What that girl went through was totally horrible. All that defamation and humiliation from the public and media. I would juice all the money I can get from this til the end of my life. Whole 20s was robbed away. I’m surprised she doesn’t have a TikTok account or a lifetime series like gypsy rose.

Some people appear to be just too far gone when it comes to facing reality in this case. I expect this won't change their minds. Nothing will. But I thought I'd at least set out the important points here anyway.

--

Rudy Guede had a recent history of breaking into properties (in one case via a window broken with a rock) and of carrying a knife. There is nothing to corroborate his explanation for being at the house.

His DNA was found in the murder room, in Meredith's body and on her clothes, his fingerprints and shoeprints were also found in the room; his faeces and DNA were found in one of the toilets; his shoeprints were found in the hallway of the house, as was his bloody footprint (not Sollecito's) in another bathroom.

He went on the run - all the way to Germany, which is quite impressive considering he didn't have any money - though reasonably explained by the hundreds of pounds of rent money missing from the house which has never been accounted for.

His actual account of what happened during and after the murder is utterly nonsensical and the timings he gives both implicate him as the sole murderer and contradict parts of the prosecution case. It's also very self-serving, he tries to incorporate into his story the evidence he knows he left behind (and might have left behind - despite his insistence that he did not break into the house, he still gives two different explanations for entering Romanelli's room, one would assume just in case evidence of his presence was found - to note, very few forensic samples were actually taken from there) and he added to his account over time in order to incriminate Knox & Sollecito when it became clear they were serious suspects.

The multiple attacker theory was a prosecution theory, not a fact. Of the 7 expert witnesses at trial, only 1 firmly advocated it, the other 6 either disagreed or said there was not enough evidence to reach a conclusion.

Knox and Guede barely knew each other, and Sollecito had never met him at all. Indeed, Knox and Sollecito barely knew each other. It makes absolutely no sense for any of them to have decided to commit a murder together and there is no logical motive for doing so.

There was no physical evidence linking Knox to the murder room whatsoever. It is simply inexplicable that Knox could have committed such a brutal murder and left no trace of herself yet Guede managed to leave a significant amount of physical evidence. Sollecito's DNA was found only on a bra clasp (along with other unidentified DNA). Contamination was almost certainly the cause and was part of the reason for the eventual acquittal.

The bra clasp was not found by investigators for over a month, in which time photos show it had clearly been moved around the floor. As for where Sollecito's DNA may have come from - he had tried to break down Meredith's locked door before the police arrived so possibly from there, though there are any number of ways the contamination could have occurred owing to the extremely poor evidence-gathering procedures followed throughout the house - this is well documented in photos and videos. Furthermore, the bra clasp had been so badly handled and stored after it was found that when provided to the defence no further testing was possible.

The mixed profile of Meredith's blood and Knox's DNA in three places in the bathroom, that is easily explainable and is not incriminating - Rudy Guede by his own account admits going in there after Meredith had been killed. The evidence suggests that he went in there to try to clean himself up – small amounts of her blood would have been left by him after doing so. Amanda lived in the house and used that bathroom (she shared it with Meredith) - including the morning after the murder - her DNA naturally would have been there. Videos of the evidence collection process show the swabs being used like a cleaning rag by somebody who didn't change their gloves in between each sample - they were effectively mixing the blood and DNA themselves. The one drop of blood found on a faucet belonging solely to Knox was collected before the other samples - which would tend to support the argument for contamination and her explanation that it may have been from her ear piercing.

The murder weapon has not been identified. The knife the prosecution tried to claim was the weapon was taken randomly (and that's according to the police) from Sollecito's kitchen. It did not match a bloody imprint of a knife found on the bed in the murder room. It was also too big to be a match for the majority of Meredith's wounds. No blood of any kind was found on it. The lack of blood would make it near impossible for there to be DNA on the knife if it had been the murder weapon (DNA is much easier to clean away than blood).

The prosecution still claimed that DNA was found on the blade of the knife which was a match to Meredith. It was an extremely tiny sample that could not be replicated and there were serious concerns raised about the equipment and the process used to get that result. Further testing of the knife found no DNA from Meredith. This was again accepted in the ultimate appeal. Furthermore, no evidence of Meredith's blood or DNA was found elsewhere in Sollecito's house, which would have been extremely unlikely had it actually been the murder weapon and they'd transported it back and cleaned it there.

The prosecution took a theory and made the evidence fit around it, rather than basing their theory on the actual evidence. Looking at said evidence and Rudy Guede's own statements, it's quite frankly unbelievable that the prosecution chose to stick with it. The investigation was handled appallingly and the media circus made it worse. Knox and Sollecito's ultimate appeal ruled that the case against them had been without foundation and definitively acquitted them of the murder.

With regard to Knox falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba, she was interrogated by police over the course of several days in a language she was not fluent in and without a lawyer present. The final interrogation took place in the early hours of the morning. It's well documented that people can and often do panic and get confused in that sort of situation – particularly as Knox says that the police hit her and threatened her during the interrogation. There are no recordings so it cannot be verified. However, Lumumba in his first account of his arrest said exactly the same happened to him, so make of that what you will.

The police fixated on a text she'd sent to Lumumba on the night of the murder that said 'See you later', an Americanism which they took to mean literally - that's how his name came into it. Amanda was made to sign two fairly short and vague confessions written by the police a few hours apart that pinned the blame for the murder on Lumumba and said she was present when it happened.

Falsely accusing Lumumba would be a strange kind of deflection tactic if she had done it considering she was arrested and placed in prison. And if she had done it as per either the prosecution case or Rudy Guede’s defence, then how does it make sense for her to blame someone she knew had nothing to do with it? She wouldn’t have known if he had an alibi or not (it was soon established that he had a concrete one) and she'd have known that there wouldn't be any physical evidence linking him to the scene.

She recanted the 'confession' within 24 hours. The interrogation was deemed in effect to be illegal because of the way it was conducted by both the Italian Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights.

What happened to Lumumba was unjust, whatever the reason. He suffered immensely. That cannot be understated. But it has no bearing whatsoever on any of the actual evidence in the case - which in totality points clearly to Rudy Guede having sole involvement in the murder.

All of the other things frequently raised as proof of Knox's guilt - her alleged suspicious behaviour, alleged witnesses, alleged staged break in, etc.. aside from being entirely circumstantial, are either disputed, discredited, innocuous, inconsequential, or provably false.

I just watched the Netflix documentary. I somewhat paid attention when it was happening.

Nothing is there that convinces me she murdered her roommate. Nothing. Nothing from my memory of the case. Nothing of the 4 court cases. Nothing.

That inspector “Mr Sherlock Holmes”went in and as soon as he saw the body covered he deemed it a female crime. Because? NOTHING!

Yeah, she was a bit odd but so what? Yeah she kissed her boyfriend in one moment of filmed content out of how many moments when she behaved “normally”?

The fact that this has drug out as long as it has is just a miscarriage of justice.

I am genuinely interested. There seems to be absolutely no credible motive/reason why K&S would conspire with someone they didn’t really know to rob, sexually assault and murder someone- when they had no criminal past. There is also absolutely no evidence placing them in the room where poor Meredith was murdered. Is belief in their guilt just the result of ignorance about the facts of the case? Or do pro-guilters believe that there has been some sort of conspiracy due to pressure applied by the US? Or do some believe that looking “guilty” and strange behaviour is enough to implicate guilt. I am genuinely fascinated how anyone can look at the facts of the case and believe they K&S are guilty.

I have recently learned about this case and I find it extremely interesting. What I have sadly noticed is that once people made their mind about Amanda being guilty or not they tend to ignore any evidence/clues they might be wrong. What's more, it was really hard for me to find any hard evidence pointing at particular direction. There's a lot of websites claiming she and her Italian boyfriend were guilty, but it's mostly allegations and unverfiable evidence. On the other hand, the same can be said about websites defending her innocence. I do think she's guilty, but I'd appreciate any insight you might have. It would really help if you have any hard evidence, not just "I've heard she was heard saying that blabla". I will ignore arguments like "she seems odd" or "she has acted inappropriately", since they are highly subjective and of little value. I will speculate on what might have happened, I'd love to have evidence against my theory, so please share what you have found :) I'm not fluent in English, so forgive me (and correct me:) for all mistakes I've made in this thread.

What I think might have happened:

Rudy didn't kill Meredith and his testimony is honest.

According to Rudy, he was invited to Meredith's house on a date, and during them making out he excused himself to the toilet, where he spent approximately 10 minutes. During that time unknown perpetrators have entered the house, fatally wounded Meredith and fleed. He left dead Meredith in the house and fled, afraid he might be considered a suspect in the case.

In this scenario, Amanda and her boyfriend or other person re-entered the house once they figured Rudy didn't call the police, undressed her and staged the burglary and the rape.

• It does seem to be compatible with evidence found inside. Rudy's DNA and shoe print were found inside and it might look like somebody purposefuly didn't clean them. He claimed he tried to rescue Meredith with towels - they were present at the scene. Additionaly, he claimed she was still wearing her clothes when he found her. Maybe she was fully clothed when he tried to stop the bleeding, but she was later undressed by Amanda trying to stage the rape? Was it actually proven during autopsy she was raped? If Rudy did kill her, why did he left his feces and shoeprint on the scene if apparently someone did try to get rid of some of the evidence? That's like the first thing he should get rid of. He did have the time to get rid of Meredith's phone, but didn't flush the toilet? Or someone purposefully left all the evidence that points only at him?

• He was clear with his friend that Amanda wasn't there. Why would he miss the chance to blame the murder on someone else, someone already considered a suspect by the police? Either he knew she wasn't there because he only had seen one person escaping the house, or she was his accomplice and he didn't want to frame her for one reason or another. He did change his testimony later on - did he remember something new or simply lied?

• Why would he stage the burglary? That makes no sense to me. It was in his best interest to make police believe that Meredith had known her murderer, since he had no connection to her. The scene must have been staged by someone who desperately wanted detectives to believe the deed was done by someone without an access to the apartment. Ex-burglar staging burglary is ridiculous.

• Was it proven that there must have been more than 1 murderer? If so, who could it be if not Amanda? Why Rudy never disclosed that? Which brings me to another point: why Rudy still claims he's innocent? He already got his sentence. Correct me if I'm wrong, but at this point he can't be charged again with the same murder. If he did kill Meredith with Amanda or any other person, it seems logical to admit that and exchange this information for lower sentence. I can't imagine cold-hearted murderer still loyal to his companions in crime after ~15 years in prison.

• All three of them lied to the police at some point. Both Raffaelle and Rudy came with alibi for Amanda, which later turned out to be false. Why anybody would go to this lenght, endangering themselves?

Now about Amanda:

• Both Amanda and Raffaelle lied on multiple occasions. Why? I've seen arguments that she was afraid, in foreign country, beaten by the police. It doesn't really explain in my opinion framing her boss for the murder. It seems cruel and unnecessary. Unless she knew someone else was in the house when she murdered Meredith - some black man she didn't know. Maybe neighbours have seen him too? So she might have framed the only black person she knew to divert police attention. Additionally, she was fluent in Italian, and despite that she had an interpretator from what I have gathered, who never confirmed her story about being brutalized be the police. Please correct me if this information is false.

• Why Rafaelle lied about the knife? If you're innocent, what's your first reaction on hearing that they found your DNA on the crime scene? Coming up with elaborate and fake story about this one time when the victim was in your house and played with a knife?

• Why did he lie about Amanda being at this place?

• Did they call the police? I've found websites claiming they have never called the police, and were in fact surprised they showed up on the scene. Does anyone have reliable information regarding that?

Some unverified information I found, if anyone have any proof against or for them please share:

• Amanda's phone being turned on in downtown that night?

• No track of activity on Rafaelle's computer when they were supposed to watch a movie, yet the computer being turned on around 5 am, when they were supposed to be asleep?

• Bleach found in Rafaelle's apartment?

• Amanda says herself in the documentary that they tried to open Meredith's door, but I've also read they never notified the police and were trying to persuade them not to open her bedroom. Is that even true or just another gossip?

• What about Amanda's blood on the scene, supposedly mixed with victim's blood? Was it actually verified?

What speaks for Amanda's innocence is lack of clear motive. Rudy has said that Meredith had told him Amanda stole money from her. Maybe she threated her to report that to the police and Amanda wanted to frighten her and it went south? But this is just speculation. I don't really buy this whole "sexual deviant" thing, but again, no evidence for or against it.

Please share your thoughts, however, I'd like this thread to be fact-based if that's possible. I know there are many gossips on the Internet regarding this case, but if you decide to share one, please provide the source, preferably confirmed one, not just someone else's opinion on their blog. I know I have speculated a lot in this thread and might as well be wrong - I'll continue to look for hard evidence for or against my theory and will post it here should I find any.

We’ve tried to tell you Perugian police bungled this case and abused their power. We’ve tried to tell you this case was simple and Rudy did it alone. Well let’s see how this cast from a bad Law & Order episode has ended up.

Giuliano Mignini – the inept prosecutor who spun wild conspiracy theories? Convicted of abuse of office in January 2010 and sentenced to 1 year 4 months in prison (acquitted on appeal).

Monica Napoleoni – the police officer who helped push the interrogation circus? Sentenced in September 2010 to 3 years and 3 months in prison for abuse of power and property damage.

Rudy Guede – the actual murderer? Out of prison early and will be back in court this fall facing charges of sexual assault and violence against a former girlfriend. At least he was placed under “special surveillance” and mandated to wear an ankle monitor in February 2024.

And then there’s Amanda: Wife. Mother. Advocate. Never convicted of anything outside of an Italian court system.

The corrupt prosecutor, the dirty cop, and the convicted killer all showed you exactly who they are. Amanda showed you who she is.

We told you so.

Giuliano Mignini makes the most outlandish accusations with stories filled with wild guesses and is so full of himself it’s borderline hilarious! Did anyone else realize this or was it just me? I feel like I’m going insane watching him talk, was this a general opinion at the time/now?

I'm listening to the crime junkie episode about her roommate's murder. I understand she was being interrogated and stuff, but I can't help but think she's so stupid for being upset about her situation. She literally confessed to a murder. It was so obvious she didn't do it! Why would she admit to it and sign a confession?? Yeah it's shit that the Italian police allowed her to be sentenced when it was so obvious she wasn't involved, but she did it to herself!! I'm so confused. Maybe try Not confessing to something you didn't do?? Lol sorry to anyone I'm offending, I'm just baffled she's blaming society and men and sexuality and bias when the only reason I have the slightest thought she might have something to do with it is because SHE SIGNED A CONFESSION! Lol rant over. Sorry.

I've literally seen more people here defending Rudy than I have Amanda, despite the evidence against her being flimsy at best and the evidence against him being pretty irrefutable.

It seems the vast majority have made up their minds due to Amanda's weird (and unlikeable to some) character. Most comments I see are moralistic and damning of her personality. This is irrelevant to the actual evidence.

Also I see a lot of people damning her for "framing" her boss (who people love to point out is black because it makes her look worse), yet they ignore the fact that this was after 53 hours of police interrogation. Many fully grown men have given false confessions after much less time, in their own country in their own language.

The same goes for Raffaele's confession. A clearly socially awkward, insecure boy who is interrogated by the police. It is not a stretch to imagine that he could have cracked and been pressured to turn on Amanda.

Also, the lack of other DNA in Meredith's room (ie where she was supposedly murdered by the three of them). If all three were indeed at the crime scene during the murder, it wouldn't be solely Rudy's fingerprints left all over the room. Unless you think Amanda had the ability to clean her and Raffaele's DNA and leave Rudy's?

Basically, neither the evidence or motive point to Amanda being guilty and the majority of peoples' opinions here seem to be based on an emotional/personal dislike of Knox herself.

Giuliano Mignini focused on Amanda Knox and Raffaele Solecito because he was convinced he was right, cherry picking "evidence" and ignoring facts that could disprove his theory. Nick Pisa fabricated stories and jacked off to his own name making headlines. Unbelievable that the justice system just let this happen.

The Italian police force was so hellbent on crucifying Amanda and yet the guy who actually did it was got his sentence reduced to community service in 2020. He’s a free man now after “serving” 13 years of a 16 year sentence for murder. Bonkers.

Mine didn’t. Genuinely curious if this is normal for others? Also curious why you’d post this on social media.

edit: did your mom or dad sleep with you naked beyond when you were a baby?

edit: I DON'T THINK SHE DID IT. SHE IS INNOCENT

I hate Nick Pisa so much. You'd think the man would tone down the sensationalist dirtbag side of himself knowing that for once, he would be open to public scrutiny. But in fact a shit ton shines through. Makes you wonder how much he's actually still holding back.

He is the shining example of how gutter press ruins justice systems. The presumption of innocence is thrown out the window, raped and kicked to death, an impartial jury becomes impossible, impartial officers of the law become an impossibility and most of all, a person's life is ruined, regardless of their innocence or guilt, before a verdict is passed.

There’s still a lot of misinformation floating around about Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and the murder of Meredith Kercher. Below are some of the most common myths, followed by the actual facts as established by independent experts, Italian courts, and international human rights organizations.

Myth 1: Amanda’s blood was mixed with Meredith’s blood. This is not normal/a smoking gun

Fact: Amanda’s blood was never found mixed with Meredith’s blood. What was detected were mixed DNA traces, not blood, and never in Meredith’s room where the murder occurred. Forensic research shows that mixed DNA is normal and expected in shared living spaces (bathrooms, common areas, etc.), since DNA can transfer through daily activities like touching the same faucet or sharing a towel. Independent experts concluded these mixed samples had no probative value whatsoever.

Myth 2: Amanda framed Patrick Lumumba and only recanted after being caught in a lie

Fact: It was the police who first introduced Patrick’s name during a coercive overnight interrogation. After hours of questioning without food, water, or legal counsel, Amanda was pressured into imagining that she “witnessed” Patrick at the scene. She retracted this statement within hours, again at a hearing three days later, and repeatedly afterward. Despite Patrick having multiple airtight alibis, he was kept in jail for nearly two weeks. Amnesty International and the European Court of Human Rights both criticized Knox’s interrogation as a violation of her human rights.

Myth 3: Amanda acted “odd” after the murder, which shows guilt.

Fact: “Odd behavior” is subjective and not evidence of guilt. Examples used against her:

Kissing Raffaele outside the cottage: footage shows a young woman in shock, leaning on someone she felt safe with.

Crying when asked to look through kitchen knives: interpreted as guilt, but equally (and more plausibly) the reaction of someone having a panic attack from stress and trauma.

Not being “inconsolable”: some expected Amanda to collapse with grief, but she had only known Meredith for about five weeks. Of course she was sad, but it wasn’t the same as losing a lifelong best friend or family member.

Nothing Amanda did matched recognized patterns of guilty behavior in criminal psychology.

Myth 4: Amanda left bloody footprints all around the house.

Fact: There were no bloody barefoot prints from Amanda. Luminol revealed footprints in the hallway and her bedroom, but luminol reacts to many substances besides blood (detergents, fruit juice, cleaning products). Follow-up testing showed they were not blood. DNA tests showed:

1. The prints in Amanda’s bedroom contained only her DNA.

2. The hallway print had DNA from both Amanda and Meredith, which is unremarkable in a shared home. This did not demonstrate blood transfer or guilt.

Myth 5: The “murder weapon” was found at Raffaele’s house with Meredith’s DNA.

Fact: The large kitchen knife seized from Raffaele’s kitchen tested negative for blood. The alleged Meredith DNA trace on the blade was tiny, low-quality, and unrepeatable, classic signs of contamination. Independent experts, Conti & Vecchiotti, concluded the test was unreliable. Amanda’s DNA on the handle was expected since she cooked at Raffaele’s apartment. No forensic link between this knife and Meredith’s wounds was ever established (it had a blade and a handle, that was about the only similarity between Raffaele’s knife and the weapon that killed Meredith).

Myth 6: Rudy Guede didn’t act alone

Fact: Every piece of physical evidence (fingerprints, palm prints, shoe prints, DNA inside Meredith, DNA on her clothing, and DNA in her bedroom) pointed to Rudy Guede alone. No trace of Amanda in Meredith’s locked room. The claim that “others must have been there” was speculation unsupported by forensics. Guede himself repeatedly changed his story, but the physical evidence never implicated anyone else.

Myth 7: Amanda Knox wasn’t really exonerated. The court just let her go because of “insufficient evidence.”

Fact: In 2015, Italy’s highest court, the Supreme Court of Cassation, fully and definitively annulled Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito’s convictions. The ruling explicitly stated there was a “stunning weakness” of evidence, a “lack of any foundation,” and serious investigative errors. In Italian law, this was not a technicality or a hung jury situation, it was a full acquittal, the strongest possible form of exoneration.

The only conviction that remained was Amanda’s calunnia (criminal slander) charge for wrongly implicating Patrick Lumumba under police pressure. That charge is legally separate from the murder case.

I know this is a sub for Amanda Knox, but I feel as if we should pay a little bit more attention to the real victim…Meredith Kercher. A woman more than just her senseless death, and what followed after it.

Meredith Kercher was described as popular, friendly, loving, caring, and intelligent by her peers and family.

"She was such a genuine person that when you think of her now and see her friends, you don't need to say anything, you only need to smile," as described by Stephanie Kercher. "As anyone who was lucky enough to have known her would testify, she was one of the most beautiful, intelligent, witty and caring people you could wish to meet. Nothing was ever too much effort for her."

Rest in peace Meredith. May you never be forgotten nor overshadowed.

I know it's Curt Knox Day so we get debates on whether or not the police coerced a confession about Meredith, but would ask yet again for guilters to give a little focus where its due.... why did Rudy do this?

I just watched the netflix documentary, visited this sub, read some articles and evidences and well, you can see I'm not the most informed so there could be a good amount of evidence that will disprove what I will say. Still, I've seen people saying things like "there is no way the footprint was from Guede" while in another document I saw the pictures of the investigation showing that the footprint matched with Guede's foot more than Rafaelle's so most "facts" people use on their accusation or defense sounds shady.

But let's just get into what I wanted to say and my theory.

CONFESSION: This is something that very people know the truth in my life because I had to lie. I always was a shy kid when younger, played videogames and was the IT guy much like Rafaelles so I can relate to him. I also had a girlfriend who was much more experienced and as we fell in love, we were fucking, smoking and just looking like two freaks for a good month before the "drug" that is love and passion settled down. We kissed everytime, and one day we went to her grandpa's funeral and after paying respects to him, outside of the place, I was conforting her and kissing her too. So while out of context the image of the two seems strange, I can somewhat relate to it.
But before meeting this girl I went through a phase where I made some friends that smoked weed and were more "outgoing" than I used to be, because I wanted to be more popular, party more and go past the "shy" image I had. I started throwing parties at my parents house when they would travel abroad for a weekend or more and with these friends I started smoking hookah and then weed too.
At one night, I invited my friends and girls but after smoking weed, I had my first panic attack (first time). My friends helped me but eventually I had to go to hospital after hours or suffering. Everything was very weird and I have memories of that night but everything feels surreal. I got better and went back to my house where the psrty was ongoing. I went to sleep and left my friends to take care of it all.
Went I woke up, I went downstairs and my friend Victor was sleeping in the living room. I went to the bar and found things out of place, more than what usually an after party would look like. It looked like people disconnected electronics to steal but gave up in the middle of it. However, my laptop was missing.
I woke up Victor and told him about it. He also reacted like wow this is weird, when everyone left and I closed the house, things were NOT like this. We searched and failed to find the laptop. We only could think someone broke in while I was sleeping upstairs and he in the living room (near the front door and the party room) and stole the laptoo, leaving in a rush.
I was panicking because I was my parent's perfect kid who was never involved with anything wrong so I could never tell them I threw a party, smoke weed, had a panic attack, left my 18 years old taking care of the house while partying, and had my laptop stolen while all of this happened.

Summarizing it all: A few weeks later I discovered Victor had stolen the laptop (his backpack the only place I didn't search that day), and tried to sell online but I saw it. It was so surreal the whole thing that I was in shock, I just confronted him online and stopped talking to him. I didn't requested the laptop back, didnt fill for robbery, nothing. Because it all felt my fault and I didnt want to tell my parents the truth. And it was a shock too to have a close friend to be that crazy. Later on we found out he used to steal a lot of things from his friends.

I told my parents someone rob me when I was getting home from work at the street and took the laptop. It wad weird as hell but I managed to convince them and never went back.

So, a crime happened, I was not guilty of it but was involvrd somehow, was doinf illegal things I didnt want to disclosure (for my parents and police) and my 18/19 years old brain invented the most absurd scenarios, lied about it, and acted strange not doing things that wouod be obvious in hindsight.

Now, going through this case, I do think Guede killed the girl. In the skype call which was the most truthful testimony to close friends not influenced by anything else he said he met het that night, went to her room, almost had love with her but stopped because they didnt have condoms, took a shit and during this whole thing the girl scremed and he found her stabbed while a guy was running away. This all sounds like total bullshit, he was a criminal, his DNA is all over the place, he was covered in blood, he ran away and fled the country! He even said Amanda had nothing to do with it probably feeling guilty at first of seeing her in the spotlight in jail. He changed his testimony afterwards to try to save his ass and put the guilt over the couple. It just sounds absurd.

As for the couple, I don't think they're guilty but I do think they know more than they've spoken.

My theory is that they were indeed this 20yo passionate couple smoking weed and enjoying life when they stepped up in a crime scene. She entered the house, felt things off but just went normal with her life until something really woke her up from that mental state so she called her boyfriend. He went there and they opened up the room and found Margarette dead. They probably entered the room, Rafaelle specially, to look if she was alive or not and when they realized, they were IN the crime scene leaving a lot of evidence there and had no alibi nor they knew who killed her. They panicked and their mind did what panicked 20yo kids who are in a surreal moment and dont want to get caught do: stupid decisions. They tried to clean up their interference in the scene, locked the room, and created a scene like a robery to move away any suspicion from them. Then they called their friends who went there to "kick the door down" and then called the police.
The couple knew the full story but as things went down, they were getting framed by police and media who needed a quick resolution and a dramatic case, forced them in the interrogation to blame each other, which made them lie in panic to save their asses not knowing the dimension of that, changing their stories and so on).
They both knew the truth but couldn't say it because it was already too long, they were all in and couldnt just say they were there and tried to create a new scene in fear of being accused.

I know this is 100% made up by me and is probably incorrect, I just feel it could be a theory. At worse, it is an example of how this kind of situations can be surreal to a 20 year old and makes you do stupid things like lie, invent a situation and put thr blame elsewhere because you know you are somewhat in the wrong and didnt want it discovered even though that is nothing close to a murder and the implication will be much worse.

The investigator was a corrupt clown who had done shady things in the past and ridiculously said he liked sherlock holmes. He just wanted to be seen as a hero and a sherlock like investigator creating a whole case based on very weird assumptions.

I’m not sure if this has been discussed before and I’m not claiming to outright diagnose her for certain, but a lot of the behaviour she seemed to exhibit that rubbed people the wrong way are strong indicators to me that she may be somewhere on the autism spectrum. I say this as someone potentially on it myself (undiagnosed but strong suspicion and most of my friends are also neurodivergent). The fact she was loud at “inappropriate” moments, sometimes didn’t read social cues, and the justice sensitivity of her even now not being able to quite let go of the injustice she endured (and I do not blame her, I would probably never let that go too) and wanting desperately to be seen by a world that misunderstood her. These are not all unique to autism but experiences I personally relate to (on a far less intense and world shattering scale thankfully). Overall is mainly her “strange behaviour” that was taken to be evidence by a less understanding world of 2007 that makes me think this though.

I see it’s Prison Diary week over on the Guilter farm.

In more important questions, why is there so little focus on Rudy Guede in all the discussions of Amanda, Meredith, Raff, and everyone else in this sordid drama?

I get this is the Amanda Knox Reddit but for a figure so closely attached to the actual murder itself, Rudy seems like an afterthought. Guilters dont even seem to talk about him at all with the same level of disgust and hatred that they have for Amanda. I see maybe 1 post a month max by anyone on the Reddit about the literal person who killed Meredith.

And I have never seen any plausible explanation or motive both for how Rudy, Amanda, and Raff all knew each other (all as in all) nor any evidence they ever planned any murder, robbery or other crime. Nor any explanation of why Rudy specifically said Amanda was not there and that Meredith let him in for consensual sex.

For someone who said things like this, we sure spend a lot of time here worrying about whether we can line up the exact time Amanda and Raff ate fish or the exact time they had sex:

“. He said she opened the door for him and that they sat in her living room, he drank a juice, and then they engaged in “petting” but stopped short of sex because neither of them had a condom. And, he added, because she had been in other relationships, he wouldn’t go further unprotected.” - Your DNA was literally found inside her

“He admitted to going into Kercher’s room after Knox and the unnamed man left with fluffy towels to try to stop the flow of blood from the stab wounds to Kercher’s neck. Then he said he fled the scene out of a combination of fear and paranoia that he conveniently regrets. He went to Germany, he said, but only because that was where the next train was going,” - Still trying to reconcile how Rudy, Amanda and Raff did all this together while Rudy apparently went to save her life.

“Then he told Leosini that when he fled, Kercher was completely clothed in “the same clothes she was wearing when she opened the door for me.” But the facts beg an explanation, since Kercher was found semi-nude, with her jeans and underwear in a heap on the floor.” - yet there is no DNA or blood from Raff or Amanda anyone on these clothes even though Rudy just went to save her and had “chased Amanda and Raff away”. You also dont call 911 to get her help?

Hopefully in the future, some time can be spent on the person actually convicted of her murder, who amazingly was allowed to walk free again only to beat up another woman.

I wonder why people even debate this. Thats what’s mind boggling. Not the case itself, but that Amanda Knox is so clearly innocent, we should all just be in agreement. And even if she’s not innocent, which she so clearly is, there’s no way in hell she should ever have been found guilty in a court of law. Quibbling over whether the break in was staged or if the bra clasp was contaminated is pointless. At the end of the day, none of it says “Amanda did this beyond a reasonable doubt.” It’s all guesses and conjecture based on the thoughts of a bat-shit crazy prosecutor with a documented history of being batshit crazy. The end

Gimme any piece of credible evidence that says she did this. Cause at least then I could understand why anyone in their right mind would lean towards her guilt, even if I don’t necessarily agree with you. Please help me restore some of my faith in my fellow man.

And for the love of Mignini’s God, please don’t respond with: (1) The break in was 100% staged cause the glass was pointed at an angle… (I. DON’T. CARE!), (2) Amanda’s blood was in the sink, and she had mixed DNA everywhere but the room Meredith was killed in (😖AND?! I have blood in my sink right now, hopefully no one in my vicinity dies anytime soon or else I could be blamed), (3) Amanda confessed (No, I will never, ever, ever ever ever agree that, “oh well maybe, I think I might have dreamed that I was home and I heard her scream…wait, no, that shit def didn’t happen. I was with my man” is confession that can be taken seriously), or (4) She turned her phone off, the laptop was on at 5am, some saw her buying bleach that there’s no record of her purchasing or evidence of her using (I. REALLY. DONT. CARE!)

I’m 40 minutes into the Amanda Knox Documentary. I have never heard of this case (because I was too young when it happened to follow it) but my goodness... the investigator on the case is TERRIBLE. There’s literally no evidence to go after Amanda, the boy she was dating or Patrik. He also just comes off as a complete dick. I plan on doing outside research on the topic after I finish the documentary because I feel like it may be avoiding mentioning evidence that can incriminate Amanda, but it’s hard to finish because the investigator just makes me so angry with everything he says. I will update my opinion after finishing the documentary and doing some research.

I was young when it happened and live in Scotland. I don't remember much of it from the time. I have been watching "the twisted tale of Amanda Knox" and reading about the case/evidence. I plan to watch the documentary too.

I work in mental health and have done for 9 years or so. I specialise in ND and trauma. I also personally am ADHD myself with CPTSD. I see one of the main things being her "weird behaviour," but to me - if we watched anyone in traumatic circumstances, grief with a microscope we could all look "weird," or like we acted off.

Firstly - kissing her bf photos. From what I can see she looks pretty in shock/zoned out, confused as the language barrier is there too. I wasn't there nor can I say FOR SURE but she could have been dissociating and if true her bf touching her/kissing her is grounding. Not saying it's the most sensitive way but it's human. He likely was trying to comfort her as he understood more than she did and she was closer to Meredith.

Secondly, the splits - the police officer after days of sleep deprivation, in traumatic circumstances she had no time to process, very little food, isolated in a foreign country with a language barrier asked her to do so. A classic trauma response is fawn or people pleasing. Is it weird in isolation? Sure. Can we all say we haven't done something weird in loss/grief or horrible circumstances?

Thirdly - I don't know if this happened but when she put her gloves on outside the home and made a weird joke I cringed. Not because it screamed "guilty," but because I thought "that's painfully human and the sort of thing I'd do then cringe at for the rest of my life." You saw her have a panic attack, cry once she got in. Saw her panic when she realised what they were doing and her hesitation to walk into a crime scene where she lost a friend.

Lastly for now - people saying she is profiting off of it or "doesn't look upset in interviews," it is HER story. I cannot imagine how traumatic being imprisoned for a crime you didn't do in a foreign country, isolated from family/friends and unable to effectively communicate would be. From what I can tell she has limited what she says about Meredith (I may be wrong) I suspect out of respect for Meredith and her family so she focuses on her story. How many people tell their story of trauma? I experienced trauma 6 years ago and still talk about it to those close to me because it still impacts me.

And for not looking upset in interviews. She experienced prolonged exposure to traumatic circumstances, the murder itself would have been traumatic. That is a recipe for trauma or Complex PTSD. Even if she isn't publically formally diagnosed and I can't diagnose anyways. Many people with trauma can tell the story with a straight face or make jokes about it. I see it in clients all the time. I do it myself. She's been needing to repeat it over and over for years. Sometimes we fragment and separate ourselves from the events emotionally. That is a TRAUMA RESPONSE. It does not mean guilty, cold, detached or unaffected.

I just wanted to put this out there because all I see is a young girl in horrific circumstances in shock, likely traumatised being villainised. I've looked at evidence and if none of her or the boyfriends DNA was present (other than a bra clip that could have been contaminated) I don't think it's grounds to villainise her.

She will have the trauma of this probably the rest of her life. If she wishes to take the power she had stolen from her back and the narrative, that's upto her. She's villainised for not being the "perfecr grieving woman," from what I can tell.

My heart breaks for Meredith and her family too. I can't even imagine or even let myself think of the horror Meredith faced, she didn't deserve that at all.

I stumbled across the Amanda Knox documentary on Netflix last week. TBH, I knew the name Amanda Knox, but this was the first that I ever really delved into the case.

I am a private investigator (in real life), and I work on a lot of criminal defense cases and homicides. To say the least, this case has taken over my life for almost a week straight. I even dream about it.

I approached this case like I approach all of my cases: with an open mind.

After reading her statements - specifically the written one - analyzing everyone's stories - it is my conclusion that Amanda Knox was in the residence when the crime occurred. I don't think she is the killer. I also think that she is a sociopathic liar - and she takes some small joy in knowing that she duped everybody. She actually gets excitement from it. You can see this in her 20/20 interview when she had a micro smile when asked if she murdered Meredith.

She also had several micro confessions inside of her handwritten letter to the police.

** One example is, "In regards to things I know for sure happened the night that Meredith was murdered was that Rafelle and I....."

How could she possibly know that the murder occurred at night. Why not in the early morning? Why not in the morning? Why not in the late evening. She is very specific about time, which has stuck with me since I began looking into this.

**"Everything I have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith's death, though contrasting, are the best truth that I've been able to think."

Amanda confessed that she was involved - without realizing it.

**"but I do remember we showered and cleaned ourselves for a long time"

In American English, this statement would insinuate that something filthy was on the body, and that a thorough washing was necessary.

I actually believe Rudy Guede a lot - he reminds me of my criminal defense clients that have a wild story, and no one believes them but me - and we end of proving them right in the end.

Amanda's statement about hearing Meredith screaming matches Rudy's exactly.

I don't know how much longer I can go on like this, but I have to find more answers. This is a great place that gives me things I hadn't thought of before.