Waiting to be Heard, Amanda Knox’s book about her wrongful murder conviction in Italy, subsequent acquittal and current legal limbo. isn’t due for release until April 30, but advance reviews are already starting to appear. According to this review in The New York Times, Knox does more than argue her innocence. She also shares how she survived being snared in the web of a Kafkaesqe high-profile case. ”I pulled myself out of the dark place into which I’d tumbled,” she writes. I promised myself I’d live in a way that I could respect. I would love myself. And I would live as fully as I could in confinement.”
Blog Editor
Mark Godsey
Daniel P. & Judith L. Carmichael Professor of Law, University of Cincinnati College of Law; Director, Center for the Global Study of Wrongful Conviction; Director, Rosenthal Institute for Justice/Ohio Innocence Project | Email | ProfileContributing Editors
Justin Brooks
Professor, California Western School of Law; Director, California Innocence Project | Email
Cheah Wui Ling
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore Email | Profile
Liza Dietrich
Research and Writing Specialist & Outreach Program Coordinator for the Ohio Innocence Project | Email
Daniel Ehighalua
Nigerian Barrister; Project Director, Innocence Project Nigeria Email
Jessica S. Henry
Associate Professor of Justice Studies, Montclair University Email | Profile
C Ronald Huff
Professor of Criminology, Law & Society and Sociology, University of California-Irvine Email | Profile
Phil Locke
Science and Technology Advisor, Ohio Innocence Project and Duke Law Wrongful Convictions Clinic Email
Dr. Carole McCartney
Reader in Law, Faculty of Business and Law, Northumbria University Email
Nancy Petro
Author and Advocate
Kana Sasakura
Professor, Faculty of Law, Konan University Innocence Project Japan
Dr. Robert Schehr
Professor, Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Northern Arizona University; Executive Director, Arizona Innocence Project Email | Profile
Shiyuan Huang
Associate Professor, Shandong University Law School; Visiting Scholar, University of Cincinnati College of Law Email | Profile
Ulf Stridbeck
Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway
Martin Yant
Author and Private Investigator Email | Profile-
Pingback: Amanda Knox Interview on ABC Tonight in U.S at 10pm EST…. | Wrongful Convictions Blog
Why would anyone believe anything Amanda Knox says? She gave three different alibis which all turned out to be false and repeatedly accused an innocent man of murder. The Italian Supreme Court recently confirmed Knox’s conviction for slander. She is a convicted criminal and a proven liar.
If you want to understand why Amanda Knox was convicted of murder, I recommend reading the translation of the official sentencing report which can be downloaded from the Perugia Murder File website:
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=259
I have to agree with Mr. Rag. We are not a Court as a previous article on this blog correctly pointed out. The only answers can be found in the written text of the verdicts. Reiterating I am not the judge I find difficult to argue for a defendant in a case in which 2 of the attackers confessed to be on the scene of the crime (and without any deal as some less than well informed people say in this incredible mass internet brainwashing court, deals are not possible in a murder case in that jurisdiction), including this particular defendant. Their presence is confirmed by numerous undeniable traces. A third one did not confess as the others but his presence is confirmed by traces, DNA and logic. All three defendants lied numerous times on their whereabouts and actions and clearly contradicted one another. These are key lies that point to their responsibility that might. Compelling forensic evidence of a staged theft exist, only those living in that flat would have an interest in setting up to mislead investigators … I could go on, this case imho is obvious, there is nothing to argue. Anyway Courts are more than able to do their job and AK has a defence team in place.
I wish to add that 2 different panels of 5 judges (all different) of the Supreme Court of Cassation – for a total of 10 judges – have recognised as established the fact multiple murderers were present at the crime scene. So what I mentioned above is supported by the highest of all Courts, with clear written explanations. Who these people are is perfectly obvious.
Apologise for the error in previous post, the words”that might” were to be cancelled.