Ok, it seems that Anna Donnino resisted defence lawyer's Carlo Dalla Vedova's questioning about this issue, aided by constant interruptions from the prosecution as well as F. Maresca.
Be that as it may, Donnino admitted to bringing her own personal experience into the interrogation room, as a way of "establishing rapport". In her testimony she would admit to everything up to a suggestion that she had told Knox that she'd had amnesia. It is strange to read that testimony because of the active way prosecution and Maresca actively interfered with Dalla Vedova's questioning.
Oh I think the court testimony shows significantly more than this. This is the key exchange between Dalla Vedova and Donnino:
Dalla Vedova: Do you remember that you also mentioned to Knox that in this personal experience of yours (which you had recounted to Knox) you had suffered some form of trauma, on account of which you were unable to remember the episode of how your leg fracture happened?
Donnino: Yes, that's correct, I told her about that.
Now, in the context of Knox's interrogation, the ONLY reason why Donnino could possibly have felt it apposite to tell Knox about an incident where she (Donnino) had suffered so-called traumatic amnesia.... would have been that the police were urging Knox to "remember" the "truth" of what she actually did/experienced on the night of the murder*, and Knox was adamant that she simply couldn't remember anything along the lines of what she was being instructed to remember, and Donnino was offering Knox a plausible explanation as to why she (Knox) wasn't able to "remember" this "truth".
Frankly, there can be no other reasonable explanation as to why Donnino might have been telling Knox about the phenomenon of traumatic amnesia (with a handy personal anecdote to reinforce the plausibility of it all). It most definitely doesn't fit with anything as anodyne as Donnino simply trying to "establish rapport" with Knox - it's a highly specific anecdote which is specifically and exclusively to do with traumatic memory loss.
Oh, and it's also well worth remembering that the police and PM would have been Donnino's "friends" in this equation - as well, of course, as being her employer (and, of course, her potential
future employer....). It certainly isn't hard to see how Donnino might be inclined to spin her recollection in favour of the police/PM (and how there would be zero reason for Donnino to spin her recollection in favour of Knox). It's also easy to conceive of a scenario where Donnino came in to meet with the police and PM at least once in advance of her court appearance, to, ermmm, *finesse* her story.
* Bear in mind, also, that Perugia Chief of Police De Felice let the cat out of the bag the following morning when he triumphally told the world's media that the police had actually "known" the "truth", even while Knox was not telling them that "truth", and that eventually Knox had "buckled" and told them "what (they) already knew to be the truth. In other words, this makes it clear that the police definitively had a narrative that they were trying to *persuade* Knox to tell them in that interrogation. And this in itself lends further credibility to Donnino's leg-break-traumatic-amnesia story being a way of trying to persuade Knox that there was a plausible reason why she might have blocked out her memory of the "truth" that the police were trying to get her to admit to them.
