Amanda's Book Due Out April 30, 2013

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Amanda Knox Appeal: Myths and Lies Of the Amanda Knox Case

September 9, 2011
There is an old saying that goes: "It's not what you believe, it's why you believe it". Somethings are opinions while others are hard facts. As concerns the Amanda Knox case- there is still a large amount of misinformation (incorrect information) floating around even after most of it has been proved to be nonsense, it's still believed by some as fact. The reason for this post is simply because I want to point out to people new to this that you have to separate fact from fiction in order to understand the Amanda Knox case.

I am not going to give opinions here- just the facts. And I am going to point out some misinformation in this case that has been proven false. Most of this misinformation is circulated by those who believe Knox is guilty. Whether they actually believe the nonsense they spread is another question, but my purpose here is only to point out the lies and why they are lies. It seems that there are quite a few people out there who are confused by conflicting information, and are becoming quite frustrated.

Q. A lot of people say Knox is innocent now, if so, why was she convicted at her original trial?
A. Knox was set up to take a fall before her trial even started. Leaked misinformation from the prosecutor's office was obtained by the media. Here are some examples of this- Knox was falsely told that she was HIV positive while in jail and was told to make a list of all her lovers. Once given that information it 'somehow' became public knowledge. After this was spread about, Knox was then told that a mistake had been made and no she was not HIV positive (pretty low tactic huh?). Her private diaries were leaked to the press. Also 'leaked' to the press were false stories about bleach receipts- giving the false impression that the crime scene had been cleaned by Amanda with bleach. NO BLEACH RECEIPTS EXIST. These type of things were fuel for the media at the time which the jury at the original trial was reading on a daily basis- Girl Gone Wild, Satanic Orgies, Sex Crazed Girl Charged With Murder, Crime Scene Cleaned With Bleach, and on and on. Much of the news at that time was not based on fact, but it didn't matter- the whole idea was to make Amanda Knox look as bad as possible and sway public opinion against her- and it worked.
By the time the original trial started she had already been raked over the coals with the minds of the jury full of those ridiculous headlines. At the trial itself the prosecution presented a witness Antonio Curatolo (a park bum) who testified that he saw Knox and Raffaele near the scene of the crime at about the time of the murder. Since Knox's alibi was that she and Raffaele were at his house on the night of the murder and did not leave- this made Knox look like a liar and went against her alibi. The prosecution also put forth their DNA evidence - presenting a kitchen knife that was taken by police from Raffaele's house. It stated in court that this knife had Knox's DNA on the handle and the victim's DNA on the blade. The prosecution also stated that Raffaele's DNA was found on the victim's bra-clasp. Also the prosecution put forth in court that Amanda and Raffaele had 'staged' a break-in to make it look like someone had broken into the house through a window.
These were the major points that led to Knox and Raffaele being convicted. The judge at the time would not allow a retest of the DNA and simply believed the DNA to be solid evidence based on the word of the prosecution. The 'staged break-in' was sheer speculation without proof but the judge bought it anyway. So it was the DNA, no alibi, trying to fool the police with a staged break-in, and of course she was made to look like she was lying about everything. Again these were the major points along with some circumstantial and some other speculative 'evidence'. The jury found Amanda and Raffaele guilty of murder and sentenced Amanda to 26 years and Raffaele to 25 years.
That was then- this is now- and at the recent appeals of their conviction the DNA evidence has been judged unreliable- no blood found on the knife- the knife was not cleaned with bleach, and that the bra-clasp was most probably contaminated. These were the conclusions of the independent DNA experts appointed by the judge of the appeals court. In short they found that the collection and testing of the DNA was unacceptable and should not have been used in court. The appeals court also heard the testimony of the park bum Curatolo (the one who made Knox look like a liar with a phony alibi) who had recently been jailed for dealing heroin- this time around he made a complete fool of himself and couldn't even get the correct day of the murder right in addition to admitting he was under the influence of heroin at the time.
So the appeal has so far been the flip-side to the original trial with no hard evidence remaining against Amanda or Raffaele.

Now, as some people would point out, there were also other reasons she was convicted, but most of these 'other reasons' are not facts and some are outright lies, and yet others are of no consequence. Consider the following which some people still think are facts.

Crime scene cleaned with bleach bought by Amanda the next morning with bleach receipt to prove it.
False- There is no evidence that proves the scene was cleaned and there are no bleach receipts. The bleach myth is one example of the 'leaked' false information that circulated at the time of the original trial.

 It was proved during the original trial that Amanda and Raffaele staged a break-in to throw police off their trail.
False- There is no evidence that there was a 'staged break-in'. This is simply speculation without proof.

Here is one of my favorites- There was found at the crime scene mixed blood belonging to the victim and Amanda.
False- An outright lie, there was NO mixed blood found.

Bloody footprint on bath mat that belonged to Raffaele.
False- While there was a bloody footprint it did not belong to Raffaele.

There was found in the house mixed DNA of the victim and Amanda.
While this is true, it doesn't mean anything incriminating. Mixed DNA is a common occurrence of two or more people living in the same space and Amanda and Meredith (victim) lived in the same house and shared the same bathroom. Prosecutor Mignini presented this at the original trial like it was damning evidence when in fact it means nothing at all. Anyone who lives with someone else is going to have their DNA mixed with whoever they live with- This is a scientific/ forensic fact.

Amanda stole Meredith's money.
False- There never was any evidence pointing to that- and she was not convicted of that even at the original trial. Even the trial judge who convicted her of murder didn't think Amanda took the money.

Then there is Amanda's behavior after the murder- The cell phone fiasco- cartwheels- false confession, etc....All of which proves nothing. In short, the major issues as concerns the new appeals judge were the eye-witness Curatolo and the DNA evidence. That is all the judge wanted to go over because he knows the rest of it is foolishness, lies and speculation. So at this point- there is no eye witness and there is no credible DNA evidence either. There is nothing left to this case to prove guilt- Nothing. So when people try to tell you that even though there is no eye-witness or DNA anymore, but there is a lot of 'other stuff' that proves Amanda guilty- just say to them- Prove it!



Anonymous said...

doesn't it give you pause why Amanda has given so many accounts. Also her boyfriend Sollecito did not corroborate her story. She said they stayed home. He said she went out. They were supposed to watch a video on the computer but there was no internet activity in the time they state. Phone records challenge the time stated they had dinner as when they were washing up they noticed the pipe had leaked water. Why lie about things? If you are innocent just tell the truth.

Saint_Michael1 said...

Actually no- not at all. First of all you must remember that this whole investigation was run by Mignini and the police under him. This man has no regard for the truth- I wouldn't take anything he has said at face value.
If you asked me exactly what time I had dinner 2 days ago- I couldn't tell you exactly- few people look at their clocks when they start to eat.
As far as the computer business- please- The police destroyed all 3 hard-drives of the computers they examine- Now why do you think they did that? Face it- Amanda and Raffaele are going to walk on this- for no other reason than they are NOT guilty.

Anonymous said...

If evidence is going to be collected, it should be to demonstrate the guilt of power-abusing/fundamentalist-"the-devil-is-everywhere" spouting/career protecting Prosecutor Mignini. Here's just a short list:

He's been convicted of abusing his power to harrass/jail/indict others who disagreed (correctly, I might add)with his views.

He had a cop pretend to be a doctor and tell Amanda she had HIV only to get a list of her sexual partners to feed to the media.

He has repeatedly claimed suspects in his cases were involved in satanic sex cults.

ALL THREE HARD-DRIVES were destroyed. If that's not fishy, what is?

And the list could go on and on.

babara said...

Amanda and her boyfriend made 1 mistake that caused all of this...they said anything to the police..never ever answer police not say a word...keep your mouth shut tight..let a lawyer speak for you

Its a common practice for police to coerce and trick accused persons into incriminating themselves....I have drilled it into my children to never say anything ...even for traffic tickets

If i am ever asked a question by police...I immediately will destroy my hard drive..its not fishy at all..its you want to give access to strangers access to everything from your life on most hard drives.

Saint_Michael1 said...

To Wax- I am not going to publish your comment due to the fact that Amanda is no longer in prison and was proclaimed innocent by the court. The things that you were saying does not prove guilt at all. It's time for people to understand the facts and accept reality. More than a few people believe untruths, and that is unfortunate because the true is not hidden in this case. But of course some people will believe what they want regardless of the facts.

Anonymous said...

There are a lot of doubts coming to the surface. Italian justice system, police, experts, Knox, ... We just have to wait until someone tells us what happened. We seem to know what didn't happen. What really happened? Where are the mobile phones, where was Knox at the time of the murder, what did the victim say about Knox? Something clearly went very wrong, and local cops were not trained for this. Now what?

Saint_Michael1 said...

I will be writing a post on this soon. The truth is really quite simple- it was only made complex by a shady prosecution. I will address that issue soon. Thanks for your comment.

Anonymous said...

This entire blog is a complete joke. You are as biased as they come michael. This girl changed her story. That single fact alone proves her guilt. Why do you like her so much?

Saint_Michael1 said...

Two things you mention above are quite revealing about why you think she is guilty.
#1. You said "The girl changed her story That single fact alone proves her guilt."
That's not a fact- it's fiction. Amanda has always said she was at her boyfriend's house the night of the murder. If you are referring to the so-called false confession that the police connived out of her under pressure- even the appeals court ruled that it was a trick of the police to obtain a false confession.
#2. You asked "why do you like her so much?" Liking and innocence have nothing to do with each other. I could dislike her and I would still know she was innocent. Do you think she is guilty because you dislike her? There is no proof at all that Amanda is guilty of this. However, if you want to buy the prosecution's theories on this case- I have a bridge in Death Valley that I would like to sell you.

Saint_Michael1 said...

One correction to the above- instead of " obtain a false confession." What I meant was: which 'resulted' in a false confession. However, the offer for the bridge is still on.


This forum is not endorsed by Amanda Knox nor her family or legal council. It is an independent venture for the purpose of an open public forum on Amanda's pending appeal in Italy. It is for educational purposes only.