Amanda Knox

2016 "Either I'm a psychopath in sheep's clothing, or I am you."
6.9| 1h32m| en| More Info
Released: 10 September 2016 Released
Producted By: Plus Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: https://www.netflix.com/sg/title/80081155
Synopsis

This gripping, atmospheric documentary recounts the infamous trial, conviction and eventual acquittal of Seattle native Amanda Knox for the 2007 murder of a British exchange student in Italy.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Plus Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

GamerTab That was an excellent one.
SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped
Lachlan Coulson This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.
Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.
marc-949-512988 4 million dollar book deal...good promotion...make money for slicing someones throat...it's a west coast thing OJ...el libbo netflix' obsession with Trump has to be in there as well...pathetic....she's not married? go figure..good night hubby, don't worry about this knife here...now go to sleep mofugga..
lesgrossman-94844 This white trash BS PR fake "documentary" is not worth watching for even one second. The reason why is because it's now legally certain that Knox and Raffaele were both "there" at the crime scene at the time of the murder, and proved that Guede assaulted Meredith and helped kill her with accomplices, are we now to assume that the lying Knox and Sollecito were not the accomplices, but that one or two other criminals were also on the premises at the same time and were helping Guede kill Meredith? That stretches credibility. This ruling is unfathomable. I can only imagine the reaction of the Kerchers and of their Attorney Maresca. This ruling defies common sense. It seems to imply that Rudy committed the killing but that Knox and Raffaele were too afraid of him to tell the police, and instead helped him hide the crime at the risk of themselves being prosecuted for it? That fear alone was the inducement to run an eight year long charade of lies and dissimulation, not to mention years of prison? When Raf's father is connected to important people and when Knox's family could afford a PR campaign to reach television? Yet Knox is so afraid of Guede counter-accusing her and of Guede being believed, that she has denied everything and even covered for Guede? Preposterous. Does Cassation think that Rudy set up the false burglary for his cover story, but then Knox and Raf lied to police about it for him? If Knox and Raf weren't complicit in the crime but were there during its commission, what were they doing during the murder? Playing guitar and smoking weed? Knox and Raf overlooked Guede tracking blood around the cottage, heard Meredith's scream but did nothing to aid her, too afraid to aid her and later ashamed of their cowardice? Were they threatened by Guede with the same fate? Or if they were hurting her along with Guede so that she did scream, they are still innocent? And why would Knox be washing Meredith's blood off her hands into the bidet and washing up blood from the murder scene rather than call police and denounce Guede as the killer? Knox could have begged for police protection She had the USA to flee to. Raf's father could protect him, his sister was Carabinieri! No. If Knox was washing Meredith's blood off her hands, Knox was hiding her part in the murder. This ruling contradicts its own reasoning. It has proved the greater yet says it can't prove the lesser. Please watch a much better film entitled "New Amanda Knox Documentary" on YouTube.
Corpus_Vile Amanda Knox, a Netflix documentary directed and exec produced by two ardent Knox supporters, Rod Blackhurst and Stephen Robert Morse, who have been campaigning for Knox since 2011, (which included harassing journalists who actually covered the case far more thoroughly than they did), opens with lingering almost gleeful close ups of the bloody crime scene and goes downhill from there. The documentary begins by trying to shape a false narrative of handy villains who all seemingly came together like the stars aligning to make innocent Amanda look so screamingly, beyond a reasonable doubtingly guilty. (and not the overwhelming behavioral circumstantial and hard physical evidence against her which the documentary brushes over in a cursory manner.) Villains first were the cops then prosecutor, and now according to Netflix,the tabloid media,anyone except Amanda Knox herself.The film makes out that Rudy Guede, the sole person convicted for Meredith Kercher's murder, left his DNA all over the crime scene, with funky arrows pointing here there and everywhere. The problem is this simply isn't true. Rudy Guede was convicted on less DNA evidence (five samples) than Amanda Knox(six samples).As for the featured so-called "independent DNA experts", Conti and Vechiotti, well, they were found "Objectively biased" and "Objectively deceptive" in court by the Nencini appellate. Specifically because Vechiotti falsely claimed that the technology did not exist to re- test the murder weapon. It did indeed exist in 2011. Vechiotti was also filmed by the BBC shaking hands with Sollecito's father in court no less, hardly appropriate behavior for so-called independents and neither's expertise is in forensic DNA anyway (Vechiotti is a pathologist & Conti's expertise is um, "computer medical science" whatever that's supposed to be). You'll notice in this review how I've rarely mentioned the victim Meredith Kercher. That's because she barely gets a mention in this sad excuse for a documentary. Not even an RIP. Meredith, the victim is relegated to a mere footnote and indeed a foot under a duvet. Reprehensibly, the doc also displays close up autopsy photos of Meredith. Yet the autopsy photos were never made public. Considering only the Kerchers (who didn't take part in Netflix's PR makeover) and the defence- and by extension the two former defendants- had access to such material, this begs the very pertinent question- who provided two ardent Knox supporters with autopsy photos of the murder victim? The filmmakers should be ashamed of themselves for this alone, utterly contemptible behavior which comes across as needlessly and despicably taunting the victim's family or at the very least exploiting their daughter and sister purely for lurid effect to make their documentary more "gritty".So what's the verdict on Amanda Knox the documentary? Well it's a terrible, false and ultimately immoral exercise in innocence fraud and here are some facts that Knox's PR infomercial left out:1 The Supreme Court's acquitting report states that Amanda Knox was present during Meredith's murder and may even have possibly washed the victim's blood from her hands afterwards but it STILL can't be proved that she did it. (which begs more questions, namely why didn't innocent Amanda call the cops for her friend and why wasn't she done for accessory at least?) The same Supreme Court do not make the same allowance for the black guy though, had he had have washed the victim's blood from his shoes for example. The court also states that there's "strong suspicion" that Sollecito was there.2 The Supreme Court's acquitting report states that the burglary was staged.3 The Supreme Court's acquitting report states that Meredith was murdered by three attackers and that Guede had two accomplices. (And you really don't have to be Stephen Hawking to figure out who these two accomplices were, when you view the evidence in its totality)4 The Supreme Court's acquitting nonetheless finalizes Knox's calumny/ criminal slander conviction, which she got for falsely accusing her innocent employer of rape and murder, leaving him in prison for two weeks and never retracting her statement, despite false reports that she did, meaning that Knox's status is still that of a convicted criminal felon.5 In finalizing Amanda Knox's calumny/criminal slander conviction, The Supreme Court's acquitting report states that Knox blamed her boss to protect Rudy Guede as she was afraid that Guede could "retaliate by incriminating" her, which of course begs some more very interesting and pertinent questions, such as how could Guede incriminate innocent Amanda to begin with?6 The Supreme Court's acquitting report does NOT exonerate Knox, it acquits her due to "insufficient evidence",like Casey Anthony, OJ Simpson and that nice man Robert Durst. RIP Meredith Kercher, who along with her stoic dignified family (who have been subjected to absolutely abhorrent abuse and attacks by Knox's supporters online) and Knox's employer Patrick Lumumba are the only victims here. May the truth shine in your case one day and the facts and truth come to light. Neither Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito are fooling anyone familiar with Ms Kercher's case & facts are available at the murder of Meredith Kercher .com and in the Nencini and Massei reports.
liammccollum-774-23631 There was no biological evidence linking Amanda Knox to the crime scene or murder weapon. When an independent forensic expert investigated the crime, he found that the original forensic investigation was deeply flawed, and they failed to properly preserve the crime scene or keep it sterile i.e. avoid cross contamination with DNA samples, hence why Sollecito's DNA was found at the crime scene. He stated that he tried to force the door open, yet forensic officers on the scene didn't change gloves after opening the door, carrying over his DNA via secondary transfer. The main evidence against her and Sollecito were the confessions and false accusations. These were clearly coerced through abusive police tactics. The police just wanted a signed confession and did not care as to whether or not they were correct. After spending maybe 12 hours in a confession room, people are more likely to say what the police want to hear in order to get out. Your mind becomes warped and you don't see full reason. This is what happened to both Sollecito and Knox. Knox falsely accusing somebody was probably done in order to get the police off her tail, but this was out of desperation in the midst of deeply flawed and archaic police tactics. Sollecito also maintains that he and Amanda were together that night, even though the police managed to dress him down into signing something he knew was not the truth. It is very easy for police to draw a false confession if they are not bound by any rules. I'm just disappointed the documentary didn't go into further depth on that. What really needs emphasised is the real tragedy or Meredith Kercher, and the uncertainty of her killer being caught. It could well be the man who is still in prison, however without another thorough and properly done investigation, there is an aura of uncertainty clouding the whole thing. Her family are also understandably upset, but sometimes you have to put aside your feelings and look at the case with cold, hard logic. Amanda Knox did not murder Meredith Kercher.