Early reviews of Amanda Knox book starting to appear

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.”

4 responses to “Early reviews of Amanda Knox book starting to appear

  1. Pingback: Amanda Knox Interview on ABC Tonight in U.S at 10pm EST…. | Wrongful Convictions Blog

  2. 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:


  3. 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.

  4. 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.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s