Pages

Friday, July 13, 2018

Ms. Houle Attacks Amanda Knox While Falsely Defending the Kercher

After following LIz Houle for many years, what has become crystal clear is that Ms. Houle is a predator.

Over the years of the trials Ms. Houle has posted treacherous things about Amanda. She has also posted slanderous photo-shopped pictures of Amanda accusing Amanda of all sorts of infamy.

Guilt mongers attack Amanda Knox incessantly, but Ms. Houle only concentrates on what she considers to be crimes against the Kercher family.

Meredith's father for one advocated truejusticeforMeredithKercher.org as a legitimate source of information. Is it any wonder that advocates of Amanda's innocence take offense?

Why don't we have the right to wonder if the Kerchers are funding this continued persecution of Amanda Knox?

Sunday, July 8, 2018

Fiendish Dribble Based on Marasca-Bruno

https://twitter.com/jimjoneskoolai2/status/1015890067867557888

1. Marasca-Bruno only mentioned that the trial court ruled Amanda Knox was in the cottage during the murder because of her statements on November 6, 2007. The first two of those statements were coerced, and the trial court used the first part of one sentence in Amanda's First Memorandum to claim she had confirmed what she was forced to sign in the other two statements.

The rest of that same sentence makes clear that Amanda only repeated the content of those coerced statements in order to declare the memory of being at the murder with Patrick Lumumba was unreal and unreliable compared to being with Raffaele Sollecito at his apartment during the same period of time.

2. Actually, Marasca-Bruno said that Amanda and Raffaele's alibi was failed instead of false. They are each other's alibi. Their mutual alibi only fails because they were pressured into giving accounts that differed from each other. The police expected them to remember details that normal people are incapable of remembering. It really doesn't matter since a person doesn't need an alibi to yet be innocent which Amanda and Raffaele are.

3. Of course there it was very likely that Amanda and Rafraele were together the night of the murder. Just not at the murder. They were very seldom apart during the week before the murder, and there was very little chance they would have left his apartment to go kill Meredith. They had plenty to keep them busy at his home.

4. Amanda has admitted to one lie that her roommate Laura put her up to telling authorities. Laura didn't want it known that she used marijuana. So when the police asked Amanda if marijuana was used at the cottage, she said no.

The rest of the lies attributed to Amanda are ridiculous since there was no attempt by Amanda to deceive anyone for any purpose. See http://bourgoisviews.blogspot.com/search/label/lies

5. Guede was convicted with unknown accomplices without Amanda or Raffaele having any way to defend themselves against this blatant deflection of guilt that was used against them. It was not proved Guede had accomplices. It was just a judges ruling based on subjective analysis of incomplete information.

6. What does it mean that Guede didn't hold a knife when people knew he owned one? The knife that left the bloody imprint on the sheets of Meredith's bed was never found. Guede's knife was never found. Guede got rid of the bloody shoes and clothes he had been wearing. So it stands to reason that he got rid of the bloody knife he had been using.

7. The 5:45 AM statement that Amanda was coerced into signing has her both saying she heard Meredith's scream and that she didn't remember hearing Meredith screaming. This contradiction is one of the reasons for considering the statement as coerced. Amanda wouldn't have said that in her right mind, and it indicates that there were mutliple persons writing that statement for her to sign.

8. Yes, there was a spot of Meredith's blood found in the bathroom they shared that had Amanda's DNA mixed with it. Since there is no way to no when that DNA of Amanda's got there, it doesn't prove Amanda was present at the murder. Amanda's DNA would be expected to be there anyhow.

9. The crime scene appears to have been staged because it can be proved that Meredith's body was moved after she died. What cannot be proved is who moved it. The trial court's ruling that Amanda was the only one who had motive to move it to make it look like the sexual attack it was is only an opinion that ignores that most likely Guede had moved the body.

The trial court refused to analyze the semen that was found under Meredith's bottom. Probably the police and the prosecutors didn't want it proved to have been Guede's semen. That would have verified that it was his sexual attack. He probably didn't realize she had died when he tried to rape her.

10. Amanda didn't need the certainty the police needed for determining Meredith had been sexually attacked. She didn't need a lab report to understand what Meredith's bare foot protruding from under the duvet meant. The most probable reason for an attack on a young woman was rape. It's ridiculous to see her assumption as suspicious especially when the police are always immediately suspicious of those nearest in association to a murder victim even without evidence.

11. It's false that there is no evidence of coercion by the police to force Amanda to accuse Patrick Lumumba. The accusations are themselves evidence of this coercion as is the claim of the police that they didn't record the interrogation. The statements show confusion and contradiction. There is also the fact that in her right mind, Amanda would never have accused Patrick Lumumba of murder. Even if she were guilty, Amanda would never have accused Patrick. A murderer would have been sure to have accused someone that people could believe committed the crime.

There is also Amanda's First Memorandum that provides evidence of Amanda's state of mind at the time she signed the 5:45 AM statement. Her confusion was so complete that she resorted to comparing two different memories for the same period of time in order to decide the memory of being at the murder with Patrick was unreal and unreliable compared to the memory of being with Raffaele at his apartment.

12. If Amanda's motive for accusing Patrick Lumumba was to protect Guede, what difference did it make if she didn't protect Guede? There is no evidence that there was a relationship between them or between Guede and Raffaele. If Guede tried to retaliate by naming her as his accomplice, who would have believed him. Guede didn't start accusing Amanda and Raffaele until after learning that the police accused them of being his accomplices.

13. Whatever claim the Italian Judiciary makes about the finality of the calunnia conviction, if the ECHR determines Amanda's rights were violated in obtaining the coerced statements that are the evidence of the slander against Patrick Lumumba, the convictions will be nul and void as far as the ECHR is concerned. Italy is a member of the ECHR. How will the Italian Judiciary continue enforcing the conviction if the ECHR overrules that conviction? How will Patrick Lumumba collect the reward the Italian Judiciary promised him without cooperation through the U.S. Courts that will not be obliged to respect the discredited conviction?

14. Guilt mongers usually retort that motive is not required to get a conviction. Maybe Guede's trial court was satisfied with his guilt even though it didn't prove his motive by testing the semen found at the murder, but that doesn't mean Guede didn't have motive just the same.

Do guilt mongers claim that Amanda had more motive because there are many claims as to what her motive might have been? None of the proposed motives were ever proved. The most advocated motive was that Amanda was jealous of Meredith for her social and academic success, but that motive was based on what Meredith's British friends and family said and not on anything that Amanda expressed with words or actions.

Saturday, July 7, 2018

Examination of TMMK Evidence against Amanda Knox

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence

Behavioral Evidence

Alibi:

An alibi is supposed to be proof that someone could not have committed a crime. How is Amanda's account of what she remembers doing when Meredith died supposed to prove Amanda was participating in the murder?

Antonio Curatolo claimed to have seen a couple he thought were Amanda and Raffaele in Piazza Grimana. Alessia Ceccarelli only testified seeing Curatolo. Curatolo's account of the evening of November 1st includes things from the night before. He is not a reliable witness, but whoever the couple were he saw were there throughout the period during which Meredith was killed. So Curatolo is the alibi for that couple.

Even if Amanda and Raffaele really meant they slept until 10:30 AM instead of merely meaning they got up then, how does this behavior mean they were at the murder during part of that time?

How does using his computer at 6:02 AM show that Raffaele was anywhere but where he used his computer?

Marco Quintavalle took a year to decide who he thought the woman was who appeared at the door of his shop. He origianally said that woman's eyes were brown, but finally was convinced she was Amanda because of the blue of her eyes. Whoever that woman was may have gone to the part of the store where cleaning supplies are kept, but she didn't buy anything from that section and Quintavalle has no record of cleaning supplies being sold that morning.

Amanda and Raffaele didn't abandon their original accounts of their activities. They were coerced into signing false statements that don't even make sense. Amanda's 5:45 AM statement has her claiming to have heard Meredith's scream but denying she remembers hearing it. Raffaele's 3:30 AM statement has him saying Amanda left him before he arrived at home at 9:00 PM even though Jovana Popovic saw Amanda there twice before 9:00 PM.

Problems With Knox's Account of Nov 2:

Guilt mongers disparage Amanda's account of going back to her apartment as being improbable and unbelievable claiming she behaved abnormally. These opinions are not facts. They are subjective speculations that only guilt mongers consider important.

Raffaele's Rejection of the Alibi:

The inconsistencies in Raffaele's story that the police wanted to clear up was that he hadn't said what they wanted him to say. What they wanted him to say was not what happened as Jovana Popovic testified to. In the 3:30 AM statement the police forced Raffaele to sign, he did not say Amanda had asked him to lie for her. He only said that she had convinced him of her version of events, but the police on November 5th convinced him of their version of events.

It's unclear why the police had that 3:30 AM statement have Raffaele say Amanda took an empty bag to the cottage for dirty clothes. She didn't carry any dirty clothes back to Raffaele's apartment, and there was a washer and dryer in her apartment at the cottage.

It wasn't that Raffaele refused to confirm Amanda was with him during the Massei trial.


Amanda Knox's Interrogation:

Amanda went to the police station with Raffaele because, like Meredith's British friends, Meredith's killer made Amanda afraid to be alone.

The police would only let her wait in the elevator lobby. She was studying when one policeman asked if he could ask her questions. The Ficarra came in and demanded the questioning be done in an interrogation room.

Everything was fine until Ficarra demanded to know who Patrick was and why she sent him a text message that she would meet him the night of the murder. Amanda tried to reason with Ficarra that she only meant "Good-bye" when she texted what she thought meant that in Italian, but Ficarra insisted she had to have meant that she would meet Patrick.

It wasn't Amanda who changed her story. It was the police who changed it for Amanda. They claimed they had hard evidence that she was at the murder and demanded to know what she and Patrick did there.

Amanda was already questioning her own memory when the police lied that Raffaele had withdrawn his alibi for her. He would not have signed his coerced statement until 3:30 AM when the police coerced Amanda into signing her first coerced statement at 1:45 AM.

The police already expected a black man was involved in Meredith's death because of black hair found in Meredith's room and because of thread that was found in Meredith's hand that police thought was hair from a black man.

The police had investigated everyone who was associated with Amanda before her interrogation of November 5-6th. There was no way they didn't know that Patrick was black. The police didn't care which black man Amanda accused as long as they could use that accusation as Amanda's admission to being at the murder.

Amanda wrote her First Memorandum within hours of being forced to sign the 5:45 AM statement. That First Memorandum demonstrates the confusion that are evidenced in those coerced statements. The police claim they have no recording of the interrogation they put her through. They have no way of disproving the frank account of that interrogation that Amanda described in her First Memorandum.

Anna Donnino was not a neutral interpreter. She describes herself to be a mediator. When Amanda was beginning to question her own memory, Ms. Donnino insisted that Amanda may have lost memory of what she saw because it traumatized her. Was Ms. Donnino playing good cop to the others' bad cop? Wasn't Ms. Donnino coaching the witness to get what the police wanted Amanda to say?

If the interrogation didn't last but 2 1/4 hours, what were they all doing from 10:45 PM on November 5th until 5:45 AM on November 6th? How did the police type in Italian the 5:45 AM satement that differeed so much from the 1:45 AM statement if they hadn't continued questioning Amanda?

Ficarra didn't get the bun and tea for Amanda until around 1:00 PM on November 6th. The snackbar wasn't even open while the police were interrogating Amanda.

With as many police signed to the interrogation report, why would Amanda have been able to have identified which one struck her in the head? Of course Ficarra being the only female officer made it easy to figure out later. If all those officers were not involved in the interrogation, why did they sign the report?

Yes, Amanda's First Memorandum was admitted as evidence. How was the PR firm involved in the wording of that document? Does TMMK think it's "garbled" because it demonstrates Amanda's state of mind that would not have allowed her to understand the 1:45 AM and 5:45 AM statements the police had edited for her to sign? Or does TMMK consider that First Memorandum as "garbled" because it is a factual account of how the police extracted the previous statements from Amanda?

In her First Memorandum Amanda questions the memory of being at the murder because she has another memory of being with Raffaele at his apartment during the same period of time. Amanda declared the memory of being at the murder as being unreal.

Knox's Lying to the Police about Meredith's Door:

TMMK claims the postal police found Meredith's door locked, but all Fabio Marsi testified was that they verified that it was locked. He had to have been told it was locked for him to need to verify it. He also testified only being told that Meredith only locked it when she went to England.

Amanda didn't tell the postal police anything about when Meredith locked her door. It was Luca Altieri who asked when Meredith locked it, and Raffaele got mixed up in translating Amanda's answer in English. Raffaele later realized that Amanda had said the same thing Filomena would tell the Postal Police.

Amanda didn't dissuade the Postal Police from opening Meredith's door. The Postal Police refused when Filomena told them to do it. That's why it was Luca Altieri who ended up doing it. Raffaele had already tried and failed. There's a police photo of the damage Raffaele caused to the door.


The Calls to the Emergency Number:

It is incredible that Raffaele could have made the 112 call after the Postal Police arrived without either of the Postal Police noticing it. Both Amanda and Raffaele were showing them the suspicious things they had discovered in the apartment.

And Amanda and Raffaele expressed their expectation that the Postal Police were the Carabinieri when the Postal Police arrived. So if they hadn't already called 112, why would they be expecting the Carabinieri instead of the Postal Police.

The assumption that Raffaele called 112 after the Postal Police is based on a security camera at the parking deck that showed the Postal Police arriving. The timestamp of that security camera was ten minutes slow. Also, the Postal Police didn't park in that parking deck. So it took them some time to walk back from where they did park. So the time when it is assumed the Postal Police arrived should have been adjusted by both those factors.

It's strange that TMMK quibbles about the defense not "electing" to present evidence of when the Postal Police arrived. The prosecution was arguing that the timestamp was only four minutes slow, but Judge Massei ruled for the defense's claims that Raffaele called 112 before the Postal Police arrived.

Why would the police operator answering Raffaele's first 112 call become suspicious from him merely claiming there had been a breakin and blood found in the apartmnet? Is it suspicious to call 112 to report a breakin and possible violence? Why assume that Raffaele broke the connection just because the police operator asked routine questions? Raffaele did immediately call back to continue the report.

What is suspicious about Raffaele answering that nothing was taken when asked? He could certainly see that the big money items had not been taken.

Knox's Behavior at the Police Station the night the Body was Found:

The police made a big deal out of how Amanda and Raffaele didn't see into Meredith's room. So why expect them to act as horrified as those who did? Luca Altieri did say that Amanda sobbed when he told her and Raffaele that Meredith's neck had been slashed, but do guilt mongers expect that she should be continually in depression over what happened. And yet when Amanda blurted out in a fit of anger against the killer that Meredith had bled to death because her throat had been slashed, guilt mongers decided that this too was inappropriate. And being fingerprinted had nothing to do with this fit of anger.

Amanda Knox Knew Details of the Crime She Shouldn't Have Known:

Amanda had said that Meredith's body had been found in the wardrobe, but this was not correct. So TMMK tries to make it seem she merely said Meredith's body had been by the wardrobe claiming Amanda knew where the body had been before being moved into the center of the room.

As mentioned before, it was from Altieri that Amanda had learned that Meredith's neck had been slashed.

Amanda didn't need to wait for a lab report to understand that the attack had been sexual. The other people there were talking about a bare foot being visible from under a duvet covering the body. That was all the hint Amanda needed. Why would the killer cover the body if it weren't nude.

If the Massei court regarded Amanda's incorrect claim that Meredith's body was found in the wardrobe to be evidence that Amanda was at the murder, why didn't Marasca-Bruno mention it as a reason the trial court gave for claiming Amanda was at the murder?

Raffaele Lying to Explain the Presence of Meredith's DNA on the Knife:

To whom was Raffaele trying to explain the presense of Meredith's DNA on his kitchen knife when he wrote what he speculated in his own diary? Nobody. Raffaele couldn't understand how Meredith's DNA got there, but didn't understand that the police had cheated on the test to prove it there. It was Stefanoni was presented a deception in over-enlarging that sample and not Raffaele when he tried to understand how there was Meredith's DNA on that knife.

Physical Evidence:

DNA Evidence:

The Double DNA Knife:

Of course Amanda's DNA was found on Raffaele's kitchen knife, but the LCN sample taken where Stefanoni hoped to find Meredith's DNA was so poor that Stefanoni couldn't get her equipment to test it. So she removed the limits on the test and over-enlarged all of the sample in one test which is a violation of normal forensic protocols to get a result she wanted.

The reason for doing two tests is to eliminate that the first test was a fluke. Not only didn't Stefanoni fail to verify her result by duplicating it, she didn't do negative tests to be sure the test wouldn't give a false positive when there was no sample.

Not only that, but Raffaele's kitchen knife could not have made the wounds to Meredith's neck anyhow, and it didn't match the bloody print left by the murder weapon when it was put down on the sheets after being used.

Mixed Blood / DNA:

First off, there was no mixed blood. Amanda's blood was not found anywhere in the cottage. Only her DNA was found mixed with Meredith's blood in the sink of the bathroom Amanda used because she lived there. Amanda's DNA would be expected in that sink anyhow.

Next, the footprints in the hall, Amanda's room, and Filomena's room never tested positive for blood. Luminol reacts to many compounds in addition to blood. The TMB test must be used to verify that blood is present, and it didn't. Claiming Luiminol is much more sensitive doesn't prove those footprint were blood. The presence of blood elsewhere in the apartment doesn't make it true that those footprints were blood. In fact, the fact that those footprints were only determined to be compatible with Amanda's doesn't prove they were Amanda's footprints. That Amanda's DNA or Meredith's DNA was found with those footprints is irrelevant since there is no way to prove it got there only during the murder. There is no proof those footprint had anything to do with the murder.

The Bra Hook:

The reliability of the bra hook as evidence was not discredited by its being collected six weeks after first being catalogued. It was discredited because protocols were not used to assure it was not contaminated by Raffaele's DNA from the rest of the apartment where he had been while visiting Amanda who lived there.

Not only was there a police video demonstrating that that bra hook was collected by investigators using dirty gloves and dirty shoe covers, but theives had broken into the apartment and stolen the mattress from Meredith's bed. There was no way the police could say that that DNA sample was reliable evidence.

In addition, there were the profiles of three other men on that bra hook to indicate it was contaminated. And it doesn't make sense that the killer would get his DNA on the hook when he cut the bra strap instead of un-hooking it. There was no reason for the killer's DNA to be there.

The burden of proof is on the police to prove that evidence is valid. It's not up to the defense to identify the exact source of contamination and prove how it got to the item from which the sample was taken.

Other DNA Evidence:

Amanda's blood was not found mixed with Meredith's blood in the small bathroom. Marasca-Bruno ruled that only Amanda's skin DNA was found in the sink.

There is speculation that the "abundance" of Amanda's DNA prove that it was from her blood. However, of the three components of blood, only the white corpuscles have DNA. Red corpuscles and plasma do not.

Footprints:

Luminol Traces:

The use of Luminol doesn't prove that the footprints in Amanda's room, Filomena's room, and the hall are of blood. Luminol reacts with a lot of things. A further test is required to establish that there really is blood present. The BTM test had a negative result. The presence of Amanda's DNA or Meredith's DNA in those footprints doesn't prove when that DNA got there. There is no proof when those footprints got there, and since they were only ruled to be compatible with Amanda's footprints, there's no proof they were even hers.

Bathmat Footprint:

As TMMK admitted, the footprint found on the bathmat was only ruled to be compatible with Raffaele's footprint. It doesn't really look like his footprint especially since the print is smaller than his foot. It could just as well be Guede's footprint and probably was.

The Footprint on the Pillow:

The shoe print found on the pillow was not complete. Its size was calculated to be that of a woman's shoe print. Amanda never had shoes with a sole that matched this shoe print. And Amanda only had five pairs of shoes. So it would have been obvious if one pair of her shoes were missing. Regardless of the calculated size, this shoe print matches the sole of Guede's shoe that made the other shoe prints in Meredith's room.


The Staged Burglary:

The reasons for the legal fiction that the break-in was staged are opinions instead of facts. How do the judges determine what made sense to Guede in deciding which window to break in? Why would the glass blow backward out the window when the rock came in the window? Why would Guede have to leave marks on the outside wall to climb it? The ground below was dry and not muddy. The mess in Filomena's room had more to do with the bag the rock knocked over than a burglary. There was glass found below the clothes as well as on top of it, and there was a piece of the window glass caught in the sole of Guede's shoe when he got to Meredith's room. The court didn't allow the glass remaining in the window to be analyzed to determine in which direction it was broken. There was glass enbedded in the inner shutter showing the rock came from outside. The spray of glass fragments was what would be expected from a rock thrown through the window. If the rock had been thrown through the window while it was open, the glass would have sprayed toward the wall instead.

If Amanda were Guede's accomplice, why would she divert attention from herself by staging a breakin that would point toward Guede who had a history of arrests for breaking and entering?

If Raffaele were involved in this staged breakin to divert attention to a burglar, why did he tell the police that nothing was stolen? That just undermined the notion of a burglar.

Why Rudy Could Not Have Acted Alone:

Multiple Attackers:

Being convicted with unknown accomplices was a fiction that allowed Rudy Guede to pass much of the blame onto Amanda and Raffaele. There really wasn't any proof of anyone else being in Meredith's room when Guede Killed Meredith. And there's no proof that Amanda and Raffaele were those accomplices if they did exist. It's telling that the police have not renued their investigation for the alleged accomplices now that Amanda and Raffaele have been acquitted.

The wounds that Meredith sustained indicate that only one person was attacking her. If there really had been three people attacking her, Meredith would have been overwhelmed and restrained before she had the opportunity to have received any wounds. The wounds to the neck in particular were not done to kill her but to intimidate her. Guede just didn't realize Meredith would suffocate on her own blood.

Other Evidence That Indicates the Presence of Others:

Guede's tracks leading to the front door do not prove he couldn't have turned on his right foot to lock the door to Meredith's room. It was only his left shoe that left prints.

Hekuran Kokomani testified that on either the night of October 31st or November 1st, he was accosted by Raffaele, Guede, and Amanda with Amanda wielding a knife outside the cottage. Of course it would have been difficult for Curatolo to have seen Amanda and Raffaele at the same time as Kokomani saw them, but Kokomani was further discredited because he claimed to have met Amanda's uncle in August. Amanda hadn't arrived until September and she doesn't have an uncle in Italy.

Massei based his theory of when Meredith died on the witness who heard a scream. That and Massei's own ruling that Curatolo's claim to have seen Amanda and Raffaele until midnight meant they left at 11:00 PM. There was no proof that the scream came from Meredith. So there's no proof that the footsteps the person hearing the scream had anything to do with Guede's alleged accomplices.

There were no smudges or cleanser residue to prove there ever was a cleanup at the cottage. The argument that there was a cleanup is based on evidence that the police thought should be there but wasn't. There is no proof that that evidence ever was there.

Guede probably moved Meredith to put her bottom on the pillow to make it easier for him to try to rape her. He probably didn't realize she had died until after he ejaculated. The court refused to have the semen found under her tested. Probably the court didn't want to find out it was Guede's semen. Just saying he had no motive to move her body doesn't prove that he did not. Motive of course is not necessary to prove guilt.

Injuries to Amanda Knox:

There is no proof that the mark on Amanda Knox's neck was a scratch. It looks like a hickey. None of Amanda's skin or blood was found under Meredith's fingernails. There was no report of those fingernails being cleaned.

None of Amanda's blood was found in the cottage much less in the small bathroom. Her wondering if the blood in the sink were from her pierced ears is not a claim that her blood was there.

The Bleach:

It's irrelevant whether Raffaele permitted the bleach to be used at his apartment. If the bleach had been used on his kitchen knife to remove blood, would have removed the starch that was still on that kitchen knife. If it had been used to clean up footprints in the hall and bathroom at the cottage, the Luminol that the police used would have reacted to it and it didn't. 

Wednesday, July 4, 2018

Wilson and Van Der Leek - Under Suspicion-Foreword

Foreword

Nick Van Der Leek asks if it's justice that Amanda Knox served only .14% of the 26 years to which she was sentenced. He should ask if it was right for her to serve nearly four years for crimes that aren't her fault.

The judges in Rudy Guede's trial ruled that he did not act alone. It was a legal fiction supported only on their understanding of what he could do alone. It wasn't proved. But even so, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have no responsibility for looking for those alleged accomplices just because Amanda and Raffaele were acquitted. It does beg the question of why the judges ruled Guede had accomplices if the only persons that were examined for that role were Amanda and Raffaele. Why aren't the police again investigating now that Amanda and Raffaele were acquitted?

Amanda Knox was cooperating with police the week of Meredith Kercher's death. Why is it her fault if the police thought she was leading them down blind alleys and wild goose chases? They were the ones asking her questions. Amanda wasn't at the murder. So how could they expect her to tell them anything about it? She could only tell them about going home to find things she didn't understand.

The questioning of the night of November 5-6, 2007 started shortly after Amanda arrived with Raffaele. One policeman asked her if he could ask her questions when he found her in the elevator lobby studying her Italian lessons. He also asked her to demonstrate her yoga exercises which Ficarra saw her doing when Ficarra came in.

It was the police who asked her for the names of men who would have known Meredith. She gave them what she could. Ficarra insisted on seeing Amanda's phone that Amanda was using for getting names from. Ficarra found Amanda's reply to Patrick Lumumba. Ficarra testified that she saw Patrick's name in the phone and asked who he was.

It was the police who insisted that what Amanda texted to Patrick had to mean she was meeting him that night. It was the police who insisted they had hard evidence that she was at the cottage during the murder. It was the police who gloated that Raffaele had said she wasn't at his apartment all night.

They made Amanda believe she hadn't remembered what happened. She has said she began to worry that her memory had failed her. Her 1:45 AM statement has her saying that she vaguely remembered heard Patrick killing Meredith. Her 5:45 AM statement has her both saying she heard Meredith's scream and also that she didn't remember hearing Meredith scream.

These two statements present a stark contrast to what Amanda said before that night and afterwards, but instead of wondering if they were coerced, Nick Van Der Leek assumes that her First and Second Memorandum and what Amanda wrote about the interrogation in her prison diary are the contradictions.

Also, the prison didn't "allocate" Amanda a prison diary. That notebook was hers. She had to pay for it and successfully sued the police for illegally confiscating it from her.

Regardless of claims made to the contrary, Amanda was being questioned for three hours before the police coerced her to sign the 1:45 AM statement. If the interrogation didn't start until 12:30 AM when the interpreter arrived, why is it claimed that Amanda was fluent in Italian.

The police also had to wear Raffaele down to coerce him into signing his statement at 3:30 AM. Supposedly Amanda was made aware of this shortly before she was coerced into signing her 1:45 AM statement.

Of course the reason they coerced Amanda into accusing Patrick was to implicate herself as part of his crime. It didn't matter that her accusation was false. The police still had her confessing to a part in the crime. They just fit Guede into Patrick's role when Patrick was released.

The irony is that Amanda is accused of waiting to recant her statements. Within hours of signing the 5:45 AM statement Amanda wrote her First Memorandum claiming the memory of being at the murder was unreal compared to the memory of being with Raffaele at his apartment. She followed up the next day with her Second Memorandum providing more details that completely contradicted the coerced statements. Nobody listened, but both Memorandum were used as evidence against her.

Even while writing those Memorandum, Amanda didn't understand she was a defendant. She thought she was detained for protective custody. It didn't occur to her she needed a lawyer since she was not told she was a suspect.

But Van Der Leek thinks her book is mistitled because she had plenty of opportunities to be heard. He ignores the Italian authorities weren't listening. Even when she insisted on a lengthy interview with Mignini, Mignini was only interested in eliciting contradictions from Amanda instead of discovering the truth.

So of course Amanda would say in her interview with Amazon that wriging the book was an "incredible expericent" that she was "very very grateful for." Of course Amanda's story was one of triumph and it's in bad taste to make her struggle against the false accusations anything about Meredith. It wasn't Meredith's false that the police and prosecutors got their facts wrong.

Whether Amanda Knox had an alibi is not the question. Why of all the people in Perugia who could have broken into that cottage and didn't have an alibi was Amanda special?

When guilt advocates speak or write something about Amanda Knox, can we or should we trust what they say?

It wasn't that Amanda Knox got a chance simply to say she didn't commit the crime upon which time the police had to let her go because they couldn't prove she did. They didn't even let her know she was under suspicion. They simply asked her more details that any normal person could remember and threatened her if she got anything wrong. She denied meeting Patrick Lumumba and denied she went to the cottage that night, and the police wouldn't let her even go to the restroom.

What's so hard to understand about the conditions of the interrogation as Amanda wrote about them in her First Memorandum? We only have the police who questioned her for what was said and done. That there were a lot of them signed to the interrogation report corroborates Amanda's claim that they ganged up on her, but there is no recording to prove they didn't as all of them claim.

Wilson and Van Der Leek - Under Suspicion-Introduction

Introduction

Van Der Leek expresses the time Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were in prison as time that Meredith Kercher didn't have. He insinuates that her death makes them guilty. Does he blame them for still living?

He downplays what Amanda has been doing since being freed from prison claiming that her greatest achievement has been being the prime suspect in a murder trial.

Lisa Wilson claims that an important timeline demonstrating Amanda Knox's version of what happened has disappeared even though her website still has a link to the missing timeline.

Amanda Knox's case files have been reorganized at another website that has its own timeline for November 1st. It can be accessed at: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/timeline-november-1/

Wilson admits there is an extensive timeline published August 23, 2014 in an article at: https://www.groundreport.com/5088798/

This probably wasn't the timetable Karen Pruett originally posted. This is probably superior to hers. So she probably took hers down to keep from distracting from this newer one. The November 1st timeline on AmandaKnoxCase.com is not as complete as the GroundReport timeline for November 1st, but the times given for the things they have in common only vary by several minutes. The Amanda Knox Case makes a point of stating where some times are approximate and gives ranges for some of those approximate times.

Wilson provides a link to a forum members; download of Pruett's timeline at Injustice Anywhere Forum, but being a member of Injustice Anywhere doesn't allow someone to access whatever page Wilson is talking about. So there's no way to determine whatever inaccuracies Wilson is so upset about.

The context of Amanda Knox's interviews is not why she didn't kill Meredith but how she was falsely accused of killing her. That Van Der Leek thinks it's improper for Amanda to smile during these interviews simply says something about him. He certainly has little regard for the way normal people respond to people around them. People are taught to smile when they speak in public. A smile is not a given tell for knowing someone is lying. See: https://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/the-truth-behind-the-smile-and-other-myths-when-body-language-lies


Van Der Leek assumes Amanda Knox wrote the crude joke that was pinned to the front door of the University for Foreigners. Just because he wants it to be her handiwork doesn't make it so. It is only his opinion that Amanda used it to send a message to Meredith's British roommates. Laura and Filomena have said nothing about Amanda having such a cruel aspect to her personality.

Van Der Leek like many guilt advocates postulates a grievance Amanda never expressed over Meredith spending Halloween with her British friends. Amanda never cared about the "in-crowd" when she was growing up. There was no sense in her getting upset about what the guilt advocates called Meredith's in-crowd in Italy.

Van Der Leek ignores the basic difference between Amanda's handwriting and that of the sick note writer. Amanda's writing line is even, but it slightly rises in the center before falling back. The sick note writer's writing line is not even, but slightly dips before climbing back up.

It's not surprising that Amanda's disposition is rounded both in the writing line and in the tops of her letters. She also shows her even temper in the uniform height of her letters which the sick note writer cannot do. The sick note writer's 1s are completely crushed, and even that person's 2s are irregular.

Lots of people distinguish their 7s and Zs with a middle hash mark to keep them from being confused with other letters. Did Van Der Leek confuse the symbol for the Euro as a Z.

Another thing that is striking is that if Amanda could write the way the sick note writer wrote, she could not have been able to write the way she normally writes. Her clear rounded letters indicate too much innocence for her to be able to write so crudely as in the sick writer note. Also, her letters are small and almost exactly the same every time. That indicates an intelligent and detailed person. She could perform a task with the precision necessary on the soccer field, but she sure wouldn't have done it as sloppy as Guede did.

It's strange that Van Der Leek would expect the "crappy and problematic" Italian in the note to be Amanda's since the usual guilt advocate expectation is that she was always fluent in Italian. Wilson seems to agree with Van Der Leek here.

Wilson also inexplicably thinks that Amanda might have used the sick note as a means of sending the police in a different direction. What different direction? How would this note point to a different killer when the police weren't interested waiting for the evidence that would point them conclusively at Guede? Sure the police already suspected Amanda and through her Raffaele, but there's no evidence that Amanda and Raffaele were even aware of this.

Why would Amanda think she needed to send the police off some other direction? And if she did feel the need, why did she allow the police to badger her into implicating herself by accusing someone she wouldn't think capable of rape and murder if she were in her right mind? She just would have just gone home like they asked her to or she would have refused to say anything further without an attorney present. But she innocently thought she was just there to help the police find the killer.

Wilson of course considers Amanda's credibility worthless, but how does she show that Amanda thought that? Even after the abusive interrogation of the night of November 5-6, Amanda demonstrated her complete candor in her two Memorandum. She had no qualms about talking to the police. And that sick note was not worthless as a credible lead to the real killer.

Amanda demonstrates a flare for preciseness as I've said about her handwriting. It's not strange that she completely obliterates mistakes she crosses out. She recognized that she didn't express what she wanted to and she didn't want to leave any possible way for someone to mistake what she wanted to say. Van Der Leek can be as suspicious of what she originally wrote as he wants, but that doesn't change how Amanda completed the expression.

Since copies of Amanda's writing are usually clipped off on the left margin, I can only surmise that Van Der Leek mean that she tends to write close to the left margin when he says her writing gravitates to that margin. The link he provided for Hand Writing Iinsights seems to show the exact opposite: a gradual shifting to the right.

Also, Amanda writes to the right border as well as from the left border. Does this indicate anything other than she makes full use of her paper? Blogs Amanda has contributed to her newspaper do show her to be introspective as does her appearance in interviews and in the NetFlix documentary. Her attention to detail would support this also.

People who have an interest in the past and work best behind the scenes are usually followers. That contradicts the assertion of many guilt advocates that Amanda was the ringleader. Why does being behind the scenes and introspective with an interest in the past keep someone from being socially oriented?

If English speaking Van Der Leek could have read about the mechanic Gianfranco Lombardi in news.sky.com why couldn't the English writer of the sick note also read about him in that article? Amanda Knox however had only been in Europe for short time and didn't have any British friends to tell her about Sky News. Also, Amanda Knox was disinterested in anything but conversing in Italian. She wouldn't have read Sky News anyhow.

And whoever was the sick note writer could just as easily have read about Meredith's boyfriend Giacomo if that were what that sick note writer was refering to with the name Gianfranco. The same goes for all the other presumably insider information that was being bandied around in Italy and Britain. Of course the sick note writer wouldn't know what the rent per person would be, and put the wrong amount.

www.perugiamurderfile.net/ no longer exists. So we have no way of know what their forum may have said about Amanda's cowardice or mockery. It's interesting that Van Der Leek claims that Amanda relishes dramatizing and imitating the voices of police or judge. Whether this is true or not (I've never heard of it,) I don't understand why a defendant should not enjoy defending herself against a crime she didn't commit.

That Amanda may enjoy vindicating herself has nothing to do with the crime she should not have been charged with to begin with. Assessing her alleged enjoyment as inappropriate is simply a red herring and demonstrates the cowardice of the accuser for not defending claims against her.

If the police could keep Amanda Knox from leaving Italy because she was a prime suspect, why did they claim she was merely a witness without rights when they abusively interrogated her? If she were already a suspect, she should have been notified of that and a lawyer should have be brought in for her before they interrogated her on the night of November 5-6, 2007.

Amanda's supposedly pernicious accusations against the police was in her First Memorandum which she wrote just hours after being forced to falsely accuse Patrick Lumumba. If the police weren't the cowards they are, they would have admitted they recorded that interrogation as they recorded everything else Amanda said without knowing they did it.

Amanda was unable to remember Rudy Guede's name or even his country of origin before the police coerced her into accusing Patrick Lumumba. She thought Guede was from South Africa. Was it cowardice to be brainwashed into believing the police when they insisted she met Guede and went to the murder with him? The police have no proof that that isn't what they did to Amanda.

Of course Amanda recanted the statements they force her to sign accusing Patrick Lumumba, but the police already had her saying she was there to witness that non-fact.

Cowards mock Amanda Knox for standing up for her innocence. They have been doing that for this long because they think they can get away with it. The police didn't care what she said after they got what they wanted. Why should the other cowards accusing her?

Of course Van Der Leek says the same philosophy against Amanda Knox instead of for her. What would Van Der Leek say about me? We already know that. He would ask who I am since I'm not using my real name. We certainly know who he is by what he says. What more does he need from me?

Amanda was brutally honest about herself as well as others in her book. She was not offended that Meredith's friends didn't take a liking to her. She even admitted that she realized that "a person" (meaning herself) "more attuned to social norms would probably have realized that immature antics don't play well here" (meaning with Meredith's friends.) So who was the immature party anyhow? Maybe it wasn't Amanda after all.

Van Der Leek has already expressed how the Italian in the sick note was substandard. It's curious that he equates this substandard Italian he will not attribute to Amanda later as a self-identification of Amanda to being lazy. But somehow he gets from this ridiculous association to having Meredith confronting Amanda with what Van Der Leek has decided is Amanda's laziness.

In spite of Van Der Leek's speculation, Amanda didn't need money to pay her rent. Even if Patrick Lumumba had fired her while also telling her she didn't need to come into work on November 1st, Amanda didn't need money to pay her rent.

There is no evidence that Patrick Lumumba really intended to fire Amanda and hire Meredith in her stead until after Patrick was interested in suing Amanda. If Patrick Lumumba was really interested in hiring Meredith to take Amanda's place, why did he tell the police he didn't know Meredith when he was arrested? What was the point of telling Amanda not to come in if he had already fired her as he eventually claimed?

Again, there is no evidence that Amanda cared anything about the persons who thought themselves "in." So there was no reason for her to give any consideration to what Meredith's friends thought of her. Amanda didn't know what Meredith told her friends about her behind Amanda's back.

Just the same, Amanda was furious with the killer for what was done to Meredith. She wasn't laughing when she explained to Natalie that how Meredith died was not without suffering. Somehow, guilt advocates like Van Der Leek expect those he suspects to be completely in depression over the death of whom Van Der Leek suspects them of killing. Why? It's inhumane to expect such a thing. Of course Amanda went on with her life while coping with her friend's death.

Van Der Leek assumes laughter indicates deceipt where none is proved. Just because Amanda and Raffaele find something to laugh about doesn't prove they are laughing at Meredith. Why is is always about what guilt advocates and their expectations?

Why was Amanda's need to shop for underwear broadcast to the entire world anyhow? Of course she needed underwear as well as other clothes since the police would let her go home to get clothes she already owned.

Guilt advocates vaunt themselves as being being superior to those they speculate try to outsmart everyone else. Where is the proof that any of that is true? It's all in the guilt advocates' ego. They aren't smarter and their victims aren't trying to fool anyone.

Again, the common illusions as to whether a defendant is lying do not prove anything. People smile for a whole host of reasons. Mainly because they identify so strongly that it would never occur to them not to smile at the person they are talking to.

Apparently it is well known that the ability to say in Italian many things considered vulgarities in English are necessary tools for dealing with Italian conversation. Consider Italian names that cannot be translated on the news in America.

So when Van Der Leek considers calculated insincere ruses, maybe he should consider what he is saying himself.


Van Der Leek expresses concern about Amanda's dress code and then jumps to how there was a transition between her being a part of the investigation to being under suspicion. Always in capital letters of course. But where was this transition? Was there a transition. Van Der Leek has already declared that Amanda was never allowed to leave Perugia because she was a prime suspect. Of course there is no evidence that Amanda knew anything about being a prime suspect, but why are we supposed to believe anything Van Der Leek says otherwise?

If by November 6th, it is an inescapable that Amanda was under suspicion for Meredith's death, why was she yet questioned as a mere witness? Why wasn't she told she was a suspect. Why wasn't she provided a lawyer to guide her through the abusive interrogation the police had in store for her? Because the police wanted to trap her incriminating herself.

The police knew Amanda's mother was arriving that day and would convince Amanda to return to the US. The police had to get something to arrest her on in order to make their job easier.

What's really ridiculous is to question a college student's dress. It's not like in the past when the graduating seniors had to have body guards to ward off creditors. In the US, college students are known for being scruffy.

Van Der Leek seems obsessed with Mignini's concern about the scarves Amanda wore, but Mignini goes on to question Ficarra about what language Amanda communicated in.

Ficarra admitted in testimony that she was dealing with a foreigner who could not understand Italian spoken with normal speed. Ficarra admitted that there was a loss of understanding that required repeating the questioning. Ficarra admitted that for more definite answers, she had to call for the services of someone knowledgeable in English.

And of course those inquiries on November 2nd involved misunderstandings that required repeated questioning on the succeeding two days. Ficarra complained about being faced with this problem on the evening of November 5th, but Ficarra didn't have to insist on questioning Amanda. She could have left her studying in the elevator lobby. She didn't have to follow up on a subordinate who didn't get the memo not to talk to Amanda. Or was it the plan all along to embroil Amanda in an abusing interrogation to avoid her mother convincing her to return to the US?

What right does Ficarra have to reprimand Amanda for demonstrating yoga exercises one of Ficarra's subordinates asked Amanda to demonstrate? Shouldn't Ficarra have limited her disciplinary actions to someone who actually works for her?

Why does ficarra have the right to reprimand a witness for complaining about the inconvenience of an interrogation? How is the witness violating any law in complaining that she is too stressed out to speak? The police are not tyrants who can demand instant attention whenever they please. The police can explain the necessity of timely action, but they cannot command witnesses to respond except with a court order.

Yes, Amanda came with Raffaele because she was afraid to stay home alone. Amanda didn't see any difference in Meredith being killed because Meredith was home alone from Amanda being home alone. She didn't want to be alone and she sure didn't want to go home alone. The police needed to put themselves in Amanda's shoes, but they were so intent on incriminating her, they didn't try to understand anything she said.

Wouldn't Amanda's ability to give the police useful information depend on whether she knew anything the police could use? Also, wouldn't the police have to be willing to listen to her to hear whatever useful information she had? The police asked Amanda for a micro-detailed account of her own life leading up to her finding strange things that led to the discovery of Meredith's body. Why?

Yes, the police did start by asking her for a list of the men who came to the villa, but also whom Meredith had met. Ficarra testified she asked Amanda about anyone who knew Meredith. Despite what Van Der Leek quotes from TrueJustice.org , Ficarra didn't say she wanted a list of possible perps. Making that list was not the abusive interrogation that followed, but it is certainly part of the questioning that started at 10:45 PM. It's not clear why a list of seven names would take 75 minutes to produce even with addresses and phone numbers.

Ficarra may have considered the main part of the interrogation to have started at 12:30 AM when the interpreter arrived, but she also claimed that Amanda spoke enough Italian to get by. So there was questioning before 12:30 AM.

Van Der Leek objected that Patrick was not a perp or someone who came to the villa, but Ficarra never told Amanda anything about the list being possible perps and didn't specify that it would only be people who came to the villa. Also, it wasn't meant to be just a list from Amanda's phone. In spite of Van Der Leek's self-imposed confusion, Amanda was just using information from her phone.

Of course she didn't have a phone number and address for the "South African" whose name Amanda didn't know. Also, since she said he was short, she couldn't have known him very well. Amanda may have said Guede visited the villa, but she was talking about the lower apartment when she said that. He did not enter the girls' upper apartment until the night he killed Meredith.

Amanda didn't know Guede's nationality since he was really from the Ivory Coast. She associated him with the guys in the lower apartment. So it's not surprising that she remembered that he played basketball with them. During that one time that she met Guede at the party in the lower apartment, Amanda would also associate him with the age of those guys of the lower apartment. So how does that make her remember his name or even give her any reason to want his phone number in her phone? What is so intimate about Amanda meeting Guede in a room full of other people who were mostly men?

Van Der Leek admits that the police telling Amanda that Raffaele no longer corroborated her story played a big part in getting her to sign the 1:45 AM statement. In her First Memorandum Amanda said that this notice confused her, and that what the police told her made her question her own memory.

But instead of wondering how the interrogation coerced Amanda into accusing Patrick Lumumba, Van Der Leek focuses on the false statements placing Amanda at the murder. That of course was the reason the police wanted her to accuse Patrick. They didn't care which black they tied her to as long as they had her tied to the murder.

Wilson and Van Der Leek - Under Suspicion-Arrest

Arrest

Yes, Amanda's mother, Edda, was arriving very soon while the police were interrogating Amanda. I don't think the timing is accidental. The police already knew that Edda wanted Amanda to come home, and since the police had not formally confirmed she was a suspect even though they firmly believed her guilt, they could not make her stay in the country.

Of course as an innocent person, Amanda thought all she had to do was tell the police they had the wrong impression of what she said. It is dumbfounding that the police would take an uncorroborated statement and use it to arrest someone without investigating the claims in that statement.

And the police had to know they coerced Amanda into accusing Patrick Lumumba in order to get her to incriminate herself as being present at the murder. They had to know the accusation was false, but they arrested Patrick anyhow. And even when they had to release him because a credible alibi proved he couldn't have been anywhere than his bar, the police continued to persecute him keeping his business closed for months forcing him to lose it.

Maybe Wilson thinks Amanda was imprisoned to protect the world from her, but what Amanda was told was only that she was put into protective custody. Afterall, the 5:45 AM statement has Amanda saying she was afraid of Patrick Lumumba. Did the police also convince her that Patrick's hinchmen would come after her?

Before and after the abusive interrogation, Amanda has said she was not at the murder, but Wilson believes the uncorroborated statement that Amanda was there and considers everything else to be nonsense.

Amanda's First Memorandum clearly demonstrates that Amanda was in no mental state to understand the statements the police had her sign. In that Memorandum which she wrote just hours after being forced to sign the 5:45 AM statement, Amanda describes the abusive tactics the police used to force her to answer questions the way they wanted her to answer them.

Wilson claims that Amanda was playing a game from the start. The only reason Wilson can give for asserting this nonsense is that Amanda didn't act the way Wilson would expect her to act.

Amanda had cooperated with police answering their questions the best she could. But that was just a game as far as Wilson is concerned. It was the police who were gaming Amanda and not the other way around.

Why does Wilson think Meredith's death was a life-threatening emergency for Amanda that the U.S. Embassy would be concerned about? It's true that Amanda feared to be alone because she worried the killer might come back for her also. Wilson doesn't seem to think that's a life-threatening situation since Wilson questions why Amanda would voluntarily go to the police station with Raffaele to avoid being alone.

So Wilson thinks that Amanda really went to the police station to stay informed of what the police were doing and to control where they investigated? How is that possible when the police were in total control anyhow? They first relegated Amanda to the elevator lobby, and then cornered her in an interrogation room. They closed off any access to information except what they were telling her and confused her into signing false statements.

And Wilson thinks that only a guilty person would subject herself to such treatment? That's absurd. A guilty person would try to limit contact with the police to zilch if possible. Like Guede tried to do.

It's interesting that Wilson admits that Amanda was put in solitary confinement completely cut off from the outside world when she first got to the prison. How was Amanda supposed to have contacted the U.S. Embassy even if she had wanted to?

Amanda didn't describe a sudden complete recovery of her memory, but what she remembered after talking to the nun was indeed profound to her. Where does Wilson get her information about how memory returns after a stressful experience in which Amanda was told everything she thought she knew was a lie?

Whether or not Wilson believes the life-changing experience Amanda encountered by getting her real memory back, it does fit with the aftermath of the mindnumbing experience the police put her through. Amanda's First Memorandum demonstrates the excruciating confusion she was left with after that interrogation. In that Memorandum Amanda described how patchy her memory was and how she had two different memories for the same period of time.

Of course Wilson has to discount Amanda's Eurika moment because Wilson wants to believe Amanda is lying. Oh, and Amanda didn't just will the return of her memory as Wilson claims. It just happened because the stress was gone. Maybe this hasn't ever happened to Wilson, but normal people under stress do have problems with memory that clear up. Even the interpreter assured Amanda that she would get back her memory of the murder which stress supposedly blocked from her consciousness.

Why wouldn't Amanda have been shocked to be formally accused of murder after remembering that she was innocent? Before she could not definatively remember what she had happened the night of the murder, and then she could. And yet the authorities still considered her a defendant.

Wilson claims Amanda doesn't sob in her mother's arms when Edda visits her on November 10, 2007 for the first time. But the audio does pick up Amanda sobbing and there is the moment where neither speak which must be when they were hugging.

I'm surprised that Wilson didn't complain about Amanda condensing much of what Edda said into one paragraph that she didn't say that way either. Amanda wasn't writing a mini-series. She had to use techniques to get across the full picture without expanding her story to the size of an encyclopedia.

It's strange that Wilson thinks that Edda's first concern would be for Meredith when Edda had come to see her daughter in prison for wrongful accusations of murder. And Wilson takes this one section of the intercept as being the sum of the total visit Edda had with Amanda.

Edda and Amanda do talk about the Kerchers later in the intercept. And Amanda repeatedly expresses how terrible she feels about what happened to Patrick because of the statements the police had her sign.

But why would Wilson expect Amanda or her mother to have "remorse" for Meredith? Amanda expresses sorrow for her friend, but she had nothing to be remorseful for. She didn't kill Meredith.

And yes, Amanda did express confusion concerning Raffaele since she could not understand why he would lie about her. But she also expressed concern that Raffaele had to endure the same abusive treatment she did.

Why does Wilson claim Amanda considered the police her scapegoat? It's what they did to her that she complained about. Is scapegoat strong enough to designate what they did to her during that abusive interrogation?

Wilson is wrong about this intercept that Amanda may not have even known was being recorded was the groundwork for her claims that she was coerced into signing the police statements. Her First Memorandum is a compelling account of what she went through even though especially since her mental state demonstrated in that Memorandum is such that she would not even have understood the import of what she was saying about the police.

Of course Amanda's lawyers would not file any charges against the police for what they did to Amanda the night of November 5-6th. As they told her, it would do no good. Just filing the charges would bring a callunia lawsuit against her lawyers.

And as Wilson implied, Amanda did get the last laugh on the police who filed a callunia lawsuit against her for what she said about that abusive interrogation. The lawsuit was dismissed with a reprimand against the police.

Wilson wants to consider Amanda's confusion over the text reply to Patrick as a lie. It was Ficarra who was holding Amanda's phone which brings up another point. If Amanda was expected to know about the text reply just by Ficarra asking about it, Ficarra must have given Patrick's name when asking about it. So it was definitely Ficarra who saw Patrick's name with the text reply and said the name to Amanda. It wasn't Amanda who brought up Patrick's name first.

Assuming that Amanda really had the hysterical reaction that the interpreter claims, how does Wilson distinguish the frantic demeanor of seeing Patrick's name on her phone from the frantic demeanor in expressing that Patrick was the one? How does one part of a hysterical reaction become involuntary while another part of the same hysterical reaction remains voluntary?

It wasn't total recall as Wilson claims. Amanda saw images of Patrick when the police claimed she met him and when they claimed she was in the villa. It was the interpreter who claimed Amanda had amnesia because of the trauma of what she experienced. But this sort of fantastic breakthrough is what often happens with coercion. If Wilson thinks it strange that Amanda should suddenly remember the murder, why doesn't it occur to her that it was really a false memory that the police forced on Amanda?

It's interesting that Wilson asks what happened after Amanda supposedly witnessed Patrick murder Meredith. The police don't ask her that. She wasn't badgered about what happened after the murder. They only harassed her into telling about meeting Patrick, going with him to the murder, and that he did it. The 5:45 AM statement only has Amanda saying she woke up the next morning in Raffaele's bed.

Amanda said in the 5:45 AM statement it was as though she imagined it all. She has said later that the police did require her to imagine what would have happened if she went to the murder with Patrick. The police must have decided that what she imagined was real.

Wilson points out how absurd the events in the two police statements are, but Wilson only assumes it's because Amanda is lying. It never occurs to her that the police really did coerced Amanda to sign them.

How can Wilson know that seeing Patrick's name on her cell phone was the only reason Amanda freaked out over Patrick being the perpetrator? The "cue" as Wilson calls it is only the trigger that started the hysterical reaction made possible by all the abusive interrogation practices the police had used against Amanda.

The police claim there are no video-audio recordings of that interrogation. They have no way to prove that Amanda really could understand what was being demanded of her. Her First Memorandum demonstrates that she could not have been of a mental state that would have allowed her to understand anything that was going on.

Even if Amanda said she didn't want a lawyer, it remains that a lawyer for her was not present to corroborate whether she was making the statements voluntarily.

Why would Wilson think Amanda would have memory issues from the interrogation of November 5-6th when Amanda wrote the email on November 4th? In her First Memorandum of November 6th, Amanda said the memory issues were due to the stress of the interrogation she just endured. How could Wilson claim the memory issues had to be retroactive in order to be valid?

How did the police prove that Amanda wasn't at Raffaele's apartment when she responded to Patrick's text message? If the police were relying on the technology that determined which cell phone tower services which cell phone, what in that technology determines which tower of multiple overlapping coverage towers serves the cell phone? The towers cannot determine locality by signal strength. Also, traffic on one tower could push coverage into other towers.

But also it's absurd that Amanda would have left Raffaele's apartment to reply to Patrick, but then return to be there when Jovana Popovic saw her minutes later.

Despite what Anna Donnino testified, it is inconceivable that Amanda could have written her First Memorandum the way she did unless she had been severely traumatized during the interrogation. Maybe Ms. Donnino didn't understand the symptoms, but it is also unlikely she would rat out on her colleagues who were breaking the law.

Assuming Amanda really were cornered and crumbled, why would she admit to being at the murder as a way out? And why would she blame the murder on Patrick Lumumba whom nobody would believe committed the crime and was sure to have an alibi that he was at his bar working?

If she were really guilty, wouldn't she try to pass guilt to a drug dealer like guilt advocates claim she knew? Even the police tried to claim she knew a drug dealer. Surely, that person they claimed they arrested from a phone number they claimed was on her phone (but wasn't) would have been a better candidate than Patrick.

But the absurdity of what the police had Amanda sign indicates that they had to coerce her into signing it. In her right mind, Amanda would never have accused Patrick Lumumba.

There is no proof that Amanda met a drug dealer on the train or that she ever was aware of anyone being one. The police claimed she had the phone number of a drug dealer in her phone, but the number in her phone they mentioned didn't belong to a drug dealer. And Amanda said she didn't know anyone who DOES cocaine. Raffaele was no longer doing cocaine. He may have an addiction to cocaine, but just like any recovering addict, that doesn't mean he's still using it.

Amanda wasn't talking about her pot usage on all days. She was only talking about her usage one day. Even if she was smoking it every day, she was not lying to her mother about her usage of pot. She admitted that that was all she was using.

Wilson is being disingenuous about Edda's testimony denying that Amanda used marijuana. Edda had already answered that Amanda only used marijuana in Seattle. So when Edda was asked if she were aware of Amanda using drugs in Italy, she was hardly denying Amanda had continued using marijuana. It was  narcotic drugs like heroin and cocaine she was asked about.

Of course when the police started asking Amanda what she did a few days before, she could remember quite well that she was at Raffaele's apartment all night. It was after they started grilling her over details nobody can remember from a few days ago that they started confusing her. And then they started telling her what she was supposed to remember instead of what was real. Of course all this confused her as well as being told that Raffaele didn't agree with her anymore.

Wilson is disingenuous about what Amanda wrote in her 5:45 AM statement. She didn't write anything but her name. As with the 1:45 AM statement, it was typed in Italian for her to sign. It's interesting to note the differences between those two coerced statements that demonstrate different editors who compiled them for Amanda to sign.

The 1:45 AM statement also conveys the confusion Amanda felt, but it is noteworthy that the editor of the 5:45 AM statement let slip that Amanda imagined what they told her was truth, and that Amanda both heard Meredith scream and also that Amanda doesn't remember hearing the scream.

That the 5:45 AM statement has Amanda claiming she was afraid of Patrick sounds like a political statement about foreigners that Amanda was unlikely to make herself. This is more likely to be a jab at immigrants who were not liked by born Italians.

Yes, Amanda wrote a book about her experiences. I don't expect she will get an apology from the police or any guilt advocate.

Why would Amanda claim Meredith was attacked downstairs before fleeing upstairs? There were no stairs connecting the two apartments. The real concern about the copious blood in the lower apartment was that there was no way the cat could have gotten out after receiving whatever mortal blow could have caused that much blood. Presumably Guede used Meredith's key to go there to clean up.

No shoe prints were left unidentified. The only ones in Meredith's room were Guede's. How do you decide that bruises are made by small fingers? Of course Judge Mecheli ruled that Meredith put her hands on the wound to her neck. Maybe that's how those finger marks got there. The bloody hand print on the wall was Guede's. A blond-brown hair? That's not what Stefanoni testified. If multiple persons attacked Meredith, she wouldn't have had the opportunity to get any defensive wounds. She would have been completely subjected to whatever her attackers wished to do to her, but that's not what happened.

How is stifling Meredith's scream supposed to be evidence of her being attacked by multiple attackers when the prosecutor pointed to various witnesses he claimed heard her scream? Is Van Der Leek calling Mignini and those witnesses liars?

There were three men's DNA attributed to the bra clasp sample in addition to Raffaele's. Were they attackers also? Their profiles support the likelihood that Raffaele's DNA was also contamination. How does evidence of Rudy Guede being there confirm he had accomplices?

Why does Van Der Leek mention what Guede claimed he wrote on the wall except to throw unnecessary attention on Raffaele? Since Van Der Leek admits that the letters were probably just Guede's hand prints, Guede probably made up that Meredith was trying to say Raffaele's name but only getting out "AF."

Regardless of what the "editor" claims, the bra clasp was cut off. There is no question about this. It's debatable whether Rudy would have tried to wash off the blood before leaving the cottage. He said he went to the small bathroom for towels. It's logical that he would have attended to other factors at the same time.

Nobody has said that Rudy Guede was ever in the upper apartment except the time when Meredith died.

How does Van Der Leek know that Rudy Guede didn't break in the night of November 1-2nd? He doesn't. It was only a ruling saying it was a staged break-in. It wasn't proved. So why speculate on who let him in when more than likely Guede broke in.

Does someone have to as privileged as Raffaele Sollecito to tell the audacious police they can wait for attendance to their unreasonable demands? Does a few minutes completing a meal make Meredith Kercher any more dead? Imagine the cockiness of somebody to abuse authority that way?

Even if the police really thought Raffaele culpable of murder, does it really change that culpability to wait a little while for the suspect to finish a meal? If the police don't have a warrant for an immediate arrest, what are they complaining about?

What's wrong with Wilson? Does she confuse a mere misunderstanding over a parked car with being charged with murder?

How arrogant is it for the police to demand that citizen Raffaele dance to their tune because the police consider him a witness? It's one thing for a driver to kowtow to the police who have a lawful reason to tow a car, but what law allows the police to terrorize a citizen because he is a witness?

However weird Wilson thinks the lives of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were, is that a sufficient reason to decide they killed someone? What did their so-called weirdness have to do with Meredith? Nothing.

Raffaele's family sounds like a normal Italian family. They were protective of their own. How did this reflect on Amanda?

There is no evidence that family members of either Amanda or Raffaele knew their loved one was guilty. The suspicions of the Sollecitos concerning Amanda is not clear evidence of anything.

One of the things about the Italian Judiciary that has come to light with the case against Amanda Knox is that it is not fair. It appears to be common knowledge that police and prosecutors are aided by trial judges in acquiring false convictions which end up being annulled by the Supreme Court.

There is no evidence that Raffaele's sister Vanessa did anything to manipulate the "system" other than keep her benefits when her job was threatened for no other reason than being Raffaele's sister.

It was Vanessa who closed down her father's negotiations with Mignini for Raffaele to accuse Amanda of taking advantage of him for a lightened sentence. Their father was not aware it was illegal, and Raffaele denies any knowledge of this deal being negotiated.

Wilson even acknowledges that Vanessa Sollecito was hoping to transition into a civilian role in the Carabinieri. How this was supposed to help Vanessa in an illicit scheme to get Raffaele out of prison is up to Wilson to explain, but she doesn't.

Whatever political influence Wilson thinks Vannesa was trying to get for Raffaele doesn't materialize. The telling thing is that it seems necessary to try to get it in order to get justice. Guilt advocates still claim it was political interference that allowed Amanda and Raffaele to be acquitted.

Of course none of what the Sollecitos may have attempted had anything to do with Amanda.

Of course Patrick Lumumba was a pawn in the game the police played to get Amanda Knox to incriminate herself. The police had mistakenly thought a black man's hair was found in Meredith Kercher's left hand. See: http://tinyurl.com/3paj6go

They were expecting a black man to be involved, but they also suspected Amanda was guilty for ridiculous reasons that Investigator Giobbi gave. The police were investigating everyone Amanda knew. She didn't really know Guede. So they had no lead on him. Amanda worked for Patrick Lumumba who was black.

The police didn't care which black they used to connect Amanda to the murder, but they had to know who Patrick was before Ficarra conveniently found his name on Amanda's phone.

Van Der Leek categorizes Amanda and Raffaele as the same type of misfit that Guede was. Does he think that the case against Guede is the same as the case used against Amanda and Raffaele? There weren't the same, but guilt advocates have always insisted that all three were guilty together.

1. Guilt advocates always interpret sex as guilt for anything. Connect a woman to sex and they conclude she's not innocent in anything anymore.

2. Guilt advocates make a big deal about Meredith's rejection of Amanda on Halloween, but Amanda never did.

3. There is absolutely no evidence of a drug party in Meredith's room. There is no indication that Amanda and Raffaele were there at all.

I. Amanda is not an orphan. Raffaele still has his father even if his mother died. It's not how dysfunctional their families may be that is important. It's how they responded to it. Amanda and Raffaele came out fine. Guede didn't. Van Der Leek can't prove Amanda and Raffaele's involvement in Guede's crimes by predicting it from their family life.

II. That Amanda and Raffaele were not included in the fashionable part of their young society didn't harm them any more than it did the rest of us who were not in the "in" crowd. It's ridiculous to claim Amanda had no real friends. They all came out to support her. We don't hear as much about Raffaele's social life, but it didn't seem to bother him as much as the death of his mother did.

III. Amanda was certainly naive enough, but how was she terrified of life? She was eager to learn and set off on an adventure to a foreign land where she wasn't fluent in the language. She was not desperate to be part of Meredith's British friends. Amanda preferred to be part of the local scene with people who spoke only Italian.

IV. Amanda never experimented in hard drugs like cocaine or heroin. Raffaele had used those hard drugs around the time of his mother's death, but he was no longer using them.

V. So the prison warden Angela Antonelli said Amanda was like a vampire with her strong personality knowing what she wants and very determined? Doesn't that contradict what Van Der Leek goes on to claim that Amanda had a "weak sense of self, a teetering social identity and shaky self-esteem?"

Antonelli's criticism doesn't make sense since she also described Amanda as being reticent staying to herself and not socializing. How was that "sucking emotion" from anyone? It's confusing who Antonelli really was since she says she was the guard closest to Amanda but that she Antonelli distanced herself from Amanda. She can't be the guard Amanda talked about in her book.

Van Der Leek insists that Amanda, Raffaele, and Guede were all deeply immersed in the occult. Did he forget that Meredith wore a Dracula costume for Halloween?

Does Van Der Leek condemn all avid readers of Harry Potter? Is he calling all the grownup readers of Harry Potter juvenile for not having discarded their interest?

If Van Der Leek claims that Amanda Knox suffers from a "weak sense of self, a teetering social identity and shaky self-esteem," doesn't he admit that she was a perfect candidate for the police to take advantage of during the abusive interrogation.

How does Van Der Leek talk about Amanda and witchcraft when other guilt advocates strenuously deny that charges of witchcraft were never part of the case against her?

Van Der Leek as much as admits he brings up witchcraft because saying Amanda is involved in it will influence what people think about her whether they admit it or not.

When Amanda wrote about the ways of committing suicide in jail, she was talking about what other inmates had done. What significance does that have to the description of Meredith's murder? Sure, Amanda was depressed enough in prison to contemplate committing suicide, but what does that have to do with killing others?

Van Der Leek suggests that it was Guede who took Meredith's rent money to spend at Domus Disco. Strange, earlier it was claimed that Amanda took it. Of course Van Der Leek and Wilson try to make similarities between the two Amanda and Raffaele and the one Guede in order to make it appear they were part of Guede's crimes.

VI. It's strange that Van Der Leek reads disassociation and detachment into the books that Amanda and Raffaele wrote. Amanda certainly wasn't disassociated and detached when she broke down into sobs when brought back to the apartment where her friend was killed. It's this strange expectation that she was supposed to be completely and continually overwhelmed with depression because Meredith was murdered. People do not live that way. Even during a period of grief, we find things that interest and amuse us. That doesn't mean we ever forget our loss completely. What guilt advocates expect of Amanda is not healthy.

VII. It has been Van Der Leek's goal all along to call Amanda a person without credibility. It's not surprising that he calls her a habitual liar. Guilt advocates latch onto any mistake or contradiction to claim it's a lie. A falsehood is not a lie unless there is a deliberate attempt to deceive. The only time Amanda deliberately tried to deceive was because her roommate Laura asked her not to expose Laura's use of marijuana. All other lies attributed to Amanda are totally debateable as to Amanda's trying to deceive anyone. Most of the alleged lies have no significance except as excuses to claim Amanda always lies.

Why would it be impossible for Guede to steal Meredith's phones if he also stole her money?

VIII. Lots of people lived near both Guede and Sollecito. Is there some reason they should know each other but not any of those other people? Or how does it make Guede like Raffaele just because he lived near Raffaele? There really is no evidence that they knew each other. They were never seen together. They didn't phone or text each other. They didn't write letters or emails to each other. They had no common interests.


Van Der Leek goes back to his theme of the vampires. He claims that Meredith's Halloween vampire costume may have been a trigger setting off psychological quirks in Amanda and Raffaele. Van Der Leek has explained that Guede had a vampire quirk, but there is no reason to think it was transferred to Amanda and Raffaele.

The wounds to Meredith's neck had nothing to do with vampires since they were not directed at either of her carotid arteries. They were stabs that were administered to intimidate her into submission.

Van Der Leek seems to have forgotten that it was Mignini who fancied himself as Sherlock Holmes. Amanda and Raffaele only called the police to report the suspicious things they noticed in the villa.

There is no proof that Guede's shoe prints in the hallway leading to the door were ever bloodier than they were found to be. There was no evidence of a clean up having been done, but more to the point, why would they try to clean up Guede's shoe prints? There is no evidence tying Amanda and Raffaele to Guede.

Van Der Leek admits that Meredith's fingerprints were found in Amanda's room, but he is suspicious that Amanda's were not found there. How could Amanda have cleaned away only her and Raffaele's fingerprints while leaving Meredith's? Fingerprints are not very visible without that black powder the police dust with.

There is no evidence of a cleanup having been done anywhere in the apartment. There were no smudges or cleanser residue that would have to have been there if there was a cleanup. The lack of evidence Van Der Leek wanted to find is not evidence of a cleanup. It just means Van Der Leek doesn't know what happened.

And why would Amanda and Raffaele clean away fingerprints from rooms that were not involved in the murder? Such an allegation defies reason. Especially since there was no such cleanup in Meredith's room.

Van Der Leek claims it was impossible for Guede to have locked Meredith's door since his shoe prints go straight to the front door. However he admits that those where shoe prints from just one shoe--the left shoe to be precise. So he cannot prove that Guede didn't turn toward the door with just his right foot in order to lock the door.

The postal policeman Fabio Marsi testified that there wasn't much blood in the bathroom. Filomena didn't see that there was blood everywhere. She just heard Amanda say it. Amanda had had time to become worried about what she had seen. It didn't seem that much blood when she took the shower, and it wasn't.

Van Der Leek says what PERHAPS occurred when Guede was there with Meredith. Of course Van Der Leek has to involve Amanda and Raffaele as though they were there also, but we only have proof that Guede was in Meredith's room.

Does Van Der Leek even have evidence that Guede was high on drugs at the time? The people who later saw Guede at the night club said he acted strange and smelled horrible, but they didn't say he acted like he was high.

Amanda is a German ethnic. The valkyries were Norse goddesses. Van Der Leek's intentions are to make some kind of savage warrior out of Amanda. Maybe an Amazon.

There was no morbid sex ritual involved in Meredith's death. It was just a bloody struggle to subject her that wouldn't have occurred if there had been three people involved. They would have quickly subdued Meredith for whatever purpose Van Der Leek expected.

The crime may very well have been a "spur of the moment" thing that Van Der Leek suggests. Guede broke in to rob the apartment, but while he was hidden around the corner in the front bathroom, Meredith came in, and he already expressed his interest in her as well as Amanda. Meredith just happened to be the one Guede took by surprise.

Van Der Leek seems to describe Amanda as being an explosion waiting to happen, but it is Meredith who expresses dissatisfaction to her friends about Amanda. It's not Amanda who expresses any grievance against Meredith.

How does turning their phones off prove Amanda and Raffaele killed Meredith? It doesn't. It just means they didn't want to be disturbed.

Amanda and Raffaele didn't claim they only woke up at 10:30 AM. They only said that was when they got up.

Van Der Leek takes the turning off of the phones as indicating Amanda and Raffaele made a decision for a "change of plan." We already know they had a change of plans. Amanda found out she didn't have to go to work and Raffaele found out he didn't have to drive Popovic to the bus station.

Now why when Amanda and Raffaele had only that week found that they were so in love, would they suddenly decide it would be a great idea to go murder Amanda's roommate? The implications of that assumption are simply ridiculous.

In an interview Raffaele misspeaks and said something about a party that was on a different day. Exactly what party Raffaele was referring to is unknown, but it doesn't justify jumping to the conclusion that he was talking about a fictional party with Guede.

And then to fantasize that Amanda may have been having three-some sex with Raffaele and Guede when Meredith objected? That's ridiculous. Thanks to the police, we know all about Amanda's sex life, and three-some sex never happened.

But Van Der Leek speculates that Amanda and Raffaele could have gotten wasted IF THEY WANTED TO, and that they could have done it with Guede. But of course Van Der Leek thinks they did it at the villa. There's still no evidence that they indulged in anything but marijuana at Raffaele's apartment.

Van Der Leek's obsession with a couple of Amanda's printed Ss is completely absurd. If you look at more examples of her Ss in her prison diary, they are exactly written exactly the same way as the ones he claims loop down below the writing line.

It's true that some of her Ss come down a nano-bit more than others, but how does Van Der Leek jump from that to claiming the letter is drowning in blood? Why does he get this morbid image when he sees the letter S ?

Van Der Leek is wrong about the contrast he draws between Meredith and Amanda. Undoubtedly Meredith is fully as capable a student as he describes her, but Amanda is also a very learned student.

Amanda concentrated on her studies instead of worrying about inclusion in the "in-crowd" back in Seattle. Since she never cared about such ridiculous social connections, why does Van Der Leek call her insecure? If she didn't have friends, why are the guilt advocates so upset about the Friends of Amanda?

And how does Van Der Leek conclude that Amanda is calculating? She was the one who was manipulated by the police and not the other way around. Or is it because Amanda always has a boyfriend that makes Van Der Leek think she's calculating?

Van Der Leek asks what could have set Amanda off against Meredith, and then proceeds to provide a theory as though it is established that Amanda was set off to begin with. There is security camera proof that Guede arrived at the villa and that Meredith arrived later. There is no proof that Amanda and Raffaele were there at all.

Here's a theory. Van Der Leek and Wilson propose opinions that they then masquerade as facts. So far they have validated this theory.

Van Der Leek speculates Amanda's animosity toward her own mother that is not in evidence. Where has Amanda told someone they can't tell her what to do because that person is not her mother?

Oh, and then Van Der Leek wants to make it seem that this scenario he has fantasized about the unlikely conspiracy between Amanda/Raffael and Guede culminates in a premeditated murder of Meredith. Didn't he say before he didn't think it was premeditated?

Where is all this hostility from Amanda supposed to have come from? She never expressed any anger against Meredith. She never expressed a grievance against Meredith. Meredith did talk about Amanda behind Amanda's back, and even though Amanda didn't know about it, the guilt advocates consider this malice against her as being the source of murderous rage against Meredith.

Meredith being murdered doesn't prove that Amanda and Raffaele killed her. That's why guilt advocates have had to piggyback guilt for them from Guede. There's no question that Van Der Leek and Wilson are trying to force association with Guede's crimes onto Amanda and Raffaele's innocent shoulders.

So what does Van Der Leek provide as a reason for believing Amanda killed her roommate and friend? That Amanda would have been kicked out of the house if Meredith survived! All of the surviving roommates were kicked out of the apartment. Meredith's death did "fuck" up everything for Amanda and Raffaele. That's no excuse for blaming them for what the outsider Guede did to Meredith.

Van Der Leek admits that Meredith died an umpleasant death that extended over an excruciating period of time, but guilt advocates blame Amanda for expressing the crudeness of that death.

If Amanda and Raffaele wanted to conceal a relationship to the murder of Meredith Kercher, they could have immediately taken off on their already planned day trip to Gubbio. It may have only been an hour away, but they could have found a room in which to continue their courtship until Filomena or Laura came home to find Meredith's body. But they instead lived their own lives as they had when they went to bed the night before.

Considering the Editor's Note: Kokomani is discredited for having attested to interaction with Amanda's "uncle" before she was in Italy.

Wilson and Van Der Leek - Under Suspicion-Prison

Prison

It's interesting how racist the Italian police were in arresting Patrick Lumumba. It puts to shame all the racist accusations made against Amanda Knox for being coerced to accuse him.

It's also interesting that the police advised Patrick Lumumba whom they had to know was wrongfully accused the fast track trial that was never offered to Amanda Knox.

The only complication involved with the case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito was that someone else committed the crimes they were accused of. It is definitely complex to divert blame from Rudy Guede to the innocent Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

"Faux PR?" Is that what Van Der Leek considers defending herself against false accusations of murder to be?

Van Der Leek has a strange impression on how long Italian trials last. The trial of Amanda and Raffaele is subject to scrutiny because it didn't last longer than it did. Trials are obviously the national sport of Italy since they really have no ending point. When the prosecution can point to its own mistake as a reason for returning the trial to the trial court, when can anyone expect a trial to end?

Van Der Leek again talks about the three things he thinks caused Amanda to accuse Patrick Lumumba. This is a pattern. Also, since there was no indication that Amanda had any fear of Patrick Lumumba before the November 5-6th interrogation, why does Van Der Leek think it's because Amanda is lying in the 5:45 AM statement that was typed in Italian for her to sign that has her saying she feared him?

It should be a dead give-a-way that that Amanda was coerced to sign such a fraudulent statement. There was no reason that Amanda would have accused a steady family man like Patrick of attacking and murdering Meredith when she would have every reason to know he would be at his place of business at that time.

Quoting the coerced statement of 1:45 AM doesn't make it any more reasonable that Amanda would leave the apartment of her boyfriend who knew she didn't have to go to work that night.

The supposed "update" of the 1:45 AM statement with the self-contradictory 5:45 AM statement isn't credible in the least. How could Amanda say she heard Meredith's scream without remembering hearing it? The supposed fear of Patrick Lumumba demonstrates the bias that an Italian like Mignini would have for a black man more than Amanda would have expressed.

If Amanda were really afraid of Patrick Lumumba, why did she converse with him the next day as the 5:45 AM statement would have her doing? Why would Patrick ask her to talk to journalist in order to find out what she knew about Meredith's death if he were really the killer?

There really isn't an Amanda version in which she invites Patrick to the villa to set him up with Meredith. This was what the police coerced Amanda to sign. Basically, Van Der Leek has to admit that the accusation against Patrick is false, but he wants to assert that Amanda still propositioned Meredith on behalf of a man. Namely Guede by substitution. The same strategy as the police used.

The same strategy of smearing Amanda by association was used by the fraudulent warden at the prison. Amanda was asked to incriminate herself by talking about the murder, and she refused. Only Van Der Leek expects us to believe that Amanda asked Meredith to cooperate with an equally humiliating compromise in a sexual game Amanda never engaged in before or since.

It was the police who prompted Amanda to accuse Patrick Lumumba. It was just a matter of time before they broke down her resistance to their false assertions they had evidence that she was at the murder and that what she texted in reply to Patrick had to mean she was meeting him that night. Starting with Ficarra asking who the Patrick was in the text message until Amanda thought it was possible that Patrick could be the killer, the police had been harassing her with demands about Patrick. It was the police who kept saying his name and not Amanda until they got her to agree to the false statements.

Of course Van Der Leek mind reads Amanda as being desperate with guilt and wanting to use Patrick as a scapegoat. If Amanda really did kill Meredith, she would have realized the police had nothing on her and that they were trying to manipulate her into confessing. There was nothing to connect her to Guede, and she didn't have to admit being there.

In her right mind whether guilty or not, Amanda would never have accused Patrick Lumumba. If she were guilty, she certainly would have known someone more believable as the killer than Patrick. Surely, a guilty Amanda would have known a drug dealer guilt advocates are certain she knew who would have been more believable as the killer. All those used hypodermic needles littering the ground around the villa was evidence of drug dealers in the vicinity.

What's interesting is that Van Der Leek even admits that the police were not accepting Amanda's denials of knowledge they wanted. He admits they were "firing off questions" and wouldn't "settle for vagaries." He admits the police were demanding the name of a suspect and latched onto the name Patrick. It never occurs to Van Der Leek any more than it did to the police that Amanda really didn't know anything about the murder.

Van Der Leek claims that Amanda manipulated the police into having her sign the 5:45 AM statement so that she could introduce issues she could use as a defense later. But it was the police who demanded her sign that statement since they couldn't use the 1:45 AM statement against her as she was still a witness at that time.

If by "second statement," Van Der Leek means Amanda's First Memorandum which was actually her third statement that day, Amanda didn't admit meeting Patrick at all in that statement. It does show that she was of a confused mental state that would have made it impossible for her to have understood either of the other two statements presented for her to sign.

Van Der Leek asserts Amanda's guilt in Guede's crimes against Meredith by criticizing her denial and detachment. Why wouldn't Amanda deny responsibility for crimes she didn't commit? How can Van Der Leek expect Amanda to associate with Guede's crimes? She was affected by the horror of what happened to Meredith, but what Guede did was not her actions, and Van Der Leek has no right to expect her to own it.

But just like the police, Van Der Leek takes Amanda's denials to be evidence of her guilt. That's not justice. He claims that the world is fascinated with Amanda Knox because as he claims "we have done some dastarly things also." He still expects Amanda must redeem herself from his suspicions. Maybe he should redeem himself from those suspicions.

In consideration of the Editor's Note: When Amanda was arrested, the police did a drug test and only found she had used a little marijuana. There is absolutely no evidence that Amanda Knox used LSD.


Is Amanda and enigma to guilt advocates because they want to try her for her evil character, and Amanda keeps having interviews that emphasize her good character? That would explain why they are so intent on calling her interviews lies. They can't admit that her character is that of an innocent person.

Why does Wilson call it absurd that Amanda complained about not getting on with her own life while in prison? Wouldn't anyone express that concern if arrested from their normal life? So where's the arrogance or narcissism that Wilson has inserted into the discussion? Just because Wilson wants to claim Amanda was intent on getting away with criminal deeds doesn't make it so.

Wilson seems to think that Amanda and Raffaele didn't have a right to tell their own experiences in the books they wrote. Wilson of course wants everyone to believe they would be lying about what they wrote. Why assume that? Can't we just read what they wrote and decide for ourselves?

Wilson criticizes Amanda and Raffaele's laissez faire attitudes towards the murder investigation. Free-market attitudes? Apparently Wilson finds many things Amanda wrote to be "inappropriate." That's a favorite guilt advocate talking-point. The expect Amanda to stop being herself and turn into some sort of robot programmed to be forever depressed over Meredith's death and nothing else.

However juvenile Wilson considers Amanda's prison diary, it is Amanda's and nobody else should have had the right to see it. And yet Wilson complains about Amanda making illegible something she decided she miswrote. It's just Wilson wanting to criticize Amanda for something Amanda didn't say.

Amanda in that prison diary apologizes to Patrick calling the accusation a big mistake, and Wilson compares that apology to Oscar Pistorius calling the death of his girlfriend an accident. What was Amanda supposedly trying to minimize? She's admitting she was wrong. Is it because she had previously said the police had brainwashed her?

What's obvious from Wilson's analysis of Amanda's diary is how painfully obsessed Wilson is with Amanda's inner thoughts. Did Wilson really think Amanda's diary would be the viewpoint of someone other than Amanda? And what difference does it make that Amanda mispelled the word "scarce?" Wilson has a dictionary handy to check spellings. Amanda didn't.

What difference does it make that Wilson thinks Amanda is "self-absorbed" in the memoir she wrote? Isn't that the definition of memoir? And yet Amanda is criticized for making money off of Meredith's death even though Wilson complains that Amanda was writing about herself.

If Wilson is going to take the warden's word for it that Amanda was not clean, how can Wilson then go on to contradict the warden who said that Amanda didn't try to fit in. Isn't the warden's version of things what is really the repeat of what was used against Amanda? Amanda didn't fit in. She was accused of being unclean. She was convicted for being weird.

Amanda never denied that there were people in her high school who considered her weird and even lesbian. Amanda just didn't care what they thought.

Why does Wilson think that Amanda is supposed to condescend to the level of personality of the other inmates? Was Amanda supposed to pretend she was interested in the vulgar things they were interested in? Amanda wanted to get on with her studies that Wilson admits the other inmates ridiculed her for. Too bad those other inmates weren't interested in bettering themselves.

How did Amanda's not fitting in with Meredith's British friends lead to Guede killing Meredith? Why does Wilson think that Amanda needed to fit into the lives of the older roommates Filomena and Laura who had families and friends to go see?

The warden criticized Amanda for having a personality strong enough to resist the psychological pressures that caused other inmates to harm themselves.

Of course Amanda was a special inmate in that prison. She was a middle class American, and she was wrongfully accused.

The warden complained about Amanda not talking about the night of the murder or about Guede. She criticized Amanda for not trying to get other inmates to understand what happened that night. Does Wilson expect Amanda to have said something to the other inmates that could have been used against her like all the other attempts Amanda made to get the authorities to understand her innocence?

I have to wonder about the honesty of this warden who claimed she was closer to Amanda than any other staff at Capanne. Amanda wrote in her book about the guard that she liked the most. This warden is not that guard.

Wilson has ignored that the part of Amanda's diary where Amanda apologized to Patrick for what she did to him. But does Wilson also expect Amanda to demonstrate remorse for crimes she doesn't admit to committing? Of course Wilson states that Amanda's account of being forced to sign the incriminating statements is fake, but how does Wilson prove it? What makes Wilson think that Amanda would deceive herself in a diary she never thought anyone else would read?

Wilson seems to think the way for Amanda to prove her innocence is to grovel in guilt.

Curiously, Wilson notes that Amanda's Prison Diary which only covers less than the first mont of her stay in prions doesn't detail the hardships from her entire stay in prison she described in her book. Did Wilson expect Amanda to know all that before it happened? Besides, Amanda did cover the false HIV notice, and her difficulty in adjusting to prison life. Also, she was more concerned at that stage in understanding how she got there.

I have to wonder at the honesty of the warden who claimed that Amanda didn't say goodby to anyone who was in prison when she left. She certainly said goodby to that guard she liked. That's another reason why I think the warden is lying about being the staffer who was closest to Amanda. The entire interview the warden gave seems contrived to make Amanda seem inhuman.

In her book, Amanda said she didn't care what the "in crowd" thought of her. She appreciated the honesty of other outcasts instead.

Wilson sees Amanda as being the enigma in "this case." How could Wilson not see her that way. Wilson sees Amanda participating in a murder that makes no sense, but it doesn't occur to Wilson to question whether Amanda and Raffaele had anything to do with Guede's crimes against Meredith.

Where is Amanda "painfully conscious of how she presents herself?" To whom did Wilson think Amanda was trying to present herself? Amanda just wanted to survive the prison experience and get on with her life. She studied her college courses and planned for how she would resume her career after being freed.

How does Wilson compare the mental state Amanda was in after the abusive interrogation that left her weeping and confused with the self-possessed and conscious state of mind after she had recovered and realized how she had been manipulated?

Of course Amanda in her right mind would not have accused Patrick Lumumba of killing Meredith, but Amanda's First Memorandum proves she could not have been in her right mind when the police had her sign those coerced statements.

Wilson thinks that Antonelli's account is somewhat exaggerated? Antonelli's misconstrued Amanda's differences from the other inmates to say Amanda was weird. So is it such a bad thing for a normal person to be considered weird compared to convicts who have a good chance of being sociopaths?

Why would Raffaele think he was arrested for murder because he forgot details of the night in question. It wasn't the marijuana that he smoked that was his problem. It was that the police wanted to convict Amanda and he was her alibi. The police were going to interrogate him until they got something for which to arrest him no matter what.

Wilson criticizes Amanda for not contemplating her mistakes, but Wilson criticizes for doing just that. It's also nonsense to criticize Raffaele for carrying a knife. Many men carry knives. It is a very practical tool.

Just how long does Wilson think the confusion Amanda had because of the abusive interrogation was supposed to last? It's only Wilson's assertion that Amanda recovered from that confusion because scapegoating Lumumba didn't work out. Even both coerced statements have Amanda stating the confusion she experienced and the 5:45 AM statement even has her saying she thinks she imagined it.

Amanda's First Memorandum picks up on the confusion mentioned in the coerced statements and shows how her mind was trying to break free by comparing two conflicting memories she realized she had for the same period of time.

Her confusion is still evident in how that First Memorandum demonstrates that she thinks she's still trying to help the police find the killer. Even though she described the abusive techniques that were used in the interrogation, she expresses that she understands that the police were just trying to do their job.

Of course when Amanda sorts out the falsehoods the police have forced onto her mind, she goes back to what she originally told them--that she spent the entire night with Raffaele at his apartment.

Wilson says that one of the reasons the police suspected Amanda was because she remained calm when Meredith's body was discovered. Numbness is a symptom of sedation.

It's strange how when Curatolo confused events of one day with another, what the guilt advocates want to believe is still considered valid, but when Raffaele has the same problem, he's lying. Raffaele definitely expressed things the way he understood them. That didn't always happen to be correct. So Wilson finds it shocking that Raffaele can be mistaken? Guilt advocates are consistent in adhering to the most incriminating view they can find.

It isn't just Amanda who didn't notice much blood in the bathroom. The Postal Policeman Fabio Marsi testified that there wasn't much blood there. Amanda was unnerved by the unflushed toilet that indicated an intruder in the cottage, but by the time she got to Raffaele's apartment, she wasn't sure what it meant. The front door being open didn't indicate anything but that whoever closed it didn't lock it to keep it from opening on its own.

Amanda told the investigators nothing about when Meredith might lock her door. It was Altieri who asked her when Meredith might lock her door, and Raffaele got the translation of her answer wrong.

As confusing as the changes in Raffaele's accounts of the evening were, what could be the purpose of his "mendacity?" Except for the version the police coerced him to sign, he still ends up at his apartment with Amanda all night. His thought processes do seem damaged by his previous drug use, but that doesn't make him dangerous.

Why does Wilson question Jovana Popovic's credibility? Why would Ms. Popovic make up the two encounters with Amanda during the time that the statement the police coerced Raffaele into signing says that Amanda was not at Raffaele's apartment?

Wilson neglects to mention that Amanda replied to Patrick's text message five minutes before Jovana Popovic returned to see Amanda at Raffaele's apartment. Does Wilson really think that Amanda left the apartment to make that reply when Amanda would have had to return to be there when Ms. Popovic returned? Most likely the cell phone tower that was nearest was not the one that serviced her phone.

Amanda and Raffaele were indeed high on marijuana while Guede was killing Meredith. But marijuana would have put them to sleep right where they were at Raffaele's apartment.

Which of the crowd Amanda associated with does Wilson consider "shady?" Another talking point of guilt advocates is Amanda's supposed use of hard drugs like cocaine or heroine, but as hard as the police tried to connect her to these drugs or drug dealers, there's no evidence of her using either.

Wilson says that Raffaele's confusion about whether Amanda went out that night or how long she was out if she did go out is because he doesn't want to be caught in a contradiction if the police prove she committed the crime. That's hogwash. He simply couldn't remember with certainly what happened that night.

Wilson forgets that Raffaele didn't write his book in English. It would be interesting to know what word he used that was translated as "performance," but in addition to that, it is quite unlikely that "le performance" would have the same meaning as the English word "performance." Especially since the Latin word from which the word "performance" is derived has the meaning "to furnish."

Guilt advocates admonish that an innocent shouldn't be afraid to tell the truth. The fact that Raffaele plows ahead with his facts jumbled doesn't prove him guilty. It just proves he believes his innocence.

Why does Wilson get to judge Raffaele for his willingness to change? What change does she expect? Putting together a coherent account of events is impossible. People don't always notice what's happening around them. Events are not necessarily coherent to begin with. History is not what really happened, but what historians agree happened. That Wilson doesn't agree with what Raffaele remembers doesn't make her his historian.

My Goodness. Raffaele really does have a sense of humor. He wrote all that nonsense in order to cheer himself with the thought that Wilson would give herself a verbal enema reading it. Serves her right, but I do wonder how Raffaele knew that Wilson in particular would read it?

Since it's impossible for Raffaele's kitchen knife to have been the murder weapon, Raffaele had ample reason to wonder how Meredith's DNA could have gotten on it. It's a sign of an intelligent mind that uses a diary as a sounding board for analyzing perplexing problems. Raffaele doesn't know the police cheated on the test to get the result they wanted. So he's merely brainstorming on how it could have gotten there. That he does so doesn't mean he has any reason to already know it was there.

Since Stefanoni lied about the legitimacy of the DNA test results indicating Meredith's DNA on Raffaele's kitchen knife, why shouldn't Raffaele be concerned about false evidence elsewhere?

Why shouldn't Raffaele think of compensation for the ordeal that the police put him through. Why shouldn't Amanda write a book about her experiences. After all, she was training to be a writer. Would an innocent really think they wouldn't get justice for wrongful accusations.

Why should Raffaele refrain from putting personal information in his personal diary? What is inappropriate about him thinking about his own thoughts? Shouldn't anyone writing a diary expect that privacy?

It's strange that Wilson considers Raffaele's continued memory confusion to be suspicious, but that the return of Amanda's memory was also suspicious. I find this hypocrisy to be very suspicious.

Guede did have no relationship with Amanda and Raffaele, but when he saw it to his advantage, he claimed they were the killers. Of course Guede never testified so that their lawyers could cross-examine him and show how contradictory his claims were.

What ties did Guede have with Amanda? He told his friends he had the hots for her, but there's no evidence he discussed this with Amanda or discussed anything with Amanda besides his drink order where she worked as a waitress.

Race in Italy does seem to be even more provocative than it is in the United States. In one of the coerced statements typed in Italian for Amanda to sign, Lumumba is referred to as the African boy. Few people in America would say such a thing an not Amanda either.

However much Raffaele made on the book he wrote, he would still see it as the result of a personal tragedy. Raffaele never asked to become famous for being wrongfully accused of murder.


Wilson criticized Raffaele for distrusting Luca Maori for wanting to distance Raffaele from Amanda? Don't guilt advocates insist that Raffaele threw Amanda under the bus?

I'm flabbergasted. Wilson admitted that the prosecutor has the right to suppress defense evidence.

I don't know how anyone knows that Curt Knox spent a million dollars on PR for Amanda, but shouldn't Italy be reimbursed for this expense needed for freeing her from the false accusations against her?

Isn't it convenient that when the shoe print evidence was discredited against Raffaele, the prosecution found the bra clasp that had been cut off from Meredith's body. Of course there was no reason for the killer to have touched the bra clasp while cutting it off the bra. That indicates the sample had to be contamination. And the police didn't use protocols to prove contamination didn't occur.

Of course Raffaele's father was innocent. So why would Wilson question why Raffaele's father would make up stories if HE were innocent. Of course Raffaele's father is desperate to explain why his son is innocent. He knows what he said was possible. He doesn't know whether it's true or not. Actually, neither does Raffaele. Why would Raffaele know if Amanda borrowed a bra from Meredith?

Van Der Leek admits that Amanda is legally exonerated of the murder of Merekdith Kercher, but still claims that her reputation and credibility is still damaged. He makes this claim in regards to the false statement she was coerced into signing in which she accused Patrick Lumumba.

None of the reasons Wilson and Van Der Leek give for Amanda to accuse Patrick make any sense considering that she should have known she would be arrested for murder anyhow. That is if she were in her right mind which I doubt.

Van Der Leek admits that the police already decided whom they believe killed Meredith, but can't figure out how to incriminate them. Van Der Leek admits the police intended to keep the each of Amanda and Raffaele talking until they contradict themselves.

So what does this have to do with the truth about Meredith's murder? The police succeeded in getting Amanda to accuse an innocent man. And they succeeded in getting Raffaele to make statements that were easily proved false about when Amanda was at his apartment.

So if Patrick had fired Amanda, why did he call her to work on Halloween which wouldn't have been her day to work anyhow? Why did he have to tell her the next day not to come in if he had already fired her? And Van Der Leek admits that Patrick claimed he had a good relationship with Amanda. Since her 5:45 AM statement said she was afraid of him, doesn't that indicate that what she signed was coerced?

How curious that Van Der Leek quotes Patrick saying Meredith's Italian was poor even though Meredith had already completed the language course Amanda was taking. Since it's a guilter advocate talking point that Meredith was superior to Amanda in all ways, how does this also validate the guilter advocate talking point that Amanda was completely fluent in Italian? She couldn't have been.

How does Van Der Leek know who composed the group of girlfriends that accompanied Amanda and Meredith to Le Chic? That's not where the British friends usually went.

Did Lumumba really hire Amanda for her waitress abilities or her attraction for customers? If she could tease customers into coming to his bar the way he described, why did he only complain about it after getting arrested? Van Der Leek admits that Patrick didn't want the exodus of customers that firing Amanda would cause.

Why is it that women are supposed to put up with their men's dalliances, but men aren't supposed to be tolerant of the other relationships the women they prefer have? Amanda never agreed to marry Raffaele and she never agreed to be faithful to him any more than she did to DJ. Maybe this upsets the male prerogative attitude that Van Der Leek may have. But it is the truth. It certainly doesn't mean Amanda would expect such an exclusionary relationship with Meredith that guilt advocates expect. Neither Amanda nor Meredith were lesbian.

There is no evidence that Patrick was interested in offering Meredith a job until after he was arrested and he wanted to claim she accused him in retaliation for firing her.

It still makes no sense that the Italian police would immediately arrest and abuse Patrick Lumumba without verifying the accusation they had to know was false to begin with. Since they had to coax Amanda into accusing Patrick, the only reason they abused him when arresting him was because they knew they were wrong.

The police admitted the wrongful accusation of Patrick Lumumba when they suggested to him that he could get a reduction of sentence if he confessed. Of course the fast-track trial was not offered to Amanda.

Van Der Leek's questioning the naivite of Patrick Lumumba demonstrates guilt advocates' prescriptive expectation for innocent behavior. Why should Patrick "intuit" that the police arresting him had anything to do with Meredith's death, or Amanda or working for him.

The statements the police coerced Amanda to sign do not have her saying Patrick Lumumba had persuaded her to take him to the apartment of the girls, and they do not have her say Patrick was motivated by revenge for Meredith rejected him. Is this what the police told Patrick?

Amanda did apologize to Patrick twice for accusing him: once in her prison diary which was publicised, and once before the Hellmann Court. Amanda of course could not tell police he had nothing to do with the murder because she wasn't at the murder and she wasn't with Patrick somewhere else.

Van Der Leek takes Guede's calm assurance that it was all a mistake with the certainty that he would eventually be released as how a real innocent person out to react. But Van Der Leek seems to think that Amanda's similar reaction is an act.

Amanda never denied she went to the police station with Raffaele on November 5th of her own volition in spite of being tired. She has always said she did it because she feared being alone with the killer still at large. Meredith's British friends all stayed together before leaving the country for the same reason. Amanda may have been particularly afraid of being alone in the night. She did seem to function all right going to school that day.

Why is Amanda's being confused which text message the police were asking about supposed to be an obvious lie? Does Van Der Leek think that her reply to Patrick's text message not to come in to work was the only text message she had ever sent?

If Van Der Leek thinks Ficarra's pointing out this text reply of Amanda's would alert Amanda to the fact that the police have had her under surveillance, then he must admit that the police already knew about this text message exchange between Amanda and Patrick before interrogating her. The police would have already investigated Patrick and learned that he is black making him a prime candidate for the black man they already believed was involved. It was not an accident that the Ficarra found this text reply to Patrick.

Deleting the text message from Patrick telling her not to come to work doesn't establish her work as an alibi for that evening. Just saying she was there is not anyone at the bar confirming Amanda was there.

It's also curious that Patrick needed to text her not to come into work if as he claimed he had already fired her.

Van Der Leek cannot understand why working a night shift is not the same thing as going to a class in the day time. Why does he equate a woman walking home alone at night along deserted streets of a dangerous part of town the same as walking into a busy college campus in broad daylight?

Why did Patrick Lumumba not mention to anyone that he had fired Amanda until after he was arrested? Did he decide he had fired her when she told him on November 5th that she couldn't continue working?

Yes, appearances can be deceptive. That's why I don't accept the appearance of guilt that guilt advocates manufacture.

If Wilson believes Guede's deposition, then Guede was alone with Meredith when she first entered the villa. That's at odds with him, Amanda, and Raffaele going there together.

Wilson wants to believe there's a reason Guede would remind Meredith a burglar could have taken her money when he claims Meredith said it was Amanda. Guede was probably putting the blame on Amanda while trying to appear the voice of reason. The important point is that Guede knew about the money.

The water found at the villa can be explained by Amanda having taken a shower. No blood was found at Raffaele's apartment.