Photo Courtesy Amanda Knox family
West Seattle resident and UW student Amanda Knox was awarded $55,000 by the Italian court for the theft of her personal notebooks. They somehow got into the hands of a journalist working for Italy's largest newspaper. Her family may appeal and seek a higher award.

Amanda Knox family may appeal $55,000 law suit victory

Amanda Knox was awarded $55,000 by the Italian court Thursday, March 18, for the theft of her personal notebooks and unauthorized photographs by Corriere Della Sera journalist Fiorenza Sarzanini. Her step-father, Chris Mellas, told the West Seattle Herald the family wanted ten times that amount and may appeal. Corriere Della Sera is Italy's most widely read newspaper.

"We will probably appeal the amount," Mellas told the Herald. "The big thing is the decision, not the money. I can't stress that enough. The materials had already been looked at deemed no evidentiary value in the trial. This was just her private property. The journalist had zero right to publish this, much less read it. How did she go about doing it?"

Amanda Knox's family wants to know how the journalist got the notebooks in the first place, as very few officials had access to it. The notebooks were looked at by investigators, then returned to her in prison. The paper also ran photographs of Amanda without authorization, Mellas said. He said they published her personal information extensively.

"This was a full front page story for two days including Sunday, then in their magazine, on their website, then their own book publishing company," said Mellas. The book was called "Amanda e gli atria" (Amanda and the Others).

"That book is not allowed to be published," he said.

Amanda Knox's family is currently in the appeal process of her Dec. 4 guilty verdict for the murder of roommate Meredith Kercher.

We encourage our readers to comment. No registration is required. We ask that you keep your comments free of profanity and keep them civil. They are moderated and objectionable comments will be removed.


she innocent

she is innocent

If Amanda Knox had not

If Amanda Knox had not killed Meredith Kercher, then she would never have been a suspect in the killing of Meredith Kercher.

Therefore she would never have been in the news in the first place.

Now that she is a convicted murderer she has become a media star.

She has been awarded damages which should never have been awarded.

She is receiving full board accommodation free of charge, can use a library, gym, hair dresser and get used to resort style living others who work can only afford with great difficulty.

She is given the chance of improving her Italian language ability again courtesy of the Italian tax payer. For the intensive Italian language immersion she would have to pay handsomely at home.

No doubt she will make more money out of the crime she has committed.

Is it not sickening that someone can indulge in extremely anti-social behavior such as a violent sex attack, murder, drugs and reaping financial rewards form her despica

She is Guilty

She is Guilty. She is clever I grant you that. But Guilty.
She has managed to convince most of the people from her home town but very few others. Her parents are a disgrace - they are more bothered about lucrative TV rights and winning damages to feather there nest.

The only good thing about this is Knox has had to spend at least another year in prison.

I actually doubt she enjoys it as much as Crime Pays states - she'd not appeal if she did.

I hope she is hating every minute of it. Meridith will certainly have hated every sordid minute of Knox's sex attack and brutal slaying

Amanda deserves far more for

Amanda deserves far more for the time she has served in prison. I'm really not sure any amount of money can change that --years of one's life being taken away for a crime you did not commit.

keep fighting

the family should keep up the fight, 55k isnt enough for slander and stealing ones property and profiting from it.

Knox is not going to be

Knox is not going to be acquitted for her finger prints are on the murder weapon and she cleaned up the murder scene.

Something she would never have done if the murderess were innocent.

Amanda surely deserves far

Amanda surely deserves far more.

She should not be disadvantaged and given less than Ted Bundy or Scott Peterson for that matter.

"I'm really not sure any

"I'm really not sure any amount of money can change that --years of one's life being taken away for a crime you did not commit."

It was Amanda Knox (the perpetrator) who took the life of the victim, Meredith Kercher.

Amanda Knox is not the victim, Amanda Knox is that woman who killed the innocent victim.

Some do seem to have trouble understanding the difference between perpetrator and victim.

In simple terms the perpetrator is the bad woman and the victim is the good person.

Only perverts would mix these concepts up.

Why were 17 posts deleted?

Why were 17 posts deleted?

Of the deleted posts not a single post purported to be indicative of innocence.

Why were only post deleted of posters who believe that Amanda Knox is rightfully convicted after receiving a fair trial.

Not a single post of posters who believe Knox is innocent have been deleted on the two stories published by Steve Shay yesterday.


Amanda Knox is innocent

“If Amanda Knox had not killed Meredith Kercher, then she would never have been a suspect in the killing of Meredith Kercher.”

How do you figure that, genius? Do you deny that any innocent person is ever suspected of a crime?
There was no legitimate evidence to convict Amanda Knox of anything. Only speculation and hype put out by crazed media that thought a beautiful crazed sex-killer made a good story. The DNA test on the infamous knife was shown to be fatally flawed and it was also shown that knife could not have the murder weapon anyway (too large).
But everyone (including the jurors) was saturated with myths and presumptions that she was guilty before the trial even started. She did NOT get a fair trial.

Forget the myths and consider these facts:
They caught the guy that really did it (Rudy Guede) and Amanda Knox wasn't working with him. In the weeks leading up to the murder Rudy had been involved in three breaking-and-entering incidents in which he was armed with a knife and had no accomplices.

There was NO forensic evidence that Amanda was in the room where Meredith was killed. It would have been impossible for her to be involved in a violent struggle and leave no evidence; or to clean up evidence of her presence while leaving the evidence of the REAL perpetrator (Rudy Guede).

No witness saw Amanda Knox ever hurt anyone or threaten to do so.

Knox had no motive to hurt Meredith Kercher.

Amanda Knox had absolutely no history of any tendencies toward violence or bizarre sexual practices. The prosecutor DOES have a proven history of abuse of office, intimidation, and false accusations.
Amanda Knox is an innocent victim of a cruel and ridiculous miscarriage of justice.

17 Posts

Guest #9: "Of the deleted posts not a single post purported to be indicative of innocence. "

That is not accurate. I had written several lengthy posts advocating innocence and they are also gone.

Money Should Go to The Victims

I believe the money that has been awarded to Amanda for slander against her should be given to the either the Kercher family or the man she slandered Patrick Lumumba.

Response to Guest #10

Guest #10

You wrote “But everyone (including the jurors) was saturated with myths and presumptions that she was guilty before the trial even started. She did NOT get a fair trial.”

Do you have an independent source to support the above accusation? Indeed do you have any verifiable source for any of your accusations you have made?

Have you had an opportunity to read the judges 427 page report on the reasoning for the guilty verdict?

Suppressed evidence of innocence

It is an outrage that Italian authorities are allowed to get away with suppressing evidence that Amanda Knox is innocent.

Rudy Guede reportedly made comments that Amanda & Raffaele were not present at the murder scene. This was reported to have been told to a cellmate. And a nun and a priest were said to have heard similar comments.
I read another article saying the prosecutors, Mignini and Manuela Comodi were going to interview Guede to confirm the validity of this. Now he denies ever saying it.

Let’s think about this:
1. Guede makes a statement which if true, clears Amanda & Raffaele…and proves Mignini unjustly and maliciously persecuted them.
2. Mignini goes and talks to Guede.
3. Guede retracts statement.

This is outrageous! Mignini should not have been allowed anywhere near Guede. Obviously there was a HUGE conflict of interest. Mignini was just convicted of abuse of office and Guede’s statement, if believed, would finish destroying his reputation.
Can anyone doubt that Mignini was capable of making either threats or promises toward Guede in order to shut him up?!

The follow-up of Guede’s statement should have been done by someone trustworthy who had no previous connection with the case and Guede should have been guaranteed protection against retaliation from Mignini.
By failing to do that, Italian officials have forfeited any claim to any legitimacy of the trial whatsoever.

The money Amanda Knox was

The money Amanda Knox was rewarded should go to the victims family and the other people Amanda Knox damaged like the business owner whose business was shut down as a result of Amanda Knox defamatory allegations.

Was he not awarded something like 7000?

How can that be fair he was innocent, accused by Knox of a heinous crime, which resulted in his business failing due to the damage inflicted by Amanda Knox to his reputation and furthermore it is the courts finding that it was Amanda Knox who killed Meredith Kercher.

How can it be fair that Knox is awarded almost 10 times the amount of damages than Lumumba?

Amanda didn't slander or falsely accuse anyone

Amanda Knox didn’t slander or falsely accuse anyone. Hair in Meredith Kercher’s hand indicated her attacker was a black man. Amanda Knox had a part-time job working for a black man, Patrick Lumumba. Because of this and the additional coincidence of a mis-translation in a text message from Amanda Knox to Lumumba, police jumped to the conclusion that the crime had been committed by Lumumba, working with Amanda Knox and her boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito. Knox and Sollecito protested their innocence, maintaining they were in Sollecito’s apartment all that night and knew nothing of the crime.
Believing their theory about Lumumba correct, and apparently figuring that a young woman of only twenty years would be easier to break, police and the prosecutor then leaned hard on Amanda Knox. It was the police who insisted to Amanda they had proof Lumumba was guilty. She was subjected to a harsh and extended interrogation without benefit of a lawyer or proper translator (she was not fluent in Italian) until she was forced to make confused statements of imagined visions that incriminated herself and Patrick Lumumba. These statements were then twisted into an accusation of Lumumba. After recovering from the brutal interrogation, Knox reaffirmed her innocence and the truth of her original account. She expressed regret that her confused statements had caused hardship to Lumumba.

No suppression of evidence

No suppression of evidence occurred the opposite is true.

There are 427 pages of evidence indicating Knox's involvement in the case.

The defense had chosen to not even challenge much of the evidence against Knox.

The trial was almost a year, Knox had plenty of time to address the incriminating evidence but either couldn't or wouldn't.

Her contemptuous display of the court did not help her either.

She murdered a person and behaved like it was all fun and jokes, is this normal behavior?

Knox is guilty that is certain.

Amanda Knox voluntarily

Amanda Knox voluntarily accused her employer Patrick Lumumba of the crime she had committed.

The police did not advance Patrick as a murder suspect, it was Amanda Knox who accused him in order to mislead investigators.

She know that her allegation was false and so did Edda Mellas as tape recordings prove.

Both women did knowingly that he was innocent not inform anyone else this fact.

They wanted an innocent person jailed for a crime Amanda Knox has been convicted of committing.

She was convicted unanimously.

Sure, Ted Bundy thought he

Sure, Ted Bundy thought he was innocent as well.

The jury saw it differently.

Amanda Knox is innocent

“No suppression of evidence occurred the opposite is true.”
There is obvious conflict of interest and actual suppression seems likely.

“There are 427 pages of evidence indicating Knox's involvement in the case.”
There are 427 pages of self-contradictory nonsense.

“The defense had chosen to not even challenge much of the evidence against Knox. “
There really wasn’t much real evidence to challenge. It was mostly speculation and wild theories from a prosecutor’s warped mind.

“The trial was almost a year, Knox had plenty of time to address the incriminating evidence but either couldn't or wouldn't. “
The jury was allowed to sleep while the defense was addressing the evidence.

“Her contemptuous display of the court did not help her either.
“She murdered a person and behaved like it was all fun and jokes, is this normal behavior? “

She was young and naïve, foolishly believing because she was innocent, she had nothing to fear.

“Knox is guilty that is certain.”
Amanda Knox is innocent, that is certain.

If Amanda Knox were innocent

If Amanda Knox were innocent she would not have been convicted.

Honesty is the best policy.

Her numerous lies were correctly de-coded by everyone on the jury including the judges.

Innocent people have no need to lie.

The 427 page report could not lead a reasonable person to believe that Amanda Knox in innocent especially when the indication is that she is the person who actually applied the fatal stabbing.

Amanda Knox had the privilege of a fair trial, she admitted that herself.

Knox is guilty regardless of much her supporters twist, spin and misrepresent the facts.

Amanda Knox is innocent

“If Amanda Knox were innocent she would not have been convicted.”
A really ignorant comment. Anyone who reads the news has seen reports of innocent people cleared after being convicted and spending years in prison. It happens in the U.S. as well as Italy and anywhere else.

There is no evidence that Amanda Knox ever lied. Some of the things she said seemed contradictory because of coerced and confused statements made during a brutal interrogation.

A reasonable person would have a hard time believing the nonsense in the 427 page report was actually produced by something pretending to be a legitimate court of law.

Amanda did NOT say the trial was fair. That’s a blatant lie based on a twisted and incorrect translation. She said she thought her lawyers did a good job of trying to defend her against a stacked court.

Amanda Knox has not been proven guilty by any evidence that would stand up in a fair trial.

It is clear to anyone who looks objectively at both sides of the argument that she is an innocent victim of perverted justice.
Take a look at the link at the top of the article.

Amanda Knox Guilty?

Of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Of being a U.S. citizen in Italy.
Of being young and naïve.
Oh yeah, and she did smoke a little marijuana too. But that hardly deserves a lengthy prison sentence....

Amanda Knox is clearly

Amanda Knox is clearly guilty.

Even the judges who look at her case prior to Knox going to trial, all of them felt that Amanda KNox had acase to answer.

A drop in the bucket

A giant search engine should analyze the millions of blog comments written about Amanda over the past 2 1/2 years. For every comment in which the writer disparaged Amanda by referring to promiscuity or sex partners, or called her a whore, a slut, a skank, etc., Amanda should receive one dollar. She could pay all her bills and still have another million left over.

Sandy wrote: "The money Amanda Knox was rewarded should go to the victims family..."

That's where it's going.

Ted Bundy

Ted Bundy thought he was innocent also? There are no commentators who thought Ted Bundy was innocent. Not one.

The comparison to Ted Bundy is interesting. In both cases bad police work led to murders which could have been prevented.

Some of Bundy's killings of course occurred in the Seattle area. Early on police had a composite sketch that looked exactly like him and they were contacted by people who saw the similarity. Later on he escaped from jail and went on to kill.

In the Meredith Kercher murder Rudy Guede was caught having broken into a school in Milan only four days prior to the crime. He was armed with a knife and was in possession of property stolen from a law office in Perugia a couple of weeks earlier. They thus knew of his participation in two separate breaking and entering incidents. Police simply put him back on a train to Perugia. Easier to make it somebody else's problem. Because the Italian police did not take Rudy Guede out of circulation on 27-Oct-07 he had the opportunity to kill Meredith Kercher four days later.

Recently an Italian judge has reduced Rudy Guede's sentence by 14 years. The Judge's reasoning was that Rudy had apologized for not doing enough to save Meredith. What nerve! Because of this incompetent Italian Judge's decision to allow Rudy back on to the streets in his mid 30's, there is a very real chance that he will kill again.

It's not about who's system is better. The US has flaws but we are better at recognizing them and correcting the problem than are the Italians.

Did Guede Get A Deal For His Accusations Against Knox?

It strikes me as a strange coincidence that the judge was so struck by Guede's apology for leaving Meredith alone to die (but not an apology for killing her) that he felt moved to reduce Guede's sentence by 14 years. It is not believable that Guede got a 14 year reduction for a half-hearted apology. Who ever heard of something like that happening for real. It looks more like the prosecutors cut a deal with Guede. Guede may have been asked to implicate Amanda Knox in the crime by changing his story to state at his appeal that she was there that night. In exchange for that plum for Mignini, Guede gets a 14 year reduction. My bet is that is the REAL reason for the 14 year reduction in sentence. Such shady deals also happen in the US.

Doesn't matter if she is guilty of murder or not

At the time the information was leaked and printed Amanda was only *ACCUSED* of murder. No trial had yet been conducted.

Once she is convicted, she still has rights and those who printed her private writings had zero right to profit.

Nail them to the wall. If the right thing is to give the money to the Kercher family or Lumumba, so be it though I personally think the conviction was joke and they should be acquitted at appeal.

Rudy got his sentence reduced at appeal because he "apologized" to the family and the others didn't. Again, even when Rudy's appeal was being heard, Amanda and Raf were only *ACCUSE*. Why apologize for murdering someone while maintaining your innocence. That's crazy!

Fantastic news! Now Amanda

Fantastic news! Now Amanda can start to pay the fines and damages imposed by the court. I think she owes Meredith Kercher's family around $2m which will take more than one or two comedy nights to clear. I do get the impression from the story above that Mr Mellas believes the money will come to him and his family rather than Amanda. He's going to get a very nasty shock when the cheque by-passes Seattle and heads straight to Coulsden.

Could someone provide a

Could someone provide a coherent explanation backed up by verifiable independent facts why the police and judiciary would go to extraordinary lengths to framing Raffaele (Italian Citizen) and Amanda (American Citizen) of the murder of Meredith?

If this case is about hatred of “America” why would the Italian authorities also convict an Italian, their respective sentences are only different by 1 year?

I think it more accurate to state the evidence such as it is disputed rather than there isn’t any.

"No credible evidence

"No credible evidence links

"No credible evidence links Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito to the murder of Meredith Kercher. There is not one fingerprint, not one footprint, not one shoe print, not one hair, not one fiber, no sweat, no saliva, no blood, and no DNA of any kind that puts Amanda or Raffaele in the room at the time of the murder. Why? Because they were NOT there."

What about Amanda Knox's room?

There was no fingerprints of Amanda Knox in her own room.

Does that mean Amanda Knox did not stay at that house, or possibly was not even in Italy?

It means that the only person who had a motive to clean up the crime scene did exactly that.

The two Italian girls were out of Town, Meredith had been killed by Amanda Knox and Solecito and Guede had no motive to clean up Amanda Knox's room to the point that the forensics could not even find a single finger print of the murderess in her own room where she stayed for weeks/month.

She is guilty beyond any doubt whatsoever.


The police didn't go into Amanda's room to collect fingerprints, Eddy. They collected fingerprints selectively from the areas where the crime took place. They felt there was no need to collect fingerprints in Amanda's room, obviously, because she used it every day.

There was no clean-up. That is a myth.


Curious writes: "Could someone provide a coherent explanation backed up by verifiable independent facts why the police and judiciary would go to extraordinary lengths to frame..."

This is not a simple question. My best guess is that it was the perfect storm. It probably starts with a combination of corrupt and incompetent civil servants who saw their pride on the line.

I also wonder if there wasn't what might be called a "beauty myth backlash" in play. This alludes to the book of the same name by Naomi Wolf that talks of the unfair advantages afforded by society to the best looking women. There are those who have a deep seated resentment this and it may have worked against Amanda.

There may also have been deep down objections to the "blame the black guy defense."

The question is not a simple one. Perhaps it would help to look at the Duke Lacrosse case and the Wenatchee hysteria where the underlying reasons for the judicial mistakes were never fully understood either.

No Fingerprints?


She isn't guilty "beyond any doubt whatsoever" because they couldn't find her fingerprints in her room. Get real.

The evidence against Rudy Guede is massive and overwhelming. It shows that he murdered Meredith Kercher and that he acted alone.

Coherent explanation

Curious, the police and judiciary did not go to extraordinary lengths. It may have started out as business as usual, then the ball started rolling and they all got caught up in it. The explanation is not necessarily coherent -- it is intertwined with a whole bunch of human frailty, weakness and error.

Here is a report from today's Seattle Times about a different but similar case, demonstrating how these things can happen, and how long they take to be rectified:

"...[CSI] Kofoed's work came into question after his 2006 investigation into the slaying of a rural Cass County couple, Wayne and Sharmon Stock. Detectives zeroed in on the couple's nephew and his cousin but found no physical evidence tying the two to the killings. Detectives managed to get a confession from the nephew, but he retracted it the next day. A day later, Kofoed said he found a drop of one victim's blood in a car linked to the suspects. The car had been combed over by another forensic investigator.

The suspects were charged with murder and jailed for several months before being released because prosecutors determined the confession was unreliable and didn't fit the facts of the case...."

I believe Amanda Knox

I believe Amanda Knox pointed at an innocent man in order to get him convicted for the crime Amanda Knox committed.

Edda Mellas knew about Lumumba not been guilty from the point that Amanda Knox told her. The conversation was bugged and taped.

Edda Mellas chose not to inform the police that Amanda Knox framed Patrick Lumumba.

What was Edda Mellas' motivation for knowingly leaving an innocent men in jail for the murder her daughter Amanda Knox was convicted of committing.

The evidence against Amanda Knox was so compelling that every judge and juror felt strongly about Amanda Knox' guilt.

Is Amanada Knox registered

Is Amanada Knox registered as sex offender?
My understanding is that she was found guilty on all counts by a proper court in a fair trial.

If she is not yet registered as a sex offender, does anyone know how the process is, when will she be registered as sex offender?

Response to "I believe Amanda Knox"

Guest #36, you are mistaken in your beliefs.

The police asked Amanda who had texted her the night of the murder, telling her that the person who texted her was the murderer. She believed the police and agreed it was possible Lumumba could have committed the crime.

Once she had retracted and withdrawn her "confession" the day after giving it, the police could have deduced that Amanda was not a reliable source of information about what happened at the murder scene, because she said she wasn't there. They chose to keep Lumumba in custody regardless of there being no evidence against him. In fact, they kept him in prison three or four days after his alibi was validated, and two days after they had apprehended Guede, against whom there was plentiful evidence.

Amanda may have told her mother that her recollection of seeing Patrick at the crime scene was not accurate, because she had not been at the crime scene. Neither Amanda nor her mother knew, however, that Patrick was innocent, because the cops had told them he was guilty and the cops kept him imprisoned.

Amanda was conferring with her lawyers from the time her mother arrived in Perugia. It was the lawyers' responsibility to communicate with the police on behalf of their client. I have no doubt they did, since Amanda's defense lay in her denial of having witnessed or participated in the crime.

"The police asked Amanda who

"The police asked Amanda who had texted her the night of the murder, telling her that the person who texted her was the murderer. She believed the police and agreed it was possible Lumumba could have committed the crime."

This is completely untrue!

The police did never tell Amanda Knox that they believed Patrick Lumumba was the murderer.

Amanda voluntarily advanced his name.

Ask yourself, why would a person who later became a convicted murderer, advance the name of an innocent person in a murder investigation?

Lumumba had an alibi and her attempt at framing an innocent man for the murder failed.

I am sorry "Mary H" but it is just not true that police suggested to Amanda Knox that Patrick Lumumba was the murderer.

"Amanda was conferring with

"Amanda was conferring with her lawyers from the time her mother arrived in Perugia. It was the lawyers' responsibility to communicate with the police on behalf of their client. I have no doubt they did, since Amanda's defense lay in her denial of having witnessed or participated in the crime."

The desire to deny any personal responsibility defies commonsense.

Incorrect: The police


The police officer stated that the scene looked like a war zone and Amanda was the only one who had being charged over the incidence.

Some people make it out to be that it would appear that Amanda Knox was peripheral to the riot.

The matter went to court and she was fined.

No one else was fined.

It is not fair that Amanda

It is not fair that Amanda Knox was awarded a payout when she herself published violent sex stories on the Internet.

Then she framed an innocent man who gave her a job in Perugia.
The result is that his business eased trading.

He got a very small payout only 7000 dollars or so and he was completely innocent.

amanda innocent

If you think Amanda Knox is guilty, then why? Because you heard someone say so? Because you accepted without questioning some myth about a cartwheel or accusing an innocent man? (Not true.) If the information you heard is wrong, then so is your conclusion. If she was your daughter/sister/friend, wouldn’t you want people to listen to both sides of the story before deciding?
injustice in perugia . org

Sam or what ever, You are

Sam or what ever,

You are mistaken.

Amanda Knox killed Meredith Kercher and that is the reason why she was convicted after enjoying a fair trial.

Innocent people don't have their DNA on the murder weapon.

You will not find my DNA on the murder weapon.

Unlike Amanda Knox, I was not there! Hence, I could not have done it.

The scientific evidence proved conclusively that Amanda Knox was there.

The PR money would be better spend on the two appeals Amanda Knox is going to lose.

Knox is the killer

The only people who think

The only people who think they are innocent seem to be relatives and former sex partners.

Around here no one thinks they are innocent.

Amanda and Raffaele are innocent.

No American— no human being of any nationality— should be wrongfully convicted. Amanda and Raffaele are innocent. Many articles were printed over the past two years that are filled with misinformation. Look past false prejudices. Please take time to look at the actual facts of this case. Meredith Kercher and her family deserve justice. Imprisoning two innocent people brings neither peace nor justice for Meredith.

Please check out the facts in this story: 'Amanda Knox, Winner of Media Lottery'.

Response to Ron L Siva

Surely no human being should be brutally murdered for one apparent reason, no American either!

I did not read any facts on the web site you listed just a series of unsubstantiated comments about the media and prosecution.

So have you spoken to Meredith Kerchers family?

"Amanda Knox and Raffaele

"Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are innocent. They are victims of an unfair prosecution and court system. All the lies and false evidence have been refuted. Amanda’s only regret can be that she was wrongfully convicted. Don't let an innocent rot in jail. This could have happened to any young student visiting Italy. Please visit this site for the real facts: injustice in perugia org"

They are as guilty as can be!
Did you not read the judge's report?

I followed the trial from the beginning and Knox did receive a fair trial.

Her problem is that she is guilty, not that she did not receive a fair trial.

She was framed well thats

She was framed well thats how it looks and only god knows here whats happened so if she goes free on appeal, well then that is the man above telling us that she did
not do it and if she did do it well she will stay in jail.