Mary, as a friend, I feel embarrassed for you saying that "Amanda did not lie".
Amanda did indeed lie, and more than once.
You may argue she is not guilty (and often do very admirably), but please do not attempt to argue "she did not lie"
May I start by quoting her own lawyer who throughout the trial was very protective of his client and her oft cited 'quirkiness'.
He was forced to concede the following:
" Luciano Ghirga, told reporters Friday [09 November 2007]"... that his client had given "three versions and ... it is difficult to evaluate which one is true."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004005696_italy10m.html
Spare us any attempts to even waste cyberspace spinning this straightforward affirmation that his own client, Knox, did actually lie here when (2) of her 'versions' were simply *in his own direct words*.... 'untrue'.
Although the above is adequate refutation of your statement,
for the record, some time ago another observer listed several other instances of 'lies' from Knox.
As a preface, some of these additional examples of 'lies' have been the subject of very vigorous and varied attempts here to justify, interpret, spin,and/or explain.
I remain unconvinced.
Regurgitation of those unconvincing attempts will do little other than add to the 50,000, and I will not again revisit them.
1) Lie one. Amanda said she was going to call Raffaele, but according to Raffaele, Amanda had already returned to his apartment at 11.30 am, and then they had gone back to the cottage.
At 12.34 pm Amanda and Filomena spoke again. Filomena said, “We spoke to each other for the third time and she told me that the window in my room was broken and that my room was in a mess. At this point I asked her to call the police and she told me that she already had.”
2) Lie two. Amanda and Raffaele didn’t actually call the police until 12.51 pm.
The postal postal police unexpectedly turned up at the cottage at 12. 35 pm.
3) Lie three. Amanda and Raffael told the police that they had called the police and were waiting for them.
4) Lie four. Amanda told the postal police that Meredith always kept her door locked. Filomena strongly disagreed with her, and told the postal police the opposite was true.
Amanda and Raffaele were then taken in for questioning.
5) Lie five. They said they couldn’t remember most of what happened on the night of the murder, because they had smoked cannabis.
It is medically impossible for cannabis to cause such dramatic amnesia and there are no studies that have ever demonstrated that this is possible.
Long term use of cannabis may affect short term memory, which means that users might have difficulty recalling a telephone number. But it won’t wipe out whole chunks of an evening from their memory banks.
6) Lie six. Amanda accused Diya Lumumba of murdering Meredith at the cottage.
It’s true that two of Amanda’s such statements were thrown out by the Italian Supreme Court. However, Amanda repeated the accusation, in a note that she wrote to the police on 6 November.
This note was not thrown out by the Italian Supreme Court, and it was admitted as evidence.
7/8) Lies seven and eight. In her 6 November note Amanda claimed to have seen Diya Lumumba at the basketball court at Piazza Grimana; and outside her front door. He was actually at his bar.
9) Line nine. Amanda’s supporters claim that she confessed to a lesser role in Meredith’s murder, and blamed Diya Lumumba, because she had been “smacked around” or put under pressure by the police.
But the real reason she had to say she was at the cottage was because she was informed that Raffaele Sollecito was no longer providing her with an alibi.
Raffaele had been confronted with phone records, and was now claiming that she was not with him the whole evening, and that she had only returned at 1.00 am. Amanda did not attempt to refute Raffaele’s claim, but now admitted that she had been at the cottage.
The significance of this about-turn cannot be stressed enough.
(Incidentally, Raffaele was also claiming that he had lied, because he had believed Amanda’s version of what happened and not thought about the inconsistencies. He is acknowledging that Amanda’s version had inconsistencies.)
If it had been true that Amanda had been “smacked around” by the police during questioning, why haven’t her lawyers ever filed a complaint? It was very telling that Amanda dropped her allegation of being hit by the police at her recent court hearing, and instead just claimed she had been put under pressure.
There’s a world of difference between police brutality and being put under pressure. It wasn’t the first time that Amanda has made a false and malicious accusation, as Diya Lumumba knows only too well.
10) Lie ten. Amanda claimed to have slept in at Raffaele’s until the next morning. However, her mobile records show that this was not so. Amanda turned on her mobile at approximately at 5.32 am.
The only plausable explanation for Amanda’s deliberate and repeated lies? That she was involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher.
It should be no surprise to anyone following the case that the same three witnesses who have repeatedly lied, Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede, have all been placed at the crime scene.
