Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post new topic   Reply to topic

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post  aiyoyo on Wed 13 Feb - 6:22

Who says crime does not pay?

Amanda Knox's to break her silence on 30th April, to coincide with the release of her book: "Waiting to be Heard".
She will be talking on National TV then. I believe her scheduled TV appearance on said date is mainly publicity to promote her book.
It may be part of the deal that her publishing agent required upon her. Reportedly her book is said to be worth $4 million (whatever that means). It could well be advance for the book, fees for TV appearances, and expected sales figure could reach at least that figure.

Her book comes after her ex-boyfriend and murder trial co-defendant, Raffaele Sollecito had published his memoir entitled "Honor Bound: My Journey to Hell and Back with Amanda Knox" a year earlier. In it, he questioned Amanda Knox's innocence because of her "bizzare behavior" the day Meredith Kercher was found dead in the apartment Knox and Kercher shared in Perugia, Italy.

Knox and Sollecito were convicted of Kercher's murder in 2009, but set free in 2011 on appeal, and are facing Judge final-decision on Prosecution counter-appeal in March. That would explain why Knox's book release date is scheduled in April.


Posts : 9611
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post  Hobs on Wed 13 Feb - 12:20

From Peter Hyatt

Transcript of Amanda Knox's handwritten statement to police on the evening of November 6, the day she was arrested.

The statement is in italics, with statement analysis in bold type.

This is very strange, I know, but really what happened is as confusing to me as it is to everyone else.

The opening line appears deceptive.

Dr. Paul Eckman teaches that testifying to memory failure is almost always deceptive. We don't know what drugs may have impacted her when this statement was made, but failure to remember is most always deceptive, especially in high stress situations.

note the inclusion of sensitive words, "very" strange, and "really" what happened. She notes that others are confused as she is.

I have been told there is hard evidence saying that I was at the place of the murder of my friend when it happened. This, I want to confirm, is something that to me, if asked a few days ago, would be impossible.

Passive language "I have been told" rather than who told her what specifically. But far more telling is the following words within her statement: "I was at the place of the murder of my friend when it happened". This is not something an innocent person generally says, even in the form of a question, nor in a reflection of others' words. Someone NOT at the crime scene would not frame these words.

Note that she Wants to confirm, which is different than confirming.

She wants to confirm something that to her, if asked a few days ago, would be impossible. Is the something that she wants to confirm something that would be different to someone else (hence the use of "to me"). She is not being asked "a few days ago", she is being asked in the present. It appears that her perspective on the "something" she wants to confirm is different now than it was a few days ago.

Also note that "would be impossible" is different than "is impossible." The addition of "would be" changes her claim from something that already happened into a future event.

I know that Raffaele has placed evidence against me, saying that I was not with him on the night of Meredith's murder, but let me tell you this. In my mind there are things I remember and things that are confused. My account of this story goes as follows, despite the evidence stacked against me:

"in my mind" is likely deceptive, as it is only in her mind; and not in reality. It is an attempt to avoid the stress of lying.

When people recount events from memory, they generally don't call it a "story", a word which conjures images of a made up tale.

On Thursday November 1 I saw Meredith the last time at my house when she left around 3 or 4 in the afternoon. Raffaele was with me at the time. We, Raffaele and I, stayed at my house for a little while longer and around 5 in the evening we left to watch the movie Amelie at his house. After the movie I received a message from Patrik [sic], for whom I work at the pub "Le Chic". He told me in this message that it wasn't necessary for me to come into work for the evening because there was no one at my work.

It may be that she and Patrick argued.

Now I remember to have also replied with the message: "See you later. Have a good evening!" and this for me does not mean that I wanted to meet him immediately. In particular because I said: "Good evening!" What happened after I know does not match up with what Raffaele was saying, but this is what I remember.

weak commitment to the text. If the subject does not own the text, neither can we.

I told Raffaele that I didn't have to work and that I could remain at home for the evening. After that I believe we relaxed in his room together, perhaps I checked my email. Perhaps I read or studied or perhaps I made love to Raffaele. In fact, I think I did make love with him.

Deceptive use of qualifiers. Again, see Dr. Eckman for this form of deception (memory). Note "perhaps" (qualifier) she made love "to" Raffaele. Sex is a theme in this case, and should be explored by investigators. First she says she may have made love TO Raffaele, then changes it to WITH him in the same sentence. The change in language would need to be explored.

However, I admit that this period of time is rather strange because I am not quite sure. I smoked marijuana with him and I might even have fallen asleep. These things I am not sure about and I know they are important to the case and to help myself, but in reality, I don't think I did much. One thing I do remember is that I took a shower with Raffaele and this might explain how we passed the time.

We can only commit to what the subject commits; here, she took a shower, but wants everything else to be vague; indicating deception.

In truth, I do not remember exactly what day it was, but I do remember that we had a shower and we washed ourselves for a long time. He cleaned my ears, he dried and combed my hair.

"in truth" is used because she now wants to be believed as is the inclusion of minute detail after reporting memory failure. Sometimes liars add extra, minor detail, in the hope of persuading (see Casey Anthony description of "Zanny the Nanny").

The shower details are also interesting as it is used to pass time and sexuality. Sex is a theme in her statement. Think how you might describe your night; even if you had a romantic shower, would you include it? If you felt that you needed to, would you give details about ears? Sex is in her mind WHILE giving this statement and should alert investigators to any sexual motive in the crime. Making love "to" not "with" her boyfriend may show that Amanda Knox strongly wanted to please him. This may speak to motive and just how far she went.

One of the things I am sure that definitely happened the night on which Meredith was murdered was that Raffaele and I ate fairly late, I think around 11 in the evening, although I can't be sure because I didn't look at the clock.

lack of commitment to the events noted

After dinner I noticed there was blood on Raffaele's hand, but I was under the impression that it was blood from the fish. After we ate Raffaele washed the dishes but the pipes under his sink broke and water flooded the floor. But because he didn't have a mop I said we could clean it up tomorrow because we (Meredith, Laura, Filomena and I) have a mop at home. I remember it was quite late because we were both very tired (though I can't say the time).

Always note when someone says that they "can't" say something; it can indicate that if they did tell the information, it would harm them. Here, she "can't" tell the time; yet has other details down carefully.

"noticed" is passive. Passive languge indicates a desire to conceal and she is withholding information here.

Note also any inclusion of thought/emotion within an event. When someone is giving a verbal or written statement, it has been shown through careful study that in the recall process, emotions and thoughts are added later; not in the actual event itself.

A statement has 3 general portions:

an introduction

the event

post event action

It is in the 3rd section that emotions and thoughts are most likely to be included in an honest statement.

note also the "balance" of a statement is where the introduction of an honest statement is about 25% of the statement; the event is 50%, and the post event (like calling 911, etc) is 25%. Any deviation is noted but strong deviation is a solid test for deception. This is covered in other analysis)

The next thing I remember

temporal lacunae. This indicates withheld information during a critical time period; high sensitivity. The police interview would strongly emphasize here

was waking up

note verb tense

the morning of Friday November 2nd around 10am and I took a plastic bag to take back my dirty cloths to go back to my house. It was then that I arrived home alone that I found the door to my house was wide open and this all began. In regards to this "confession" that I made last night, I want to make clear that I'm very doubtful of the verity of my statements because they were made under the pressures of stress, shock and extreme exhaustion.

note "very doubtful" qualifier; rather than making a full denial of her confession.

note the order: stress, shock, and extreme exhaustion. Stress is the first thing noted.

Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn't remember a fact correctly.

Here, Knox comes close to a confession, even in her denial. Note what she calls the information: "fact"

I understand that the police are under a lot of stress, so I understand the treatment I received.
However, it was under this pressure and after many hours of confusion that my mind came up with these answers. In my mind I saw Patrik in flashes of blurred images. I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming. But I've said this many times so as to make myself clear: these things seem unreal to me, like a dream, and I am unsure if they are real things that happened or are just dreams my head has made to try to answer the questions in my head and the questions I am being asked.

Even within fabrication, each word spoken (or written) is vital and should be examined within the forensics of the investigation.
We have already seen the lack of ownership and now she only reports seeing things in her mind. Yet, in spite of lying, there may be many important elements within her account.

But the truth is,

This introduction tells us that she has lied and now wants to be believed

I am unsure about the truth and here's why:
1. The police have told me that they have hard evidence that places me at the house, my house, at the time of Meredith's murder. I don't know what proof they are talking about, but if this is true, it means I am very confused and my dreams must be real.
2. My boyfriend has claimed that I have said things that I know are not true.

Knox is acutely aware of the evidence, the crime scene, and that she has been blamed.

I KNOW I told him I didn't have to work that night. I remember that moment very clearly. I also NEVER asked him to lie for me. This is absolutely a lie. What I don't understand is why Raffaele, who has always been so caring and gentle with me, would lie about this. What does he have to hide? I don't think he killed Meredith, but I do think he is scared, like me. He walked into a situation that he has never had to be in, and perhaps he is trying to find a way out by disassociating himself with me.

Several indicators here, including qualifiers, adverbs,and the inclusion of "never" which here is offered (negation) which suggests that she did ask someone to lie for her. Note that she says "he walked into a situation" with "walk" a word indicating tension.


Repeated use of similar statements is from habitual liar (childhood) who wants to be believed

I understand because this is a very scary situation. I also know that the police don't believe things of me that I know I can explain, such as:

note "can't explain"

1. I know the police are confused as to why it took me so long to call someone after I found the door to my house open and blood in the bathroom.

This tells us what Knox has been attempting to do: confuse the police. The police are not "confused"; they recognize the incongruity of Knox' statements. This is the "muddy the waters" technique employed by the guilty (Jose Baez comes to mind)

The truth is,


I wasn't sure what to think, but I definitely didn't think the worst, that someone was murdered.

someone; gender free. This is an attempt to, perhaps, even lie to herself about the murder. She knows the gender of the victim.

I thought a lot of things, mainly that perhaps someone got hurt and left quickly to take care of it. I also thought that maybe one of my roommates was having menstral [sic] problems and hadn't cleaned up. Perhaps I was in shock, but at the time I didn't know what to think and that's the truth. That is why I talked to Raffaele about it in the morning, because I was worried and wanted advice.

lack of commitment noted; lots of qualifiers leaving room for a variety of explanations in order to "confuse". Liars have a difficult and stressful task of recalling what stories they have told and by adding "perhaps" and "maybe", they are able to later defend their inconsistency.
First, she lists posible excuses for not calling police, excuses that didnt cause her to be alarmed. Then she goes on to say that "perhaps" she was in "shock", which means that she would have had knowledge of a traumatic event. In the next sentence, the "shock" turned to "worry" which caused her to seek advice.

2. I also know that the fact that I can't fully recall the events that I claim took place at Raffaele's home during the time that Meredith was murdered is incriminating. And I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik, but I want to make very clear that these events seem more unreal to me that what I said before, that I stayed at Raffaele's house.
3. I'm very confused at this time. My head is full of contrasting ideas and I know I can be frustrating to work with for this reason. But I also want to tell the truth as best I can. Everything I have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith's death, even though it is contrasting, are the best truth that I have been able to think.
[illegible section]
I'm trying, I really am, because I'm scared for myself. I know I didn't kill Meredith. That's all I know for sure. In these flashbacks that I'm having, I see Patrik as the murderer, but the way the truth feels in my mind, there is no way for me to have known because I don't remember FOR SURE if I was at my house that night. The questions that need answering, at least for how I'm thinking are:
1. Why did Raffaele lie? (or for you) Did Raffaele lie?
2. Why did I think of Patrik?
3. Is the evidence proving my pressance [sic] at the time and place of the crime reliable? If so, what does this say about my memory? Is it reliable?
4. Is there any other evidence condemning Patrik or any other person?
3. Who is the REAL murder [sic]? This is particularly important because I don't feel I can be used as condemning testimone [sic] in this instance.
I have a clearer mind that I've had before, but I'm still missing parts, which I know is bad for me. But this is the truth and this is what I'm thinking at this time. Please don't yell at me because it only makes me more confused, which doesn't help anyone. I understand how serious this situation is, and as such, I want to give you this information as soon and as clearly as possible.
If there are still parts that don't make sense, please ask me. I'm doing the best I can, just like you are. Please believe me at least in that, although I understand if you don't. All I know is that I didn't kill Meredith, and so I have nothing but lies to be afraid of.

Amanda Knox owns her involvement in Meredith's death with a word: MY. Someone who was not involved in Meredith's death would not state "my involvement", because they would not own it.

The same theme continues. I have highlighted the key words as the explanation is the same. Knox can't tell the truth, as it would cause her consequences; therefore, she seeks to confuse and leave open all sorts of possible explanations. She does not report what happens, but attempts to persuade. This is likely how she got herself out of trouble growing up, and is used to getting her way. The wording suggests her form of lying is lifelong, and not specific to this event.

Amanda Knox would not pass a polygraph. She fails the polygraphy of Statement Analysis and places herself at the scene of the murder and is deceptive throughout her account.


Posts : 705
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 52
Location : uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post  Olive_Boyle on Wed 13 Feb - 13:17

I think she was guilty as hell. It was only the Americans kicking up a fuss that "one of their own" couldn't do something like this, that she got off. This case always reminds me of how black Americans reacted to OJ Simpson and he got let off.


Posts : 122
Join date : 2012-05-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post  aiyoyo on Wed 13 Feb - 13:40

@Olive_Boyle wrote:I think she was guilty as hell. It was only the Americans kicking up a fuss that "one of their own" couldn't do something like this, that she got off. This case always reminds me of how black Americans reacted to OJ Simpson and he got let off.

What I dont get is why do people involved in crime, whether convicted or not, have an strong inclination to pen book about it, then stupidly termed it memoir? She's only 26 - how much of a history has she got for a memoir? Why aren't these books classed as a "criminal-fiction".
Kate's bewk "Madeleine" is a memoir.
Knox's partner in crime, Raffaelle's book "Honor Bound" is a memoir.
Knox's book is a memoir.

After all the book isn't about their life history, it is crime-related.


Posts : 9611
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post  Inspectorfrost on Wed 13 Feb - 21:18

Autobiographies when one is in ones twenties are always about publicity and cash. I think the Italian prosecution team are appealling the last court verdict? Knox pointed the finger at her boss, she lied over and over, innocent? Yea, of course the lying junkie is


Posts : 841
Join date : 2012-12-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post  Hobs on Wed 13 Feb - 22:02

Remember all this based on the supreme court upholding her aquital.

In Italy all judgement go through 3 processes which is why it takes for ever.

The final verdict could go one of several ways.

She could remain aquitted and that's the end of that, ditto for sollectito.

One or other could be aquitted and the other found guilty in which case one walks and the other learns what sentence will be issued

Both could have the aquitals overturned and the guilty verdict reinstalled.

Sentences could go to time served which was what 4 years, something better than nothing.

Sentences could be as originally issued 26 yrs for her 25 for him, she got the extra year for lying and incriminating her boss.

Sentences could be reduced to whatever is seen fit but longer than the 4 yrs served so they would return to jail until release (good luck extraditing her back to Italy, though her parents are pretty much bankrupt so have no way of funding new extradtition lawyers, they may try and have her serve it in the states. Sollecito as a national has no choice he wil be extradited if abroad.

Sentences could be increased for one or both (which i am hoping for)

Her book deal is based on the premise she was aquitted, should the verdict be overturned her publishers will likely dump her, demand any advance back and then see about getting a book about the heinousness of the crime. She will not be able to benefit from the proceeds of the crime.

Her parents will be stuck since i assume they are hoping the little darling will reimburse them all their costs spent buying the American media and high priced lawyers.

I don't know if they have a contract drawn up stating she promises to reimburse them, i hope so otherwise there is nothing to stop the murderess keeping all the money whilst her parents and granny go bankrupt. (this would not surprise me)

Does anyone know what became of the slander case against her parents and her in regard to claiming the police hit her?


Posts : 705
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 52
Location : uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post  aiyoyo on Thu 14 Feb - 3:50

Far as I know the final judgement is due out on 25 March. I'm sure her book deal is hanging on this final verdict.

If prosecutors were to be successful in begetting an overturn of the last court's acquittal verdict, it would be impossible to get her extradited back to Italy.
There is no way Uncle Sam will agree to the extradition, mutual treaty or not. Whereas her co-defendant Raffaelle, being in Italy, is within easy reach of the law and will be left alone to face time in jail if it comes to that.

This case has turned out similar to that of OJ Simpson - got off on contamination of evidence and/or arguable forensics analysis depending which side the forensic experts represent.


Posts : 9611
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox to break her silence

Post  lj on Thu 14 Feb - 15:15

I've always suspected Amanda and Kate are distant cousins. Same narcissistic sociopaths.

"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry


Posts : 3267
Join date : 2009-12-01

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum