Errors in Lifetime’s “Murder on Trial in Italy” about Amanda Knox

The movie provides a confused look at the case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. The flashbacks are difficult to connect. For an overview of the evidence in the case, visit the evidence page on The Murder of Meredith Kercher Wiki.

  1. Knox was NOT “tried twice” for the same crime; her original conviction from 2009 was affirmed in 2014 by the Florence appeals court. 
  2. Most of the dialogue is fictional.
  3. The relationship scenes with Meredith are not based on available evidence. Meredith did not like confrontation, despite what the film shows on the stairs. The only accurate scene is that Meredith did attend the classical concert with Knox and left half way through.
  4. Postal police did not show up looking for meredith; they were looking for Filomena, as they had that information from the cell phone. Meredith’s british phone was foreign-registered, and they did not have that registration data.
  5. Postal police did not drive right up to the house and stop; they took some time finding the house, as it was off a long driveway to a main road intersection.
  6. The cottage was not connected to other structures, as shown. Thus you don’t get a view of the 2nd floor window that was broken.  The Cottage
  7. Knox wouldn’t have to “go upstairs” after entering the house; the driveway entrance leads directly to their apartment. Knox also did not notice the broken window when she first came home as Hayden says; Knox showered, left, then came back with Sollectio before the broken window was allegedly found.
  8. The movie implies Knox didn’t take a shower but “ran back” to sollecito’s. Knox actually did take a shower in her bathroom, according to her testimony and stories.
  9. The layout of the cottage is wrong; it shows porch doors off the kitchen next to the entryway; in reality this is the location of the bathroom that Guede’s excrement was found in.
  10. The drops of blood were on the sink, bidet, light switch, and door frame.
  11. Knox did not “run back to” Sollecito’s after seeing this evidence; she took a shower, returned with a mop to Sollecitos, mopped the floor in Sollecito’s kitchen, and may have had breakfast with him before telling him what she saw at her apartment.
  12. Filomena’s bedroom was actually off the kitchen; not across the hall from Knox’s as shown in the movie.
  13. Knox did not come down to meredith’s door after it was broken; she never saw into the room. Knox and Sollecito remained in the kitchen.
  14. Meredith wasn’t in town when Knox moved in; she had gone back to visit her parents.
  15. Knox did not go to the chocolate festival with Sollecito; the festival occurred prior to Knox meeting Sollecito.
  16. Knox and Sollecito did not go on a picnic (as also mentioned by Nikki Battiste) .
  17. The film does not mention the other guys Knox hooked up with and/or brought home prior to Sollecito; thus Meredith’s comment “you’ve already got a boyfriend” would never have been said about Sollecito.
  18. The luminol prints were found when the police returned in December; not the same day the murder was discovered.
  19. Knox and Sollecito did not wander around the city after the murder was discovered; they were taken to the station.
  20. Knox and sollecito were not at the memorial for Meredith; they had been getting pizza. The memorial happened on the evening of the 5th.
  21. Knox was introduced to Patrick (and the job) by someone else.
  22. The bloody footprint on the bathmat wasn’t from a shoe, as shown; it was a bare foot print.
  23. The luminol was not used before Knox and Sollecito’s arrest; it was used several weeks after.
  24. The movie claims the luminol prints were all of the same smaller size; in reality one of the prints was measured and found to match Sollecito’s footprint measurements. 
  25. Nikki Battiste claims Knox didn’t mention at the police station that Meredith’s throat was cut; according to her trial testimony, Knox admitted she referenced Meredith’s throat being cut.
  26. Qunitavalle did not provide his statement until some time after Knox and Sollecito’s arrest. He was discovered by a reporter, who encouraged him to come forward.
  27. Qunitavalle did not testify Knox bought bleach; only that she headed to that section of the store.
  28. Sollecito and Knox were not walking down the street when called in on the 5th; they were having pizza, missing the memorial. Sollecito delayed going in to the station so they could finish dinner.
  29. The investigators did not “manhandle” Sollecito during his questioning.
  30. The reason Sollecito gives for retracting his support for Knox’s alibi is that police didn’t “give him a calendar” to know what day they were talking about (per “Honor Bound”).
  31. Knox was not by herself in the hallway when doing yoga/gymnastics; she was with a policeman.
  32. Knox was taken into the questioning room because she was providing the policeman with a list of names; not because Sollecito had retracted his support for her alibi as the movie shows.
  33. The police did not know about the text FROM patrick, as Knox had already deleted the incoming message. Her phone only contained an outgoing text TO patrick, but her sent folder did not have the name associated with the number. Police were questioning her about the text she sent, not the one she received.
  34. Mignini was not present during Knox’s initial questioning and statement. According to an interview with him, it was Knox that wanted to continue talking after her 1:45am statement, leading to the 5:45am statement.
  35. Her questioning on the night of the 5th was not for “13 hours” as Hayden says; Knox started talking to police at about 11:30pm and blamed patrick within about 2 hours, then signed her first statement at 1:45am. After that there was a break; she again made the statement leading up to her 5:45 am statement.
  36. Knox wasn’t immediately told she was under arrest after blaming Patrick; she didn’t understand this until later that day.
  37. It was not a finger print that led to identifying Guede; it was a partial palm print.
  38. The police did not wait to tell Knox the first HIV test may have been a false positive; Knox was told immediately the HIV test result could have been a false positive.
  39. The police did not request a list of Knox’s sex partners after the HIV test; she decided to make a list and write it in her diary after a prison official said she may want to think about who she caught it from.
  40. Guede did not say “Knox wasn’t involved;” he gave an alibi that he met Meredith for a date, and when he showed up for the date Knox wasn’t home. His alibi claimed he was in the bathroom when Meredith was murdered.
  41. Guede didn’t change this story substantially.
  42. Guede’s DNA was not “all over the bedroom;” the instances of Guede’s DNA were only the specific ones discussed- bra, sleeve of sweatshirt, on her body, and on the purse. 
  43. The blood on the bathroom tap was not mixed; the tap blood contained only Knox’s DNA. This blood was not on the tap on the previous day, per Knox’s own testimony. 
  44. Meredith’s DNA was on a scratch in the blade on the knife taken from Sollecitos, not the tip.
  45. The prison doctor did not ask Knox to make a list of her sex partners. 
  46. Knox did not wave and smile to the press; she waved and smiled to her family when she entered court and laughed with her lawyers.
  47. It wasn’t Deanna who said “she only lived there for two months; she barely knew you.” This is a statement Knox made:

    But in the end, I only knew her for one month, and more than anything, I am trying to think how to go forward with my own life. (Knox, Translated Trial Testimony, The Murder of Meredith Kercher Wiki)

  48. The dialog about the first phone call Knox makes to her mother on the 2nd is not what is recorded in the court testimony, though Knox does testify she didn’t remember this first phone call.
  49. Knox was not asked about Quintavalle’s testimony. She did not say anything about being in his story previously.
  50. The closing statement by Mignini is fictional and contains several errors that he wouldn’t have made.

First impressions of the Lifetime movie

A good portion of twitterers were as confused by the case as by lifetime’s flashback/jumpback presentation of it.. you never really knew when a jumpback was coming..

Some of the sequencing was off  from the reality of when evidence was found. The movie made it look like AK was more guilty in the early part, and her easy-going nonchalant behavior seemed to support that, but then the forensic and other evidence takes back seat as the behavior and alibis are fleshed out.  The forensic evidence of the bra & knife DNA have a brief reappearance being attacked by the defense in the trial. And AK’s story doesn’t come across as contradictory as much as its stated by Mignini that she’s lying.

But with having two dramatizations of the events the night of the 1st:

  • Guede’s story (him running into RS), and
  • Mignini’s courtroom explanation backed by blurred-up flashes of RS & AK attacking meredith;

and with no clear telling of evidence/etc that points to one sequence being more credible then the other, it does seem to offer it up Knox’s guilt as an open question.
Drugs didn’t really have much of a presence in this telling of the case, just in the dramatization of scenes and ak being embarrassed having to reveal during the police questioning that she and raf smoked.

the after-show is talking about the headlines, but showing english & us newspapers. I constantly find that there are slights against the italian press that should properly be attributed to the US and UK press- more appropriately the tabloids.

Bait & Switch: FoxNews’ misleading lead-in

At about 3:15pm EST on Monday, Fox News tweeted the misleading headline that Hayden Panettierre believes Amanda Knox was innocent. See the tweet:

However, following the link to the article reveals the following two quote from Hayden within that article, flatly contradicting Fox News’ headline:

I can’t say I have an opinion and that’s why the story is so interesting – the facts and what people said and the changes in stories.”

Fox’s headline also came up as a top listing in a Google news search for Hayden Panettiere:

Fox News may be misinterpreting other comments from Hayden included in that same article, where she said she played Amanda as 

Innocent in who she was.

Knox’s lawyers gave Lifetime seven days to respond

Knox’s lawyer Dalla Vedova as quoted in the UK Daily Mail:

‘In Italy a film or documentary cannot be made until the court has reached a definitive decision and we still have the appeal and the Supreme Court to come.

‘I have given Lifetime a week to get back to me. If after February 10th the film and trailer are still visible then we will begin legal proceedings because there is no way an appeal can be heard with this going on.’

Two sides to every story: Knox stepfather’s response to Lifetime film

In October 2010, Mellas is quoted by the West Seattle Herald as stating they had no intention of blocking the film

“Our lawyers have expressed that it is not the appropriate time to release a film, before the appeals process, but neither our lawyers nor we have said we would block the film,” said Mellas. “We have heard that the film’s producer said the film would not contain a verdict of innocence or guilt, and that it would allow the viewer to make his own decision.

“I have no criticism about making this film,” Mellas added. “Maybe they’re coming out with a story that will be good for Amanda. Lifetime has done a lot of good stories, with a platform of advocacy for wrongly accused prisoners. But I have never spoken with any of these people.”

Their position appears to have changed, now that they have seen the trailer. The UK’s Sun reports today that Amanda Knox’s stepfather wanted Hayden to meet with Amanda, and that they’ve formalized a complaint against Lifetime:

Continue reading