6. How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #39 To #52
Jason Flom, Barry Scheck, Greg Hampikian
(Click here to go straight to Comments. Long post.)
1. Series And Post Overview
Does even this series on Knox in court v Knox in book relate to the Innocence Project’s plight?
Sure it does.
Had Barry Scheck & company done some due diligence, before adopting and touting Knox for a dangerous serial orgy of Italy-bashing, they would have checked some trial transcripts and the judges’ report and avoided Knox’s terrible book.
Maybe even read a bit here. With that done, as it should have been, they would not now be in the legal soup:
- They would KNOW that Knox is a convicted felon for life and rightly served three years.
- They would KNOW that Knox lies over 500 times in her 2014-16 book.
- They would KNOW that at least 90 of those are malicious demonizations of nice people.
- They would KNOW of the underhand way she got off.
But instead?
Instead they have let themselves be led by the nose, by a grandstanding and pathetic sycophant of Knox.
A quack who is utterly incompetent in the forensics of the case, and whose motives are fishy to say the least.
2 Telling Contradictions 39 to 52
39. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
GCM: And we must avoid interruptions, but when you have finished, we can discuss your answer.
AK: Thank you. So, here is…how I understood the question, I’m answering about what happened to me on the night of the 5th and the morning of the 6th of November 2007, and when we got to the Questura, I think it was around 10:30 or nearer 11, but I’m sorry, I don’t know the times very precisely, above all during that interrogation.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
The more the confusion grew, the more I lost the sense of time. But I didn’t do my homework for a very long time. I was probably just reading the first paragraph of what I had to read, when these policemen came to sit near me, to ask me to help them by telling them who had ever entered in our house. So I told them, okay, well there was this girlfriend of mine and they said no no no, they only wanted to know about men.
So I said okay, here are the names of the people I know, but really I don’t know, and they said, names of anyone you saw nearby, so I said, there are some people that are friends of the boys, or of the girls, whom I don’t know very well, and it went on like this, I kept on answering these questions, and finally at one point, while I was talking to them, they said “Okay, we’ll take you into this other room.” So I said okay and went with them, and they started asking me to talk about what I had been doing that evening. At least, they kept asking about the last time I saw Meredith, and then about everything that happened the next morning, and we had to repeat again and again everything about what I did.
Okay, so I told them, but they always kept wanting times and schedules, and time segments: “What did you do between 7 and 8?” “And from 8 to 9? And from 9 to 10?” I said look, I can’t be this precise, I can tell you the flow of events, I played the guitar, I went to the house, I looked at my e-mails, I read a book, and I was going on like this. There were a lot people coming in and going out all the time, and there was one policeman always in front of me, who kept going on about this.
Then at one point an interpreter arrived, and the interpreter kept on telling me, try to remember the times, try to remember the times, times, times, times, and I kept saying “I don’t know. I remember the movie, I remember the dinner, I remember what I ate,” and she kept saying “How can you you remember this thing but not that thing?” or “How can you not remember how you were dressed?” because I was thinking, I had jeans, but were they dark or light, I just can’t remember. And then she said “Well, someone is telling us that you were not at Raffaele’s house. Raffaele is saying that at these times you were not home.”
And I said, but what is he saying, that I wasn’t there? I was there! Maybe I can’t say exactly what I was doing every second, every minute, because I didn’t look at the time. I know that I saw the movie, I ate dinner. And she would say “No no no, you saw the film at this time, and then after that time you went out of the house. You ate dinner with Raffaele, and then there is this time where you did nothing, and this time where you were out of the house.” And I said, no, that’s not how it was. I was always in Raffaele’s apartment.
40. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
I was probably just reading the first paragraph of what I had to read, when these policemen came to sit near me,
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 108]
They gave me a chair outside the waiting room, by the elevator. I’d been doing drills in my grammar workbook for a few minutes when a silver-haired police officer””I never learned his name””came and sat next to me.
[Comments] So in the book it is “grammar drills”, but in Court it is “paragraphs of reading”
41. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
So I told them, okay, well there was this girlfriend of mine and they said no no no, they only wanted to know about men. So I said okay, here are the names of the people I know, but really I don’t know, and they said, names of anyone you saw nearby, so I said, there are some people that are friends of the boys, or of the girls, whom I don’t know very well, and it went on like this, I kept on answering these questions, and finally at one point, while I was talking to them, they said “Okay, we’ll take you into this other room.”
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 108]
“Why don’t you keep talking about the people who’ve been in your house””especially men?” he suggested.
I’d done this so many times in the questura I felt as if I could dial it in. And finally someone there seemed nice. “Okay,” I said, starting in. “There are the guys who live downstairs.”
[Comments] in both the trial testimony and in the book, AK leaves out the fact that she was giving names and numbers (and addresses) in her “list”. See here. See here. See here.
42. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
“What did you do between 7 and 8?” “And from 8 to 9? And from 9 to 10?” I said look, I can’t be this precise, I can tell you the flow of events, I played the guitar, I went to the house, I looked at my e-mails, I read a book, and I was going on like this. There were a lot people coming in and going out all the time, and there was one policeman always in front of me, who kept going on about this. Then at one point an interpreter arrived, and the interpreter kept on telling me, try to remember the times, try to remember the times, times, times, times, and I kept saying “I don’t know. I remember the movie, I remember the dinner, I remember what I ate,” and she kept saying “How can you you remember this thing but not that thing?” or “How can you not remember how you were dressed?” because I was thinking, I had jeans, but were they dark or light, I just can’t remember. And then she said “Well, someone is telling us that you were not at Raffaele’s house. Raffaele is saying that at these times you were not home.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 113/114]
Just then a cop - Monica Napoleoni, who had been so abrupt with me about the poop and the mop at the villa - opened the door. “Raffaele says you left his apartment on Thursday night,” she said almost gleefully. “He says that you asked him to lie for you. He’s taken away your alibi.” My jaw dropped. I was dumbfounded, devastated. What? I couldn’t believe that Raffaele, the one person in Italy whom I’d trusted completely, had turned against me. How could he say that when it wasn’t true? We’d been together all night. Now it was just me against the police, my word against theirs. I had nothing left.
[Comments] AK had been building her “list of 7” until she had been informed that she no longer had an alibi. THEN she had to come up with someone—anyone—and she did. The June 2009 testimony and book and surprisingly consistent (for Knox), yet it does not in any way reflect what actually happened. Reread these posts
[Comments] And again, to repeat from before, how exactly could this “sting” be planned for that night? Knox showed up to the Questura: (a) unannounced; (b) uninvited; and (c) refused to leave when told to do so?
43. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
I was always in Raffaele’s apartment
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] RS has repeatedly thrown AK under the bus on this. To this day, he refuses to provide an alibi. See here.
44. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
GCM: [taking advantage of a tiny pause to slip in without exactly interrupting] Excuse me, excuse me, the pubblico ministero wants to hear precise details about the suggestions about what to say, and also about the cuffs, who gave them to you.
AK: All right. What it was, was a continuous crescendo of these discussions and arguments, because while I was discussing with them, in the end they started to little by little and then more and more these remarks about “We’re not convinced by you, because you seem to be able to remember one thing but not remember another thing. We don’t understand how you could take a shower without seeing…” And then, they kept on asking me “Are you sure of what you’re saying? Are you sure? Are you sure? If you’re not sure, we’ll take you in front of a judge, and you’ll go to prison, if you’re not telling the truth.” Then they told me this thing about how Raffaele was saying that I had gone out of the house. I said look, it’s impossible. I don’t know if he’s really saying that or not, but look, I didn’t go out of the house. And they said “No, you’re telling a lie. You’d better remember what you did for real, because otherwise you’re going to prison for 30 years because you’re a liar.” I said no, I’m not a liar. And they said “Are you sure you’re not protecting someone?” I said no, I’m not protecting anyone. And they said “We’re sure you’re protecting someone.” Who, who, who, who did you meet when you went out of Raffaele’s house?” I didn’t go out. “Yes, you did go out. Who were you with?” I don’t know. I didn’t do anything. “Why didn’t you go to work?” Because my boss told me I didn’t have to go to work. “Let’s see your telephone to see if you have that message.” Sure, take it. “All right.” So one policeman took it, and started looking in it, while the others kept on yelling “We know you met someone, somehow, but why did you meet someone?” But I kept saying no, no, I didn’t go out, I’m not pro-pro-pro—-
“Are you sure of what you’re saying? Are you sure? Are you sure? If you’re not sure, we’ll take you in front of a judge, and you’ll go to prison, if you’re not telling the truth.”
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 117]
People were shouting at me. “Maybe you just don’t remember what happened. Try to think. Try to think. Who did you meet? Who did you meet? You need to help us. Tell us!” A cop boomed, “You’re going to go to prison for thirty years if you don’t help us.”
[Comments] Notwithstanding the fact that this browbeating was made up, it is told differently. At trial, AK says she was threatened because she wasn’t sure of what she was saying, while in the book she claims it was due to not remembering at all.
45. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
“Yes, you did go out. Who were you with?” I don’t know. I didn’t do anything. “Why didn’t you go to work?” Because my boss told me I didn’t have to go to work. “Let’s see your telephone to see if you have that message.”
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 114]
“Where did you go? Who did you text?” Ficarra asked, sneering at me. “I don’t remember texting anyone.” They grabbed my cell phone up off the desk and scrolled quickly through its history. “You need to stop lying. You texted Patrick. Who’s Patrick?” “My boss at Le Chic.”
[Comments] Again, aside from the fact this “interrogation” didn’t happen, these events change as well. In the Trial testimony, AK says she handed over her phone since the police wanted to verify that she had received such a message from Patrick. In the book, the police seem to be searching for people AK may have talked to.
[Comments] And, as mentioned before, if this really was a sting, why wouldn’t the police have pulled AK/RS phone and text records beforehand? Why would the police set up such a sting on the offchance AK would show up: (a) unannounced; (b) uninvited; and (c) refuse to leave when told to do so?
46. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
You’d better remember what you did for real, because otherwise you’re going to prison for 30 years because you’re a liar.” I said no, I’m not a liar. And they said “Are you sure you’re not protecting someone?” I said no, I’m not protecting anyone. And they said “We’re sure you’re protecting someone.” Who, who, who, who did you meet when you went out of Raffaele’s house?” I didn’t go out. “Yes, you did go out.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 114]
“My boss at Le Chic.” “What about his text message? What time did you receive that?” “I don’t know. You have my phone,”
...........................
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 114]
They said, “Why did you delete Patrick’s message? The text you have says you were going to meet Patrick.” “What message?” I asked, bewildered. I didn’t remember texting Patrick a return message. “This one!” said an officer, thrusting the phone in my face and withdrawing it before I could even look. “Stop lying! Who’s Patrick? What’s he like?” “He’s about this tall,” I said, gesturing, “with braids.”
...........................
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 116]
“Who did you meet up with? Who are you protecting? Why are you lying? Who’s this person? Who’s Patrick?” The questions wouldn’t stop. I couldn’t think. And even when it didn’t seem possible, the pressure kept building. I said, “Patrick is my boss.”
...........................
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 116]
The interpreter offered a solution, “Once, when I had an accident, I didn’t remember it. I had a broken leg and it was traumatizing and I woke up afterward and didn’t remember it. Maybe you just don’t remember. Maybe that’s why you can’t remember times really well.” For a moment, she sounded almost kind. But I said, “No, I’m not traumatized.” Another cop picked up the same language. He said, “Maybe you’re traumatized by what you saw. Maybe you don’t remember.”
...........................
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 116]
That’s when Ficarra slapped me on my head. “Why are you hitting me?” I cried. “To get your attention,” she said. “I’m trying to help,” I said. “I’m trying to help, I’m desperately trying to help.”
...........................
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 117]
People were shouting at me. “Maybe you just don’t remember what happened. Try to think. Try to think. Who did you meet? Who did you meet? You need to help us. Tell us!” A cop boomed, “You’re going to go to prison for thirty years if you don’t help us.”
...........................
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 118]
me. I didn’t understand that I was about to implicate the wrong person. I didn’t understand what was at stake. I didn’t think I was making it up. My mind put together incoherent images. The image that came to me was Patrick’s face. I gasped. I said his name. “Patrick””it’s Patrick.” I started sobbing uncontrollably. They said, “Who’s Patrick? Where is he? Where is he?” I said, “He’s my boss.” “Where did you meet him?” “I don’t remember.” “Yes, you do.”
[Comments] This sequence makes little sense (and yes, it is in sequence). Even as an “abbreviated” writing it makes no sense. According to AK, (a) she received the message fro Patrick, and that he is her boss; (b) AK is asked about this specific message, and why she deleted it; (c) AK confirms that PL is her boss; (d) the interpreter suggests that AK can’t remember anything, despite dropping the name; (e) AK gets hit by Ficarra to “get her attention”, even though she told the Court it was to get the name in the first place; (f) the police insist on asking who AK went to meet, despite the message which supposedly said who she was going to meet; and (g) the police revert back to asking who Patrick is, even though she had told them twice who he is.
[Comments] And of course, the police already have Patrick’s name, general address and telephone number. AK gave it to them, but ignore that. See here.
[Comments] And of course, the police couldn’t have expected to launch this brutal interrogation give, AK showed up: (a) unannounced; (b) uninvited; and (c) refused to leave when told to do so
47. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
“We know you met someone, somehow, but why did you meet someone?”
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comment] This question, if it actually was posed, seems rather odd. AK is being accused of lying to them, and protecting the real murderer. Seems that killing MK would be the reason AK went to meet him.
48. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
AK: Okay. Fine. So, they had my telephone, and at one point they said “Okay, we have this message that you sent to Patrick”, and I said I don’t think I did, and they yelled “Liar! Look! This is your telephone, and here’s your message saying you wanted to meet him!” And I didn’t even remember that I had written him a message. But okay, I must have done it. And they were saying that the message said I wanted to meet him. That was one thing. Then there was the fact that there was this interpreter next to me, and she was telling me “Okay, either you are an incredibly stupid liar, or you’re not able to remember anything you’ve done.” So I said, how could that be? And she said, “Maybe you saw something so tragic, so terrible that you can’t remember it. Because I had a terrible accident once where I broke my leg…”
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] Read the above book quotations. AK gives the name PL, tells police he is her boss, repeats that he is her boss, (and remember, she already included him in her “list”), but police seem to think she has trouble with her memory.
49. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
AK: It’s difficult for me to say that one specific person said one specific thing. It was the fact that there were all these little suggestions, and someone was saying that there was the telephone, then there was the fact that… then more than anything what made me try to imagine something was someone saying to me “Maybe you’re confused, maybe you’re confused and you should try to remember something different. Try to find these memories that obviously you have somehow lost. You have to try to remember them. So I was there thinking, but what could I have forgotten? And I was thinking, what have I forgotten? what have I forgotten? and they were shouting “Come on, come on, come on, remember, remember, remember,” and boom! on my head. [Amanda slaps herself on the back of the head: End of video segment] “Remember!” And I was like—Mamma Mia! and then boom! [slaps head again] “Remember!”
GCM: Excuse me, excuse me, please, excuse me…
AK: Those were the cuffs.
[Voices: “This is impossible!” “Avoid thinking aloud!” “Or suggestions”]
GCM: So, the pubblico ministero asked you, and is still asking you, who is the person that gave you these two blows that you just showed us on yourself?
AK: It was a policewoman, but I didn’t know their names.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 103]
Police officer Rita Ficarra slapped her palm against the back of my head, but the shock of the blow, even more than the force, left me dazed. I hadn’t expected to be slapped. I was turning around to yell, “Stop!”“”my mouth halfway open””but before I even realized what had happened, I felt another whack, this one above my ear. She was right next to me, leaning over me, her voice as hard as her hand had been. “Stop lying, stop lying,” she insisted. Stunned, I cried out, “Why are you hitting me?” “To get your attention,” she said.
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 114]
“I don’t remember texting anyone.” They grabbed my cell phone up off the desk and scrolled quickly through its history. “You need to stop lying. You texted Patrick. Who’s Patrick?” “My boss at Le Chic.” “What about his text message? What time did you receive that?” “I don’t know. You have my phone,” I said defiantly, trying to combat hostility with hostility. I didn’t remember that I’d deleted Patrick’s message.
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 116]
“Who did you meet up with? Who are you protecting? Why are you lying? Who’s this person? Who’s Patrick?” The questions wouldn’t stop. I couldn’t think. And even when it didn’t seem possible, the pressure kept building. I said, “Patrick is my boss.”
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 116]
They pushed my cell phone, with the message to Patrick, in my face and screamed, “You’re lying. You sent a message to Patrick. Who’s Patrick?” That’s when Ficarra slapped me on my head. “Why are you hitting me?” I cried. “To get your attention,” she said.
[Comments] At trial, AK is saying she was hit because she: (a) couldn’t remember. But in the book she claims it was because she was: (b) lying; and to (c) get her attention. But to restate from before, at this point AK has already given the name PL, and his phone number (from her list of 7). However, for some inexplicable reason, the police apparently need to beat the name out of her, even though they already have it.
[Comments] And of course, what better way to launch such an interrogation by not calling in the suspect and hoping they arrive: (a) unannounced; (b) uninvited; and (c) refuse to leave when told to do so
50. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
GCM: Go on, go on. The person who was conducting the interrogation…
AK: Well, there were lots and lots of people who were asking me questions, but the person who had started talking with me was a policewoman with long hair, chestnut brown hair, but I don’t know her. Then in the circle of people who were around me, certain people asked me questions, for example there was a man who was holding my telephone, and who was literally shoving the telephone into my face, shouting “Look at this telephone! Who is this? Who did you want to meet?” Then there were others, for instance this woman who was leading, was the same person who at one point was standing behind me, because they kept
moving, they were really surrounding me and on top of me. I was on a chair, then the interpreter was also sitting on a chair, and everyone else was standing around me, so I didn’t see who gave me the first blow because it was someone behind me, but then I turned around and saw that woman, and she gave me another blow to the head.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] More of the same, but in the book, AK claims to have given the name, and only after is smacked on the head
51. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
AK: All right. It seems to me that the thoughts of the people standing around me, there were so many people, and they suggested things to me in the sense that they would ask questions like: “Okay, you met someone!” No, I didn’t. They would say “Yes you did, because we have this telephone here, that says that you wanted to meet someone. You wanted to meet him.” No, I don’t remember that. “Well, you’d better remember, because if not we’ll put you in prison for 30 years.” But I don’t remember! “Maybe it was him that you met? Or him? You can’t remember?” It was this kind of suggestion.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[Comments] Okay, this appears to be a new version entirely. In this one AK claims that the police have the message, and are asking (a) about multiple names to see who it belonged to. But it directly contradicts what AK says earlier this day, that (b) they wanted to confirm the message from PL, telling AK not to work
(from earlier in trial testimony)
Who were you with?” I don’t know. I didn’t do anything. “Why didn’t you go to work?” Because my boss told me I didn’t have to go to work. “Let’s see your telephone to see if you have that message.”
(despite AK saying PL is her boss)
Who, who, who, who did you meet when you went out of Raffaele’s house?” I didn’t go out. “Yes, you did go out
[Comments] I know I’m repeating this, but if AK/RS really were targeted in a sting, why wouldn’t phone and text records have been pulled before launching the interrogation? Why wouldn’t the police have these answers before breaking the 2 of them? Also, if you were trying to lure someone, wouldn’t asking them to arrive be a good idea, instead of telling them to go home?
52. Trial Versus Book
Knox At Trial In 2009…
AK: So, there was this thing that they wanted a name. And the message—
GCM: You mean, they wanted a name relative to what?
AK: To the person I had written to, precisely. And they told me that I knew, and that I didn’t want to tell. And that I didn’t want to tell because I didn’t remember or because I was a stupid liar. Then they kept on about this message, that they were literally shoving in my face saying “Look what a stupid liar you are, you don’t even remember this!” At first, I didn’t even remember writing that message. But there was this interpreter next to me who kept saying “Maybe you don’t remember, maybe you don’t remember, but try,” and other people were saying “Try, try, try to remember that you met someone, and I was there hearing “Remember, remember, remember,” and then there was this person behind me who—it’s not that she actually really physically hurt me, but she frightened me…
GCM: “Remember!” is not a suggestion. It is a strong solicitation of your memory. Suggestion is rather…
AK: But it was always “Remember” following this same idea, that…
GCM: But they didn’t literally say that it was him!
AK: No. They didn’t say it was him, but they said “We know who it is, we know who it is. You were with him, you met him.”
GCM: So, these were the suggestions.
Knox In Her Book 2013-15
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 114]
“I don’t remember texting anyone.” They grabbed my cell phone up off the desk and scrolled quickly through its history. “You need to stop lying. You texted Patrick. Who’s Patrick?” “My boss at Le Chic.” “What about his text message? What time did you receive that?” “I don’t know. You have my phone,”
[Comments] According to the book, AK tells the police instantly who PL is. And once more, they have his phone number from the list she wrote. No argument at all
See here. See here. See here.
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 116]
“Who did you meet up with? Who are you protecting? Why are you lying? Who’s this person? Who’s Patrick?” The questions wouldn’t stop. I couldn’t think. And even when it didn’t seem possible, the pressure kept building. I said, “Patrick is my boss.”
[Comments] So not only does AK immediately give PL’s name—in contradiction to her trial testimony—but the police still want to know who he is. And then, after the police repeatedly accuse her of not remembering (or was it not paying attention), we have this.
[WTBH, Chapter 10, Page 118]
I didn’t think I was making it up. My mind put together incoherent images. The image that came to me was Patrick’s face. I gasped. I said his name. “Patrick””it’s Patrick.” I started sobbing uncontrollably. They said, “Who’s Patrick? Where is he? Where is he?” I said, “He’s my boss.”
[Comments] That’s right, after twice telling the police who PL is, the police still .... want to know who PL is.
[Comments] And the book floats 2 conflicting narratives, that (a) the police want to know who Patrick is; and (b) who AK went off to meet. Keep in mind AK already said that PL is her boss (and they do have the list). This seems to be the most redundant interrogation in history.
Tweet This Post
TweetComments
The relevant Robert Durst case is back once again in the US news. He’s been locked up in LA for more than three years but still not put on trial for killing a woman there who seemed to KNOW that he killed his wife.
Durst is the multimillionaire member of a New York family very large in the construction business. If you are in NYC or visiting NYC they built the Bank of America Tower. That site was in the news because just one pesky owner of a small old tower would not sell out seemingly at any cost, so most of an entire block stood there right on 42nd Street for years looking like it had been nuked.
Why relevant? Well Durst seems almost to have flaunted his probable several murders in a way not totally uncommon - in fact as Grahame Rhodes in an excellent post explained, that actually played to his advantage: if he flaunts the crime he must be mentally incapacitated in some way! And so a jury let him walk, and damn the family and friends of his victim.
Sollecito actually may be incapacitated in some way; he came across as slow-witted and easily confused in the US interviews at the time his book was released.
Is Knox damaged goods also? We have often wondered. Although the two families were against a “guilty but incapacitated” defense at trial, the Knox 1.0 we watched from 2007 through 2009 either showed her true damaged self or put on an okay simulation.
Both families still try to micro-manage, both seem to live on tenterhooks.
The Italian jury did not see enough of an argument on these lines to buy into. But it may have led to the reduced sentences, and to Massei’s blaming Guede with no evidence as prime mover in the attack on Meredith.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/16/18 at 03:25 PM | #
Guede may be the sanest of the three. He’s gone right past AK and RS in the quality of his degree and actually speaks consistently in coherent sentences.
I guess that might make Guede least likely to talk. He is far from telling the truth, and we have consistently despised his cover story, that Meredith invited him in and was amorous.
But he doesnt flaunt his role in the way that the other two seem driven to do.
Both put themselves out there, in a way no good lawyer or PR adviser would recommend, both invite further digging (as we among others are doing), both love the camera and the podium.
A situation made unstable because each keeps chipping away at the other. Of the 35 hoaxes in our right column, the hoaxes that RS & AK got along and acted like twin innocents seem least sustainable.
Way too many daggers drawn to disprove them and note how Knox apologists are stuck for helpful invention.
Tip for fake exoneree Knox’s audiences and media. She has to be pretty fraught about the now-prominent role of RS’s late Canadian uncle which the authorities remorselessly know more & more about.
Ask her to explain away that one. Ask Sollecito too of course.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/16/18 at 04:48 PM | #
Guede may be the sanest inmate in the asylum? Perhaps.
As for the micromanaging, it still doesn’t make sense that the book deals/interviews would have been allowed. Makes money, sure, but people had to know it would cause backlash. Hell, with all of the self sabotage AK herself does, it turn off more and more otherwise neutral people.
Any updates on WTBH will have its debut in court? Or Raffy’s statement coming?
Posted by Chimera on 04/16/18 at 10:20 PM | #
Hi Chimera
“it still doesn’t make sense that the book deals/interviews would have been allowed”
The post-annulment Sollecito book was a FOA hijacking and he repeatedly showed vagueness as to what was in it. In the Florence book trial he simply could not explain it. Bongiorno refused to defend it.
The post-annulment Knox book was also an FOA hijacking and excerpts published in Italy by Oggi ticked off the legal help there mightily and hurt her ECHR and compensation prospects. Her Nencini email in the same tone bit her in the tail also.
“Hell, with all of the self sabotage AK herself does, it turn off more and more otherwise neutral people.”
Sure Chimera I can understand you being put off Knox with the (much appreciated) total immersion, but I dont see strong evidence of that otherwise. Her audiences give her rapt attention and good feedback, and the reviews of her book and the Netflix report run at least 6 to 1 positive.
What happens then is that some in the audiences always fan out and arrive here and tend to be pretty startled by your kind of side by side comparison. The mafia and interrogation-hoax angles for example are really stark and unexplainable, and Knox is not exactly wanting attention on those.
The Marriotts & Moores & Heaveys are still doing a lot of telephoning against us; but note the media’s widespread negative reaction to the fees demanded for an evening of Knox lies.
“Any updates on WTBH will have its debut in court? Or Raffy’s statement coming? ”
We understand that they are being used as chilling devices while other parts of the picture are made clearer. I think quite effectively. Raffy has mostly or totally shut up, and the Knox bete noir seems to be reducing to “well it was a nasty prison”. Expect breaking news in the US before Italy.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/16/18 at 11:04 PM | #
A footnote on the Durst case. The syndrome Durst’s team used to get him off the rap in Texas was autism and specifically aspergers.
This horrified many as it put a black cloud over millions with that syndrome and there was protesting and efforts to educate. Our new mention was picked up by Google and a professional kingly emailed this link.
https://careersinpsychology.org/guide-understanding-autism-spectrum-disorder/
Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/19/18 at 02:03 PM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Where next:
Click here to return to The Top Of The Front PageOr to next entry 5. How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #35 To #38
Or to previous entry 7. How Knox Herself Provides Proofs Of Lies #53 To #69