"Many view Knox being given a platform with skepticism, including here in The Stranger."

Ahh, the irony. Many people view The Stranger being given a platform with skepticism.


Oh that's rich, my comment was deleted. So here we go again. I look forward to a year without Amanda Knox in the news. She cannot keep herself OUT of the news. She is a psychopath.


@6 xina, FTR I didn't report it. I'm sincerely curious why you think of her the way you do?


Also, I felt this article was actually pretty decent, and seemed relatively fair-minded for what passes here these days. But Chase is easily the best of the TS writing staff.


@7 I am in the unpopular minority who believes Amanda Knox absolutely was involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher. Every year Amanda Knox makes certain she is in the news (local and national) around the time Kercher was murdered.

She is constantly complaining about how she is treated in the public eye and yet she is ALWAYS putting herself out into the public eye - seeking attention.

The day Meredith Kercher was found murdered, I arrived home in NYS, forced to leave Seattle due to serious illness. I followed the case. I listened to the tapes of her talking to her mom during prison visits (they knew they were being taped and her nonchalant talk about how the police had nothing, her fingerprints being found on Meredith's face, her laughing, every single thing about her behavior was fucking bone chilling).

I even at one point thought she was just a fucking freak and that I was wrong.

And then I went back and after her book deal and her refusal to honor the Kercher family request that she stay away from them and away from Meredith's grave (again always in the news around the anniversary of the death like she has to shove it in their faces it is seriously disturbing and sick), the death of Meredith's father, and Amanda's numerous interviews on TV (where again her behavior was bizarre and disturbing), I returned to my original opinion. She was involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher and she got away with it because the case was botched beyond all comprehension. And let's not forget she claimed Patrick Lumumba murdered Meredith when he had absolutely nothing to do with it whatsoever. Do innocent people get railroaded and treated badly by police and forced into false confessions? Fuck yeah. Do they tell the cops other people, innocent people, committed the crime? Not to my knowledge (name a case if you know one).

Her compulsion to always be in the public eye and always claim she is the victim when Meredith Kercher is dead - was brutally murdered is beyond the pale.

I look forward to the day she disappears from the public eye and we don't have to listen to her bullshit anymore.


@Xina: You know she was exonerated by the Italian Supreme Court, right? Not merely found not-guilty, but affirmatively found innocent?

What is your explanation for how the Supreme Court could have gotten it so wrong?


@9 xina, okay, if you think she's guilty and got away with murder, it's understandable that you would feel that way.

I followed the original case pretty closely over the years, and think she's innocent. But I hadn't really paid much attention to her after her exoneration, so I thought maybe I missed something that had happened.

I would just say that sometimes people read into every little thing how they think people should behave under horrifying circumstances. She barely survived a living nightmare, a young life in tatters even after being exonerated, simply for being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Maybe not all people can handle something like that with the grace that you expect, but then I would guess that most would fail your expectations.


Yeah, I answered PiP's question because I felt it was an honest inquiry (though now I see it was to tell me I have unrealistic expectations regarding how other people "should" behave).

Not to roingehash the trial or Knox's so-called exoneration (she did 4 years in prison for lying about Patrick Lumumba). Not here to argue with people who feel differently than I do about the matter. I expressed an opinion (which so many here and elsewhere seem to so readily confuse with facts, truth, reality, etc.)


*not going to rehash the trial


@9. Hear, hear. I totally agree.


@12 xina, no one's looking to rehash the trial. My question was sincere, as I explained. You're the one who listed everything - I haven't attempted to refute any of it, though I could. It's almost like you're disappointed I didn't, and then attempt to make it out as though I was trolling you.

You've made some pretty serious allegations, some would say based entirely on your own perceptions of events, and I suggested that may be a case of your expectations.

Commenters here hate you more than they even hate me, which is sad for both of us. I've been one of your few defenders in the comment sections during my time here. I try to be very sincere, and I think you do too, and we share that in common. Sincerity is often misunderstood on the internet. And we share a very similar political and social POV. And we share the rage at an unjust and fucked-up world. I don't agree with you on everything, and once in a long while, I've respectfully shared that. Good luck to you Xina.


what's the bigger crime here? murdering that lady or marrying that fully grown man who chooses to look that way


Amanda has made it clear she depends on paying interviews as a source of income. It’s the repetitive content of the interviews always revisiting the murder including the name of the victim and and details of the crime. The insensitivity of this is mind boggling towards the Kercher family. Amanda says she shouldn’t have to disappear. Why not use her contacts and “talent” to find her own path and stop with this sad parade of media attention seeking.


Amanda Knox has made it clear she depends on paying interviews as a source of income. The numerous and repetitive nature of the interviews are problematic. She never fails to mention the victim’s name and terrible details of the crime. It is mind boggling that she and her supporters cannot see how insensitive and just wrong this is for the Kercher family to endure. I read Amanda doesn’t think she should have to disappear. Surely there is some space between disappearing and reliving the tragedy every month.


@Haters: Lol, you all were so convinced she did it, and now that you’ve been proved wrong, you’re like, “Uhhh, let’s never speak of this again, why is she still speaking, I don’t like all this speaking.”


@12: “Not to roingehash the trial or Knox's so-called exoneration (she did 4 years in prison for lying about Patrick Lumumba).”

But now it is you who are lying about her. Shall we pack you off to prison for 4 years?


If you check in with the final acquittal you might learn she was acquitted not exonerated . They still found she was present and had knowledge of the crime. However, my earlier post was not about guilt or innocence it was about showing some humanity towards the victim’s family. She can speak but might consider speaking about a new subject. Of course there are those who applaud all that she does and show nothing but contempt for the Kerchers and the man she falsely accused .That’s hateful.


Very cool article.

So, I'm just dying to know, has she shoveled her sidewalk? I mean, it keeps snowing so it feels like a waste of time, but there you have it.


@15: Hate? Who hates xina? Who hates you?

Nobody. Repeat, nobody.

Good Lord. Remember the season.


Pretty in Pink: Maybe not all people can handle something like that with the grace that you expect, but then I would guess that most would fail your expectations.


@26: Lol, except for the Italian Supreme Court, where the prevailing view is that the evidence not only fails to show her guilt but affirmatively shows her innocence!

Not sure why the rest of Italy doesn’t get it. Probably cause she didn’t live up to their expectations for how a woman is supposed to act...or maybe I should say, live down to their expectations.


An excellent recent NYT article on the subject:


@PiP: That is a great article, thanks for the link. The writer hits the nail on the head:

“Ms. Knox became a kind of ‘vessel’ onto which society could project its fears and judgments, as well as its pornographic fantasies...”

What I’d actually like to read is an article of the caliber about the Knox-haters of the world, the Xina’s and so forth, who remain wedded to the idea that “Knox must have had SOME kind of involvement.”

Is it her hippie sensibilities and mannerisms? Her sex life? What is it about this woman that so provokes people? It’s Monica Lewinsky all over again.


@29: In an interesting reversal of the Stranger's recent way of doing things, this article is well-researched and well-written, whilst the comments are filled with slanderous garbage. The cited article @28 does actually reveal one possible reason Knox's haters remain convinced of her guilt, many years after her acquittals and exoneration in Italian courts:

'In Britain, once a suspect has been charged, the law forbids journalists from speculating on their guilt or innocence until a verdict is reached, said Lieve Gies, a media scholar at the University of Leicester who studied the case. But because this crime played out in Italy, she said, that rule did not apply.


'"To this day, people are like, 'She's guilty, right?"' said Jonathan Martin, the investigations editor at The Seattle Times, Ms. Knox's hometown paper, who covered the story from Seattle. "It's amazing to me how powerful that stampede of early tabloid coverage -- a lot of it leaked straight from the prosecution -- was to shape the narrative."'

@9, we see exactly this happen: based entirely on material selectively leaked by the police and/or prosecution before trial, xina remains totally convinced of Knox's guilt -- a belief utterly undented by Knox's two (!) subsequent acquittals, one of them also functioning as Knox's exoneration by an Italian appeals court.

@22: "If you check in with the final acquittal you might learn she was acquitted not exonerated . They still found she was present and had knowledge of the crime."

Sources for those claims, please. From a New York Times' report on Knox's second acquittal, by the Italian appeals court: 'The case against Knox, the appeals court found, was “not corroborated by any evidence.” Any evidence.' ("Good Cops, Bad Cops," New York Times, 25 April 2013.) That certainly sounds like an exoneration, at least to me.

@21: "But now it is you who are lying about her. Shall we pack you off to prison for 4 years?"

Totally convinced Knox simply must be guilty of something, xina gets even that detail wrong. As the article cited @28 recounts, Knox signed a false confession, which she claims the local police extracted under duress, even including assaulting her; when informed the confession implicated Lumumba, Knox tried to recant it. Knox subsequently served four years in prison for her erroneous conviction of murder; as the never-revoked charge concerning Lumumba carried a sentence of three years, she was granted credit for time served.

Let's recall that Knox's multiple acquittals were not the end of this story:

"A third defendant, Rudy Guede, 24, was also convicted of Miss Kercher's murder in a separate trial and was sentenced to 30 years in prison. His conviction was upheld on appeal, but his sentence was shortened to 16 years." ("Italian Court Reverses American Student's '09 Murder Conviction," New York Times, 04 Oct 2011: A.1.)

Clinging to beliefs in the face of all of the evidence remains a sadly all-too-human behavior, as we have seen in multiple comments, right here in this very thread.

@19, @20: Indeed, if a person has been wrongly convicted of murder, served years of her life for it, been acquitted and exonerated, then why on earth should she remain silent about it? Because it's so totally inconvenient for her critics to consider they have been -- and continue to be -- completely wrong about her? (Awwww, poor babies! Try spending four years of your young life in jail for a crime you did not commit, and then tell us all about your suffering.)

This article relates how she's working to free other persons who were, like herself, wrongly convicted of serious crimes. Such efforts should be applauded, not criticized.


@22 The source , once again is the motivational document from the SC’s acquittal.No direct evidence was found in the bedroom where the victim was found. She was however found to be present and came in contact with the victim’s blood at some point which she tried to wash from her hands. The report is easily accessible translated in English.


@31: "The report is easily accessible translated in English."

Then you should have no trouble posting a url, or other source citation, here. Absent that, your assertions have been made without evidence, and therefore can be dismissed without evidence. (Although, why would anyone even bother with dismissal? Finding Knox "was present and had knowledge of the crime," and had gotten the victim's blood on her person, merely 'proves' that Knox was a legal resident of the apartment, which was already long established and not under dispute.)


@31, 32. Elan is citing findings from a decision that was reversed by the Supreme Court in 2015 because the decision was not only without evidence, but was actually contrary to the evidence.

Tensor, Elan will never be able to provide you the URL you rightly demanded, for the simple reason that no such document exists. The Supreme Court said, in 2015, that she didn’t do it. It’s incredible to me these people who can’t accept her innocence. This is exactly how Pizzagate came about.


@33: I wasn't able to find an actual exoneration, because with Knox having been in the residence at the time of the murder, it will forever be impossible to show she could not have been involved; she has no alibi.

Still, two acquittals and the Italian Supreme Court finding no evidence of her involvement should suffice for anyone, and certainly does for me. The conviction of another suspect effectively ended this case, but yet certain persons still want Knox to be guilty, somehow, someway -- and to pretend she's guilty, and act ashamed, even though she has no reason at all to do so.

Pretty in Pink -- thank you for your informative link @28. Sadly, xina gave another lesson in how her mind works, this time by repaying your sympathetic attempt to communicate with her with another episode of how her way is the only way; disagree with her in the slightest, on anything, and you're the enemy. It's a revealing look into the mindset of the people who will waste the rest of their lives pointlessly trying to convince someone, somewhere, that Amanda Knox is somehow guilty of murder. I'm sorry you got nothing but grief for your attempt at being reasonable.


Knox has always seemed a bit off mentally to me, from day one when she was doing cartwheels outside the murder scene. WTF? I still don't know she wasn't involved - to at least some degree - and I'm not sure she knows.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.