knox & Sollecito Appeal Against Guilty Trial Verdict Fails: Multiple Wounds = Multiple Attackers

Meredith had 47 injuries, with no defensive wounds. Unless Guede is Spiderman ....

Guede climbed Filomena’s wall, and broke in without leaving a trace outside. Spiderman could do it ....

Guede was able to hop on one foot (one was bare, one had a shoe on it. Spiderman could do it ...

Guede telepathically caused Knox and Sollecito to give multiple false accounts. Did Spiderman have telekinesis?

Guede left Sollecito’s bloody footprint and DNA behind. Did Spiderman even know him?

Okay, we get it…. Guede is Spiderman.

While the first prosecutor initially that the murder was the result of a bizarre sex game gone wrong, the court now speculated that Meredith and I had fought over Guede’s presence in the apartment or money. and that an argument between us had somehow led Guede, Raffaele, and me to kill her.

Prosecutors never said it was a sex game gone wrong. (Well, it might have been for Knox), but rather that it was a hazing/humiliation.

#508 [2015 Afterword]

My original sentence was 26 years, 4 of which I had served. The new sentence was 28.5 years. The extra time was for ‘‘aggravating circumstances’‘, meaning I’d purposely slandered Patrick Lumumba (when I’d been pressured into falsely implicating him—and implication I’d quickly recanted), in order to undermine the police investigation.

Knox is correct, in that the ‘‘aggravating circumstances’’ were because it was an attempt to undermine the investigation, and it did increase her sentence.

However, she is wrong elsewhere. She was not pressured into doing it. Sollecito pulled her alibi, and this was the solution she came up with.

The Knox Interrogation Hoax #1: Overview Of The Series - The Two Version of the 5-6 Nov 2007 Events

The Meredith Case Wiki Now Has The Key Sollecito Statement 6 Nov 2007 In Full

Also, Knox did not quickly recant. Her 3rd statement was confusing as hell (probably intentionally), and she let PL sit in jail.

A More Detailed Analysis Of Knox’s Statement 6 November 2007 Points Even More Strongly Toward Guilt

Knox did tell her mother that an innocent person was in prison, but neither of them did anything about it.

And of course, Knox would do what anyone who skips their appeal would do—issue a press release, and go to an ‘‘Innocence Convention’‘.

Judge Nencini Issues Harsh Warning To Tell The Truth - So Amanda Knox Does The Precise Opposite

Revenge Of The Knox, The Smear-All Book #12: Finally, We Nail Knox’s Self-Serving 2015 Afterword

#509 [2015 Afterword]

Judge Hellmann, who had retired from the bench, did a rare and welcome thing—he publicly responded to the verdict, calling its decision ‘’ the result of fantasy’‘. he told CNN. ‘‘The Florence Appeal Court has written a script for a movie or a thriller book when it should have considered only the facts and evidence.’‘

Knox is being partially true here. Hellmann did publicly criticise the Nencini verdict.

Knox, however, omits the fact that Hellmann was forced to retire by the CSM after his bungling of the 2011 appeal.

Knox also fails to detail the full reasons why Cassation so completely rejected his verdict.

#510 [2015 Afterword]

Once again, our case had to go to the Corti di Cassazione. But my confidence had dissipated. If the Florence Court could find us guilty after incontrovertible proof that we had no connection to Meredith’s murder, I didn’t know what to expect from the high court. I don’t know if I would survive if I were made to go back to prison with no hope of an appeal.

It didn’t have to be this way. No one forced Knox to file yet another appeal.

The Florence Court didn’t find incontrovertible evidence Knox was not involved. In fact, Nencini wrote about a ‘‘lengthy pattern of untruths’‘.

Curious how Knox knows what was presented at the Florence appeal. She skipped the entire proceedings.

Knox makes no mention of the rambling email she sent to Judge Nencini in December 2013. Probably for the best.

The Cuomo Interview: Why This May Be The Last Time Knox Tries To Argue Innocence On TV

Multiple Ways In Which Amanda Knox’s Email To Judge Nencini Is Quite Misleading

Knox omits mentioning that Sollecito tried to separate his position during the appeal.

What We Might Read Into Sollecito Lawyer Giulia Bongiornos Final Arguments To The Appeal Judges

Knox omits Sollecito being picked up near the border with Slovenia and Austria the day the verdict was handed down.

Knox omits Sollecito going on TV saying that he questions her ‘‘peculiar behaviour’‘.

As Knox & Sollecito Try To Separate Themselves, Each Is Digging The Other In Deeper

#511 [2015 Afterword]

If the guilty verdict was upheld, Raffaele’s word would shrink to the size of his cell. And there would be nothing that his family, his lawyers, or I could do about it. Neither of us deserved jail, but being free while he wasn’t would torment me.

I suspect the real reason it would torment Knox is because she could never be sure if/when he would talk.

How Each of The Three Subtly But Surely Pushed The Other Two Closer to The Fire (Part 1 of 4)

How Each of The Three Subtly But Surely Pushed The Other Two Closer to The Fire (Part 2 of 4)

How Each of The Three Subtly But Surely Pushed The Other Two Closer to The Fire (Part 3 of 4)

How Each of The Three Subtly But Surely Pushed The Other Two Closer to The Fire (Part 4 of 4)

#512 [2015 Afterword]

I majored in creative writing—something I hadn’t been confident enough to consider seriously pre-Italy. I wrote this book, believing that if I told this story with absolute candor, that the truth would persuade not just the Italian court, but the court of public opinion.

So…. those statements accusing Lumumba were just ‘‘getting her feet wet’’ with creative writing?

This book has been written with anything but absolute candor.

Knox won’t attend her own appeals, but somehow a book will help?

Influence the court of public opinion as well? Is that not a contempt of court?

Writing it helped me work through what happened to me.

Telling the truth once in a while might help too.

#513 [2015 Afterword]

The book advance helped repay some of the money my parents and step-parents had borrowed—the maximum allowed against their homes and retirements—and the mounting legal fees I owed my Italian lawyers.

The book advance? Was Knox not paid $3.8 million? Or was only a portion of it given?

Questions For Knox: How Do You Explain That Numerous Psychologists Now Observe You Skeptically?

So, Knox admits to using blood money to clear her family’s debts.

Legal Nightmare For Knox: How Tough American Laws Could Wind Back Blood-Money Profits & Spendings

Knox also admits to using blood money to pay her legal bills.

#514 [2015 Afterword]

My notoriety left me vulnerable at times I least expected. A couple of students in one of my large lecture classes at UW posted pictures of me online saying they were in class with a murderer.

Knox seemed to enjoy the limelight while in court.

Trial: Defendant Noticeably Bubblier Than Meredith’s Sad Friends

Knox would then launch a book tour and dozens of media appearances. So much for Miss Humble.

In Italy The Faux Self Pity Of Knox And Sollecito Is Increasingly Becoming A National Joke

#515 [2015 Afterword]

I had read Raffaele’s book and was surprised that there were things I hadn’t heard before. This was my chance to ask him. In it he describes himself as ‘‘Mr. Nobody’‘. Although he had been falsely imprisoned as long as I had, the prosecution and media portrayed him as a second fiddle, manipulated by me. The prosecution always said he took orders from me. The media referred to him as ‘‘Amanda’s ex-boyfriend’‘.

There are probably many things in the book Raffaele hadn’t heard before. He claims Andrew Gumbel wrote it, in his latest court proceedings.

This is Knox’s chance to ask him? To get your stories straight?

He was falsely imprisoned for as long as Knox had? Sollecito got 3 years for calunnia as well?

Yes, the media did portray it as the ‘‘Amanda Knox Show’‘. He was just a secondary actor.

#516 [2015 Afterword]

He also writes that the prosecution had contacted his defence unofficially to suggest cutting a deal if he testified against me. His family was willing to consider it, but Raffaele resolutely refused. ‘‘I had no idea.’’ I said. ‘‘Thank you.’‘

Francesco Sollecito, Raffaele’s dad, has gone on television to denounce that this proposal ever came up.

Such deals are completely illegal to make in Italy, and word of it never surfaced until this book came out.

In fact, this is one of the claims against Sollecito in his current trial.

The Sollecito Trial For “Honor Bound” #8: Passages For Which Gumbel & Sollecito Are Charged

Sollecito’s Book Honor Bound Hits Italy And Already Scathing Reactions And Legal Trouble

#517 [2015 Afterword]

In April 2013, when my memoir was published, I did my own media tour in New York. I did a Primetime special with Diane Sawyer and made an appearance on Good Morning America! I was featured in articles in USA Today and People. I spoke with reporters as far away as Australia. I gave so many interviews in my publisher’s office—one person after another—that my picture was being taken for one media outlet when the next reporter and photographer were coming in. It was exhausting, but their was a huge upside. I was sure once people hear me tell my story, they will embrace my innocence.

Yes, Knox did a primetime special with Diane Sawyer. It didnt go so well.

YouTube

The book was hardly incredibly insightful or well written

The Amanda Knox Trainwreck: How TV And Book Suggest Knox Is Increasingly Far From Facing Reality

Knox’s book is hardly super detailed or accurate.

Questions For Knox: Did You Undergo An Illegal Interrogation By Mignini? This Is Imprisonable If Not

Nor was it well received by the book-buying public. In fact, a whopping 5% of the published copies were sold.

The Amanda Knox Book: On Top Of Everything Else It Seems The Book Is Financially A Huge Flop

#518 [2015 Afterword]

Unlike the previous high court hearing, the justices listened to all sides without interrupting the defence.

As Knox did not attend the 2013 Cassazione hearing, she would not know how often they were interrupted.

Knox did not attend the 2015 Cassazione hearing, so she would not know how attentively they listened.

In fact neither in 2013 or 2015 were the Perugia or Florence prosecutions even represented at the Supreme Court at all.

Posted on 01/06/14 at 07:35 AM by Chimera • Click here for my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Knox False Claims, Examples 477-518
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Comments here (0)