Continuation Part 16: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Ken Dine]

It appears to me that the evidence that has been put forth to support this theory borders on a proof that the theory is correct. There are many details in this case where it would be interesting to know more about what the truth of the issue is. This isn't one of them for me. It seems like the facts are fairly well known and one can feel fairly confident that what LJ suggests is correct. I was surprised at the breadth and depth of evidence that people managed to find to support the theory LJ puts forth here. There are a great many other details in this case where such solid evidence to support a particular view is not available.

Really? Perhaps you could give two pieces that support this theory.

#1 - the next day at 11:30 am all these cops attended their “CASED CLOSED” media event to celebrate their success:

“Case Closed” – Meredith Kercher Murder Police Press Conference, November 6, 2007

The cops in that picture were from several jurisdictions (some came from Rome), and most of those cops (all?) were on hand at the police station by midnight to interrogate (only?) Raffaele? Are you seriously buying that utter nonsense? Do you really think it’s normal to have that many detectives on hand during the night?

#2 - Giobbi said that he had scheduled both Raffaele and Amanda’s interrogations that night. You claim Giobbi was likely wrong and just bloviating since other cops claimed Amanda came in voluntarily, but they could have either been lying, or maybe they weren’t aware of Giobbi’s master plan?

The cops that claimed Amanda wasn’t called in for an interview also said they were angry with her when they noticed her sitting in the waiting room — does that sound normal to you? Why would cops be mad at Amanda for merely accompanying Raffaele to his interview?

#3 - Mignini was also there during these late-night interrogations. Can you explain why Mignini would have been there unless something important was going down?

#4 - From tapping Amanda’s phone the police knew that Amanda’s mother was arriving the next morning. You feel that her mother’s presence in Perugia would have little impact on their plans to interview Amanda without an attorney present, but clearly you are wrong!

#5 - possibly, the cops knew Amanda would tag along since she may have done that for previous interviews. In any event, Perugia is small so it wouldn’t take very long to have the cops tailing Amanda to fetch her to the station if need be.

Logically, their ‘plan’ was to interview Raffaele 1st so they could then tell Amanda he stopped supporting her alibi, which is exactly what happened.

As Strozzi said and I agree they could have held her as a material witness, hell it took three days after the arrest for her to see a judge.

If the police tried to stop Amanda from leaving Italy with her mom the next day, then they would have been required to provide her with an attorney, and you can bet her mom would have seen to that!

With a lawyer present to advise her, there's no way that Amanda could have been forced to confess to being at the cottage that night. Without that lawyerless confession, the police had nada on Amanda!

Her mother AND her aunt in Germany had suggested she leave but she didn't.

Amanda should have listened to her mom and promptly left, just as all the English girls had done. The fact that Amanda didn’t leave Italy when her mom told her to leave, supports your argument, HOW?

The biggest problem with the theory is they didn't call in Amanda.

It may have crossed their minds and seemed a bother but I doubt it was a major factor. Not even Giobbi said so.

They didn’t call Amanda in for her planned interrogation because she had tagged along with Raffaele and they didn’t need to call her separately, but that sure as Hell doesn’t mean they didn’t have her lawyerless interrogation all set up and ready to go that night …see points #1 thru #5 above.

The underlined portion of your comment doesn’t make any sense, nor does it appear to relate to your sentence before it?

 

[Numbers]

#1 - the next day at 11:30 am all these cops attended their “CASED CLOSED” media event to celebrate their success:

[qimg]http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/case-closed-press-conference-300x228.jpg[/qimg]
“Case Closed” – Meredith Kercher Murder Police Press Conference, November 6, 2007

The cops in that picture were from several jurisdictions (some came from Rome), and most of those cops (all?) were on hand at the police station by midnight to interrogate (only?) Raffaele? Are you seriously buying that utter nonsense? Do you really think it’s normal to have that many detectives on hand during the night?

#2 - Giobbi said that he had scheduled both Raffaele and Amanda’s interrogations that night. You claim Giobbi was likely wrong and just bloviating since other cops claimed Amanda came in voluntarily, but they could have either been lying, or maybe they weren’t aware of Giobbi’s master plan?

The cops that claimed Amanda wasn’t called in for an interview also said they were angry with her when they noticed her sitting in the waiting room — does that sound normal to you? Why would cops be mad at Amanda for merely accompanying Raffaele to his interview?

#3 - Mignini was also there during these late-night interrogations. Can you explain why Mignini would have been there unless something important was going down?

#4 - From tapping Amanda’s phone the police knew that Amanda’s mother was arriving the next morning. You feel that her mother’s presence in Perugia would have little impact on their plans to interview Amanda without an attorney present, but clearly you are wrong!

#5 - possibly, the cops knew Amanda would tag along since she may have done that for previous interviews. In any event, Perugia is small so it wouldn’t take very long to have the cops tailing Amanda to fetch her to the station if need be.

Logically, their ‘plan’ was to interview Raffaele 1st so they could then tell Amanda he stopped supporting her alibi, which is exactly what happened.




If the police tried to stop Amanda from leaving Italy with her mom the next day, then they would have been required to provide her with an attorney, and you can bet her mom would have seen to that!

With a lawyer present to advise her, there's no way that Amanda could have been forced to confess to being at the cottage that night. Without that lawyerless confession, the police had nada on Amanda!




Amanda should have listened to her mom and promptly left, just as all the English girls had done. The fact that Amanda didn’t leave Italy when her mom told her to leave, supports your argument, HOW?




They didn’t call Amanda in for her planned interrogation because she had tagged along with Raffaele and they didn’t need to call her separately, but that sure as Hell doesn’t mean they didn’t have her lawyerless interrogation all set up and ready to go that night …see points #1 thru #5 above.

The underlined portion of your comment doesn’t make any sense, nor does it appear to relate to your sentence before it?

Ken Dine,

You've done a good analysis here.

The problem with the view expressed that Giobbi was puffing about planning to call both in, is that that is not all that he said. He also said that he planned to have the police conduct the interrogations of both at "the same time" (which, again for the literalists, doesn't mean "simultaneously" as in some physics experiment, but in the way police break the alibis of alleged conspirators, questioning one to get a breakdown, then confronting the other). And that is exactly what the police did. And there was no "innocent" reason for the police to "invite" Amanda from the corridor where she was attempting to do homework into an interrogation room. She had already been interviewed, and she had not come to the station intending to give a statement about Lumumba or anyone else.

ETA: It's been suggested by others, specifically pmop on IIP forum, that the reason the police scolded Amanda for being at the station was not that they actually objected to her being there, but that they used the scolding as a method of psychological pressure. They also likely knew that Amanda was dependent on Raffaele, then in an interrogation room, for transportation (he had an Audi), especially at night, and that she had become frightened since Meredith's body had been discovered. After, Amanda's bedroom was next to that of Meredith's, her new friend as well as flat-mate.

 

[Numbers]

What would be the judgment of the ECHR regarding the use of statements of Rudy Guede, who was not allowed to be examined by the defense, in the trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito?

Here is a statement of the ECHR case-law, from Vidgen v the Netherlands 29353/06 10 Jul 2012. Note that two earlier cases are invoked as precedent, Luca v Italy 33354/96 and Al-Khawaja and Tahery v the United Kingdom [GC] 26766/05 and 22228/06.

The bottom line is that Guede's statements could not be used to convict, unless other evidence demonstrated their reliability. Also, since the decision not to be cross-examined was Guede's and there was no clear reason for it, it would likely be absolutely not acceptable to the ECHR for such unexamined statements to be used for conviction.

For more details, see
http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=3162

ETA: The ECHR would also need to consider that Italian procedural law (CPP Article 192 para. 3) requires corroboration by other evidence to confirm reliability of statements made by an alleged co-conspirator and the Italian Constitution (Article 111) specifically prohibits the use of unexamined statements to be used against a defendant without the consent of the defendant.

 

[zotz]

I saw references indicating that one of the Kercher parents believes that Amanda murdered their daughter because Mez was so good (pure) and that Amanda attacked her for that. That sounds like a Mignini or Maresca line. What sick nonsense!

The good vs. evil line that the guilters want to hand us gives comfort to some people, probably including the Kerchers. For them, Amanda represents a malignant force that they believe in. It is a way to rationalize tragedy in a manner that makes sense to a moral person. The truth that Mez died a meaningless death at the hands of a single, deranged individual leaves a cold, hollow feeling in our hearts. It makes no sense from a moral perspective. I think this is one of the strongest reasons for the appeal of the pro-guilt point of view. The problem with their theory is that anyone with common sense can tell that Amanda doesn't fit their description of an evil luciferina. No matter how many complaints they come up with about Amanda's behavior, mostly from people that didn't know her, no one has come up with a single instance of Amanda's hostility or even unfriendliness towards Mez or anyone else. It must have exasperated Mignini. You can tell in interviews, by his questions, that he really wanted to show Amanda's dark side. But it just isn't there.

 

[acbytesla]

Ken Dine,

You've done a good analysis here.

The problem with the view expressed that Giobbi was puffing about planning to call both in, is that that is not all that he said. He also said that he planned to have the police conduct the interrogations of both at "the same time" (which, again for the literalists, doesn't mean "simultaneously" as in some physics experiment, but in the way police break the alibis of alleged conspirators, questioning one to get a breakdown, then confronting the other). And that is exactly what the police did. And there was no "innocent" reason for the police to "invite" Amanda from the corridor where she was attempting to do homework into an interrogation room. She had already been interviewed, and she had not come to the station intending to give a statement about Lumumba or anyone else.

ETA: It's been suggested by others, specifically pmop on IIP forum, that the reason the police scolded Amanda for being at the station was not that they actually objected to her being there, but that they used the scolding as a method of psychological pressure. They also likely knew that Amanda was dependent on Raffaele, then in an interrogation room, for transportation (he had an Audi), especially at night, and that she had become frightened since Meredith's body had been discovered. After, Amanda's bedroom was next to that of Meredith's, her new friend as well as flat-mate.

I agree, the whole point is to keep the subject rattled. I could imagine that if Amanda didn't come in with Raffaele, they might have berated him for Amanda not coming and send a squad car to pick Amanda up.

I absolutely believe that Giobbi ordered to interrogate both Amanda and Raffaele.Why else would they have so many detectives working?

 

[acbytesla]

The good vs. evil line that the guilters want to hand us gives comfort to some people, probably including the Kerchers. For them, Amanda represents a malignant force that they believe in. It is a way to rationalize tragedy in a manner that makes sense to a moral person. The truth that Mez died a meaningless death at the hands of a single, deranged individual leaves a cold, hollow feeling in our hearts. It makes no sense from a moral perspective. I think this is one of the strongest reasons for the appeal of the pro-guilt point of view. The problem with their theory is that anyone with common sense can tell that Amanda doesn't fit their description of an evil luciferina. No matter how many complaints they come up with about Amanda's behavior, mostly from people that didn't know her, no one has come up with a single instance of Amanda's hostility or even unfriendliness towards Mez or anyone else. It must have exasperated Mignini. You can tell in interviews, by his questions, that he really wanted to show Amanda's dark side. But it just isn't there.

I don't think Amanda is a saint, nut she sure isn't the devil.

 

[kwill]

No matter how many complaints they come up with about Amanda's behavior, mostly from people that didn't know her, no one has come up with a single instance of Amanda's hostility or even unfriendliness towards Mez or anyone else.

That's because she's a genuinely nice person. Who is, by the way, celebrating her birthday today.

 

[Numbers]

I agree, the whole point is to keep the subject rattled. I could imagine that if Amanda didn't come in with Raffaele, they might have berated him for Amanda not coming and send a squad car to pick Amanda up.

I absolutely believe that Giobbi ordered to interrogate both Amanda and Raffaele.Why else would they have so many detectives working?

There is a management technique called "management by objective", in which goals are established, and it's up to the employee to find a suitable way to accomplish that goal.

I suggest that Giobbi said words to this effect: get them both in for interrogation and break Raffaele so Amanda will no longer have an alibi, then get her to talk about our suspicions about her role with Lumumba.

And that is what the police, who were essentially under Giobbi's command, did. It didn't matter that they didn't order Amanda to come in. They executed Giobbi's instructions in that she appeared at the police station and the police, when they were ready, began to interrogate her.

Although Amanda was a suspect, the police wished to give the appearance that she was a witness, both to lull her, and to avoid giving her a lawyer seemingly without violating Italian procedural law. But of course, they did break that law, and the courts recognized that, but also allowed use of her legally unusable statements by adopting a different standard for the calunnia charge.

The "military" ranking of the prosecutor and police in the investigation:

Mignini - Commander in Chief
DeFelice - Administrative General
Giobbi, Profazio - Generals
Napoleoni - Colonel
The other police: Generally, lower in rank than Napoleoni

See the order of the police names and their titles on the Report of completion of the execution of the decree of the Public Minister to arrest Knox Amanda Marie, which Methos linked to.

 

[Strozzi]

I agree, the whole point is to keep the subject rattled. I could imagine that if Amanda didn't come in with Raffaele, they might have berated him for Amanda not coming and send a squad car to pick Amanda up.

I absolutely believe that Giobbi ordered to interrogate both Amanda and Raffaele.Why else would they have so many detectives working?

How many police from Giobbi's unit came with him from Rome to Perugia? Did police investigators from other units from Rome or elsewhere come, too? I am asking about police investigators, not scientific police and their support techs.

I am curious to know where they stayed in Perugia. In hotels, or are there guest rooms, bunk rooms, or just extra cots in the police headquarters? I note from former Chicago police detective Paul Ciolino's comment on his visit to the Questura that it is a large, modern building with state-of-the-art equipment.

ETA:
I am trying to get a handle on what is known about the numbers of police working this case, how many we're from Rome, and how many we're actually on duty or immediately available as the Nov 5/6 night interrogations commenced or developed.

How many police investigators/detectives/managers involved in this case are known to have been there on duty in the station around 10 - 10:30 pm when Raffaele was called in? How many women from Napoleoni's flying squad were known to be there to deal with Amanda when she was taken into an interrogation room at 10:30? How many showed up shortly thereafter?

Was any other interpreter there that night other than police interpreter Anna Donimo? She said in her testimony in court that she lives in the countryside almost an hour's drive from Perugia and got a call just before midnight to come in as things were developing with Amanda. She said she was in her night clothes when she got the call. She had to get dressed, drive to Perugia, and upon arriving at the Questura would logically have gone to the control room where Giobi was monitoring the interrogations to be briefed so she knew what was going on with Amanda and what the game plan was before she went to join in in the interrogation room. So I place her there at 1 am or shortly thereafter. Meaning that Napoleoni and other police had already interrogated Amanda in Italian and poor English ? for 2-1/4 hours before Donino joined the interrogation.

 

[MichaelB]

Here's our translation of Raffaele's Nov 6 statement: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Raffaele-Sollecito-Statement-6-Nov-2007.pdf

It's ever so slightly different to the one on Ergon's fake wiki.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Too bad the Kerchers couldn't remember all of this when they were in the court, testifying.

 

[Kauffer]

"In her statements, Amanda had repeatedly claimed that 'Meredith was my friend'. Upon hearing this, my family and I were naturally upset. Meredith had constantly complained to her friends and our family that she was unnerved about the strange men Amanda brought home, and also about Amanda's bad hygiene habits. A friend of Meredith's also stated that on a return flight to London from Perugia, Meredith had complained about Amanda for almost the entire journey."

Meredith John Kercher

John Kercher made this up. He made lots of things up. Interestingly, Amanda first appears innocuously in father Kercher's tale. He says:

"I knew only little of Amanda, but could remember that Meredith had said the American girl was eccentric" (P.21).

As his narrative develops, he professes to know much more, reporting alleged complaints made to friends, to him personally and to Arline, though not to the siblings.

But when, in the book, he relates meeting with his daughter after the flight in which the reported comments of Meredith's unnamed "friend" would have been made, just a couple of pages earlier, he makes no mention of Meredith alluding to the alleged friction with Amanda at all or even that she was unhappy in any way with her life in Perugia. In fact, Meredith's mood and demeanour could not have been different:

"When she arrived, she talked eagerly of Perugia and how she was making herself at home. She said she was trying to buy a duvet for her bed, to make her room cosy, but nobody seemed to know where she could find one. I remember her being amused by this, and saying she was determined to track one down. That this should be the duvet beneath which her body would be found is something that will always haunt me. Over lunch, she had shown me some boots she had bought. She had been laughing, and was happy." (P.19).

The early part of this book is peppered with citations from friends and acquaintances of Meredith, which portray her in a manner wholly inconsistent with someone making the comments her father ascribes to her:

Lucia Mazzeo (Meredith's teacher): "I never heard her say one bad thing about anyone or anything. She never judged others and always tried to see the good side of people..." (P.54).

Sarah Carr: "She was also caring and considerate, never complaining about anything that upset her." (P.61).

Natalie Hayward: "She was never judgemental". (P.71).

Only after Amanda was imprisoned by Matteini, on p.96, does John Kercher write negatively about her: "We knew that Meredith had not got on with Knox. Meredith had expressed irritation to both Arline and I and her friends in Perugia at Knox's personal habits, because she frequently failed to flush the toilet and had concerns over how she would 'bring strange men back to the house'..." This is straight out of Follain and a distortion of what Sophie Purton said to the police.

Then, after the Micheli pre-trial, "He (Micheli) noted that Filomena Romanelli had said that the relationship between Amanda Knox and Meredith had deteriorated by October. This was something we knew of from her friends in Perugia, and also from what Meredith had told us". (P.150).

Really? Which friends? Not one of them says anything remotely equivalent to this, to the authorities in Perugia or in trial testimony. Additionally, John Kercher does not name the "friend" of Meredith, whom he maintains witnessed almost a whole flight's worth of complaints about Amanda.

 

[Annella]

John Kercher made this up. He made lots of things up. Interestingly, Amanda first appears innocuously in father Kercher's tale. He says:

"I knew only little of Amanda, but could remember that Meredith had said the American girl was eccentric" (P.21).

As his narrative develops, he professes to know much more, reporting alleged complaints made to friends, to him personally and to Arline, though not to the siblings.

But when, in the book, he relates meeting with his daughter after the flight in which the reported comments of Meredith's unnamed "friend" would have been made, just a couple of pages earlier, he makes no mention of Meredith alluding to the alleged friction with Amanda at all or even that she was unhappy in any way with her life in Perugia. In fact, Meredith's mood and demeanour could not have been different:

"When she arrived, she talked eagerly of Perugia and how she was making herself at home. She said she was trying to buy a duvet for her bed, to make her room cosy, but nobody seemed to know where she could find one. I remember her being amused by this, and saying she was determined to track one down. That this should be the duvet beneath which her body would be found is something that will always haunt me. Over lunch, she had shown me some boots she had bought. She had been laughing, and was happy." (P.19).

The early part of this book is peppered with citations from friends and acquaintances of Meredith, which portray her in a manner wholly inconsistent with someone making the comments her father ascribes to her:

Lucia Mazzeo (Meredith's teacher): "I never heard her say one bad thing about anyone or anything. She never judged others and always tried to see the good side of people..." (P.54).

Sarah Carr: "She was also caring and considerate, never complaining about anything that upset her." (P.61).

Natalie Hayward: "She was never judgemental". (P.71).

Only after Amanda was imprisoned by Matteini, on p.96, does John Kercher write negatively about her: "We knew that Meredith had not got on with Knox. Meredith had expressed irritation to both Arline and I and her friends in Perugia at Knox's personal habits, because she frequently failed to flush the toilet and had concerns over how she would 'bring strange men back to the house'..." This is straight out of Follain and a distortion of what Sophie Purton said to the police.

Then, after the Micheli pre-trial, "He (Micheli) noted that Filomena Romanelli had said that the relationship between Amanda Knox and Meredith had deteriorated by October. This was something we knew of from her friends in Perugia, and also from what Meredith had told us". (P.150).

Really? Which friends? Not one of them says anything remotely equivalent to this, to the authorities in Perugia or in trial testimony. Additionally, John Kercher does not name the "friend" of Meredith, whom he maintains witnessed almost a whole flight's worth of complaints about Amanda.

An interesting piece from amandaknoxcase.com which shows part of a collective mindset constructed after a tabloid frenzy!

Marc Rivalland, a London barrister, wrote a letter to the London Guardian (Observer edition) shortly after the conviction in 2009 claiming that Amanda Knox said “◊◊◊◊ happens” when asked how she felt on November 2. The statement is not attributed and does not appear in any of the witness statements or testimony. Mr Rivalland’s daughter Monique was a friend of Meredith and wrote an article about her for the Times in 2012, but she was not in Perugia at the time of Meredith’s death so cannot be the source of the claim. The statement about Amanda Knox could be an example of post hoc rationalisation by someone who believed her to be guilty and therefore the ‘kind of person who probably would have said that’. The following is his letter in full:

My daughter was a Leeds student with Meredith in Perugia. They went out together on Halloween. When Amanda Knox was asked how she felt on 2 November, she said: “◊◊◊◊ happens”, which contrasts rather sharply with the contrived way she addressed the Italian court about “my friend Meredith”.
This is the behaviour of the murderer or a psychopath. Sympathy for her is misplaced. She staked all on “reasonable doubt” and came up short. An innocent person would have had one coherent story to tell.
Marc Rivalland
London WC2

 

[Vixen]

A week before the murder, Meredith and Amanda went to the Perugia Chocolate Festival and a classical music concert together. Hardly what one might expect if they hated each other.

It's interesting Amanda tore out all the pages in her diary in respect of the chocolate festival.

AIUI she doesn't mention it at all in her book.

 

[Strozzi]

An interesting piece from amandaknoxcase.com which shows part of a collective mindset constructed after a tabloid frenzy!

It is interesting to see the claims made about a person who it is alleged must have committed a violent, messy crime, when the physical evidence proves it impossible that the person was at the scene when the crime occurred and in fact proves the person was elsewhere during the victim's time of death. Not even one scratch or scrape on her her body, yet some people insist she had to be there so they can believe and disseminate nasty interpretations about the person.

 

[Annella]

It's interesting Amanda tore out all the pages in her diary in respect of the chocolate festival.

AIUI she doesn't mention it at all in her book.

Who said it was Amanda who removed those pages Vixen?? And what book did YOU read? My copy of 'Waiting to be Heard' tells of attending the chocolate festival with Meredith. I guess the pro guilt faction have a special version?

 

[Vixen]

Really? You think so? My bet is Meredith's father was the last to know. I bet Meredith's father didn't know about Giacomo. For all the talk about Meredith hating Amanda, both of the Meredith's other roommates thought they got along fine.

For me the text messages say it all. Meredith is signing off with love and kisses.Who in their right mind does that to someone they supposedly despise?

I refuse to believe Meredith was some 2 faced bitch. Is that what you are saying? That Meredith was some big phoney?

So tell me Vixen, what was the motive? Is it Amanda hating Meredith or a sex game? Or was it money? And what was Raffaele's motive? Rudys? Why would he help?

Amanda texted Mez to try to arrange a Halloween evening. Mez wrote back, I'm going out with friends. What are your plans? xx Love you.

Amanda then sent her text after text, which Mez skillfully avoided. It is unmistakeable Mez snubbed her. Amanda was left with nothing to do in her cat custume and even had to wander the streets alone.

Sure, Mez was too nice to be rude, but it's clear she didn't want to invite Amanda. As Amanda was hinting heavily and asking outright, Mez could easily have told her where her group of friends were going.

As for the kisses and love you's, that is a very girly thing, and means absolutely nothing.

Luv you, Hunxx

 

[Kauffer]

It's interesting Amanda tore out all the pages in her diary in respect of the chocolate festival.

AIUI she doesn't mention it at all in her book.

You understand nothing. Amanda writes about the chocolate festival and her visit there first on her own after which she and Meredith made cookies with the chocolate Amanda had been given and second, with Meredith with whom she was laughing and joking. (P.36). The footage of Meredith, which Amanda took that day disappeared with her camera.

 

[MichaelB]

Amanda texted Mez to try to arrange a Halloween evening. Mez wrote back, I'm going out with friends. What are your plans? xx Love you.

Amanda then sent her text after text, which Mez skillfully avoided. It is unmistakeable Mez snubbed her. Amanda was left with nothing to do in her cat custume and even had to wander the streets alone.

Sure, Mez was too nice to be rude, but it's clear she didn't want to invite Amanda. As Amanda was hinting heavily and asking outright, Mez could easily have told her where her group of friends were going.

As for the kisses and love you's, that is a very girly thing, and means absolutely nothing.

Luv you, Hunxx

Here we go again: Are you sure Amanda sent "text after text"? How many exactly did she send after Meredith replied to the first one?

 

[MichaelB]

It's interesting Amanda tore out all the pages in her diary in respect of the chocolate festival.

AIUI she doesn't mention it at all in her book.

Are you sure?

For two weeks in mid-October, tents and tables filled all the squares around Corso Vannucci for the annual Eurochocolate festival. The smell of chocolate around town was inescapable. Laura told me about the chocolate sculpture carving. It was done in the early mornings, so the next day, I went to Piazza IV Novembre to watch. The artists started with a refrigerator-size block of chocolate. As the chiseled pieces flew, assistants gathered chips and shavings into small plastic bags and threw them to the rowdy crowd. When a chunk of chocolate with the heft of an unabridged dictionary fell, onlookers screamed and reached across the barrier. I was shorter than most of the people around me, but I jumped up and down, yelling, “Mi, mi, mi!” I was amazed when a worker plopped the chocolate in my arms. People reached at it, picking little pieces off as I disentangled myself from the crowd. I rushed home, trying to get there before the block melted on my shirt. I unloaded it on the table and said, “Voilà!” Later, Meredith and I made chocolate chip cookies out of part of my winnings, trying to recreate the Toll House recipe from guesswork and memory. Another afternoon, I returned to the festival with Meredith. I flipped the video switch on my camera and acted like a TV journalist. “Tell me, Meredith, what do you think about being here at the Eurochocolate festival?” Meredith laughed and said, “No, no, don’t film me.” She pushed the camera away. She didn’t like being the center of attention.

Knox, Amanda (2013-04-30). Waiting to Be Heard: A Memoir (p. 36). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.