Thu 10 Dec 2009
Amanda Knox: What the Psychologists Think
Posted by Miss Represented under Meredith Kercher Case
[67] Comments
Following the conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for their part in the sexual assault and murder of Meredith Kercher, several important and influential psychologists have commented on the case.
All three of the experts come from different backgrounds related to psychology. One is a psychotherapist/analytical psychologist; one is a criminologist and the other a very influential investigative psychologist. All three differ widely in their individual opinion on Knox and the case.
Dr Coline Covington
Dr Coline Covington is a highly experienced psychotherapist who has studied at Princeton University, Cambridge University and the London School of Economics. She was the former Editor of the Journal of Analytical Psychology as well as the former Chair of the British Psychoanalytic Council. She has also worked for the Metropolitan Police.
Dr Covington has written an intelligent and brave piece on Amanda Knox in the First Post. Click the picture above for the link. In the article she describes Amanda’s behaviour in court:
“Knox’s narcissistic pleasure at catching the eye of the media and her apparent nonchalant attitude during most of the proceedings show the signs of a psychopathic personality. Her behaviour is hauntingly reminiscent of Eichmann’s arrogance during his trial for war crimes in Jerusalem in 1961 and most recently of Karadzic’s preening before the International Criminal Court at the Hague.
The psychopath is someone who has no concern or empathy for others, no awareness of right and wrong, and who takes extreme pleasure in having power over others. The psychopath has no moral conscience and therefore does not experience guilt or remorse.
Most psychopaths are highly skilled at fooling those around them that they are normal by imitating the emotions that are expected of them in different circumstances. They are consummate at charming people and convincing them they are in the right. It is only when they reveal a discrepancy in their emotional response that they let slip that something may be wrong with them.
The psychopath is the conman, or in the case of Amanda Knox, the con-woman par excellence. Her nickname ‘Foxy Knoxy’, given to her as a young girl for her skills at football, takes on a new meaning.
Whether or not Knox, who is appealing her verdict, is ultimately found guilty, her chilling performance remains an indictment against her. Her family’s disbelief in the outcome of the trial can only be double-edged”
This is not the first time a suggestion has been made that Amanda has displayed behaviour which is often associated with psychopathy. It is a view that I have also supported in the past.
Professor David Wilson
Professor David Wilson is one of Britain’s leading criminologists and is the author of ‘A History of British Serial Killing, 1888-2008’. He writes for the Guardian and is a regular feature on the BBC. He is also Professor of Criminology at the Centre for Criminal Justice Policy and Research at the University of Central England.
Professor Wilson expressed the following comments in an editorial in the Express on Monday:
“This is a woman clearly involved with an older, more experienced boyfriend who introduced her to a lifestyle that allowed her to bend the rules of morality that had guided her in the US,” he says.
“She was rather like a gap-year Rose West. I believe she was naive and got caught up in a very different world, which she embraced enthusiastically.”
So can he pinpoint the real woman behind the masks? He insists she should be judged on evidence alone.
“In truth she’s neither angel nor she-devil but a complex human being who sits somewhere in between. I do believe, though, that we are going to hear a lot more from Amanda Knox.”
Professor David Canter
Professor David Canter is an internationally renowned applied social researcher and world-leading crime psychologist, but is perhaps most widely known as one of the pioneers of ‘Offender Profiling’ being the first to introduce its use to the UK.
In comments made in The Times, he stated:
“Most bizarre murders, particularly those with a lot of sexual activity and if there are drugs involved, come out of a lifestyle that’s pretty dysfunctional in which there’s some build-up. So it’s unusual for apparently capable and functioning youngsters to get caught up in all this.”
This particular quote is already being used by a number of journalists and bloggers in support of Amanda’s innocence. I think it’s important to understand Professor Canter’s actual comment before making assumptions about what his particular opinions about the conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are.
Professor Canter is diplomatically stating that Amanda’s profile in a young killer is unusual, which nobody can deny, he is not saying that Amanda Knox couldn’t have committed this crime simply because she doesn’t fit the typical profile.
Indeed a comment made by forensic psychiatrist Dr Michael Welner on this blog a few months ago illustrates the point perfectly:
“All of my academic background and experience in this area of tragedy reinforces my impression that anyone is capable of anything, so long as they have the physical wherewithal. So many times have I seen cases that “never happened before.” And then I saw them happen.”
Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito are now convicted killers. The jury had access to all available information. Based on what I have seen, it was damning.
Despite the FOA’s / DCJ’s well-scripted protest, that book is now closed; it has been analyzed ad nauseum, and we await the publication of the court report with interest.
Getting back to the actual topic of Miss Represented’s post …
While Dr. Covington’s analysis of Knox’s narcissistic, callous personality is on the mark, it would be also be very interesting to better understand the Sollecito character. One of the mysteries of this case is the degree of influence that Knox exercised on Sollecito – and vice versa. (Not to ignore Mr. Guede, obviously.) Who was the dominant force? It’s not obvious IMHO. As posted above, I’m inclined to view them as two chemicals that remain harmless until mixed – at which time they become toxic.
From my perspective there remain several unanswered questions. Was it a kind of Halloween joke gone wild? Was the murder premeditated by one or all of the killers? To what degree did the victim’s beauty and popularity generate resentment in Knox – and lust in others? Was it a kind of “thrill kill”, as some observers have speculated?
My inclination had been to speculate that Knox was unwittingly caught up in something she did not understand – something out of character. This view would make Sollecito the prime mover. Therefore the best action would be for her family to acknowledge the sad reality and move towards rehabilitation. Surely the Italian appeals court would be inclined towards leniency if she told the truth and could display real self consciousness?
However, after reading Dr. Convington’s analysis of Knox and reviewing the pattern of callous, aloof behavior that followed the murder and continued during the trial, I now have my doubts.
Norbert
to dcj
well I remember the verdict that was read quite differently: AK and RS DNA was found on the knife and this knife was found in RS flat. How do you explain the purchase of bleach early in the morning and how did RS DNA landed on poor Meredith’s bra? And while doubting AK DNA on the knife, and how it got there, why was her DNA not found anywhere in Meredith’s room?
anyway, I think the facts are clear to those who want to see them. What the psychologists said also convinced me.
I’d be interested to see analysis of RS as well. Miss R, you now have your next blog topic, if you’re so inclined!!
From many accounts, he’s a good guy, someone you wouldn’t expect to be involved in this kind of brutal crime. He’s been described as a nice guy, never violent, a dedicated student and quite sensitive toward others. He doesn’t exactly fit the profile, does he?
Considering that he only had one other girlfriend and seemed much more introverted, I’d say AK might have been the more dominant one in the relationship.
One thing for sure: he couldn’t get his story straight at all and that largely accounts for his imprisonment/conviction. I definitely see something wrong there. If ever there was a time to get your story straight, it’s in this situation. The claim is that he was too confused because of the drugs that night… but we don’t really know if that can be believed or not. Is it possible? Why the conflicting stories from Raffaele?
So, yes, I get why many point to this as indication of guilt. I’m not ready to pronounce that yet because the other evidence doesn’t match up so obviously. I think this is a big area for focus in the appeals. The defence for AK and RS will need to better address this point.
The challenge in all of this is that we’re constructing characters based on a view that they are, 100 percent, murderers. That’s not something I could participate in so comfortably because I’m not confident the jurors and judges got it right. I believe all of these individuals were trying to come to the right outcome… but I just don’t feel comfortable at this stage nodding and saying, “Yep, they got ‘em.”
From a technical standpoint, one might call them “killers” because they have been convicted. However, we know the justice system has unintentionally convicted people not guilty of the crimes to which they were tried. The system isn’t perfect or flawless.
It’s probably more appropriate to say that we’re on to the next chapter vs. the book is closed. As you know, this is going to appeal and then the Italian system allows for another appeal round after that.
Roxane, I guess what’s perplexing is that we find RG’s DNA on some 200 plus articles in Meredith’s room and little to none from AK and RS. The bra strap, as you know, was highly questioned. They found a speck of his DNA on the bra strap, an item that wasn’t picked up for weeks after the murder. Also, the defence presented evidence the forenics investigators were picking up multiple items without changing gloves. And no control tests were done to see if other items might have gotten contaminated.
I guess I just don’t understand how a massive clean up could wipe out all trace of RS and AK from Meredith’s room and her body, but leave Guede’s all over the place. I mean, what kind of advanced technology did RS and AK have to do that? Plus, if there had been a clean up in and around Meredith, wouldn’t this have been readily obvious in the forensic evidence?
Hi dcj,
You wrote the following:
“I guess what’s perplexing is that we find RG’s DNA on some 200 plus articles in Meredith’s room…”
If you want to be taken seriously, I politely suggest that you don’t tell huge whopping lies like the one above.
Rudy Guede’s DNA was found:
1. Inside Meredith. Please note that that this DNA was from epithelial cells, not semen.
2. On the right side of Meredith’s bra.
3. On the left cuff of Meredith’s light blue tracksuit top.
4. Mixed with Meredith’s DNA on the her purse zip.
5. On toilet paper.
Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on:
1. On the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.
2. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the ledge of the basin.
3. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the bidet.
4. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on a box of Q Tip cotton swabs.
5. Mixed with Meredith’s blood in the hallway.
6. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the floor of Filomena’s room.
7. On Meredith’s bra according to Raffaele Sollecito’s forensic expert, Professor Vinci. Apparently, Vincenzo Pascali, Sollecito’s chief forensic consultant, also found Knox’s DNA on Meredith’s bra.
Incidentally, international forensic protocol recommends changing gloves often and NOT every time an object is touched.
The counterpoints to the one you have noted above are the following:
#1 Amanda used the knife for cooking so it’s not unexpected to have her DNA there. That Meredith’s DNA was on the blade is in dispute. Tests indicate the chances that the DNA is Meredith’s is 20 percent. Also, this knife was not conclusively proven to be the murder weapon.
#2, 3, 4 … Amanda and Meredith shared a bathroom. The mixing may be due to co-habitation more than anything else. Also, all of the samples were taken from visible blood stains, so it’s not all too surprising that DNA of AK would be present since they used the same bathroom.
#5, 6 … These were mixed samples of DNA, not blood, and the one in Filomena’s room was weak. Again, this could have been the result of simply living together in the same cottage.
#7 … I wasn’t aware of this evidence… but this again could have been the result of contamination as the bra was swept into a pile of other items in the room and then sat there for a few weeks or more.
Hi dcj,
You wrote:
“Tests indicate the chances that the DNA is Meredith’s is 20 percent.”
This is simply not true. None of the defence experts claimed this at the trial. The fact that you don’t attribute the quote to any forensic expert is very telling.
Dr. Stefanoni testified that the one test she did “reliably” identified the trace on the blade as Meredith’s.
Both Dr. Renato Biondo, the head of the DNA Unit of the scientific police, and the Kerchers’ own DNA expert, Professor Francesca Torricelli, provided independent confirmation that this forensic finding is accurate and reliable.
You can look at the DNA charts on Kermit’s powerpoint presentation.
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/powerpoints_13_we_now_examine_the_compelling_evidence_for/
Amanda Knox’s DNA was mixed with Meredith’s DNA in Filomena’s room. This proves that Amanda Knox tracked Meredith’s blood into the room when she staged the break-in.
It’s rather pathetic to claim that any incriminating DNA evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito must be due to contamination.
I expect you believe that the DNA evidence against Rudy Guede wasn’t contaminated.
Why do you think Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito gave multiple conflicting alibis, lied repeatedly, and are implicated by numerous pieces of forensic evidence?
The answer really isn’t very difficult to work out.
If you are still not sure what the answer is, this sentence from Amanda Knox’s handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007 should help you:
“Everything I have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith’s death, even though it is contrasting, are the best truth that I have been able to think.”
Well, some of what you’re saying is under contention. Specifically, it’s said that no tests were performed to conclude that there was in fact blood in Filomena’s room. The sample taken from the room was DNA mixed with DNA, not DNA mixed with blood.
I agree that the multiple stories and conflicting alibis is troubling. I’ve said that all along.
And yet, the forensics don’t necessarily support the prosecution’s theory. If they do, I haven’t been convinced of that yet.
The note to the police doesn’t really convince me one way or the other.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I think that DCJ has a very good point here. How could Knox and Sollecito have killed Meredith without leaving DNA? Why is Guede’s DNA all over Meredith’s room – and Knox’s / Sollecito’s DNA is not?
Inquiring minds want to know. Did they only touch her with their knives? Were they wearing gloves? Do they not have DNA like normal human beings?
Even more strange: why did investigators found virtually none of Ms. Knox’s DNA elsewhere in the apartment either? Didn’t she live there? Did she wear gloves all the time? Never touch anything?
OK, Investigators did find Knox’s DNA mixed with Meredith’s blood in various partially-cleaned bloody footprints.
But almost nowhere else in the house?
Norbert
Hi Norbet,
You wrote:
“I think that DCJ has a very good point here. How could Knox and Sollecito have killed Meredith without leaving DNA? Why is Guede’s DNA all over Meredith’s room – and Knox’s / Sollecito’s DNA is not?”
According to forensic experts, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito both left their DNA in Meredith’s room.
Rudy Guede’s DNA wasn’t all over Meredith’s room. There were four instances of his DNA in the room.
Evidence that Amanda Knox was in Meredith’s room when Meredith was killed:
1. The double DNA Knife not only places Amanda Knox in Meredith’s room, but also indicates that she inflicted the fatal wound.
2. The woman’s bloody shoeprint on the pillow under Meredith’s body matched Amanda Knox’s foot size, but was incompatible with Meredith’s foot size. This debunks the myth that Rudy Guede acted alone and clearly places Amanda Knox inside Meredith’s room when Meredith was killed.
3. Raffaele Sollecito’s forensic expert, Professor Vinci, claimed that he had found Knox’s DNA on Meredith’s bra. This seems to prove she also handled Meredith’s bra.
Apparently, Vincenzo Pascali, Sollecito’s chief forensic consultant, also found Knox’s DNA on Meredith’s bra
4.Amanda Knox’s reading lamp was found in Meredith’s room. This is further evidence that Amanda Knox was in Meredith’s room on the night of the murder.
5. Amanda Knox’s footprints were set in Meredith’s blood in different parts of the cottage, which clearly indicates that she had stepped in Meredith’s blood in the Meredith’s room and then tracked the blood around the house.
6. Amanda Knox’s DNA was mixed with Meredith’s blood in the bathroom, which clearly indicates that her hands had come into with Meredith’s blood in Meredith’s room and then touched different fittings and the box of Q Tips cotton swabs in the bathroom.
Evidence that Raffaele Sollecito was in Meredith’s room when Meredith was killed:
1. An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp.
2. Raffaele Sollecito’s footprints were set in Meredith’s blood in different parts of the cottage, which clearly indicates that he had stepped in Meredith’s blood in the Meredith’s room and then tracked the blood around the house.
I guess I just don’t understand how they could clean up so thoroughly and discriminately… none or hardly any trace of their own DNA, but RG’s is everywhere in Meredith’s room. How did they manage to pull that off?
I’m not a DNA expert so I don’t know about the presence of DNA elsewhere throughout the house. But one point that’s been made is that AK did not spend a lot of time at the house, using it more as a base where she passed through.
On AK in Meredith’s room:
1. The double DNA knife was not convincely established as THE murder weapon.
2. The shoe size may have been compatible, but did they match the print with any of AK’s shoes?
3. This could have been contamination.
4. How do we know how that lamp got in there? Perhaps MK borrowed it herself?
On RS in the room
1. Contamination could have been the cause.
2. Also a point under contention between the two sides… tests indicated that no footprints were made with blood.
I’m willing to concede that I don’t know as much about the evidence as others. But to observers like me, a lot of this point-counterpoint stuff causes some questioning. A lot of this evidence is in dispute, not indisputable… but I suppose this may depend on one’s frame of reference.
I’d like for nothing better than for someone to confess or provide additional insight that would give us the answers we need. But I’m afraid questions remain.
The explanation of the verdict wil help as will the appeal process where another deep look will be taken.
Harry,
I will admit that Ms. Knox was involved in the murder of Meredith – the evidence is overwhelming on all levels.
However, it’s less obvious that she inflicted the fatal wound. And I don’t understand why she doesn’t just tell the truth on this point if she didn’t.
First, are you sure that the large knife found at Mr. Sollecito’s apartment was the cause of death? And not a different, smaller knife that was repeatedly plunged into Meredith’s neck?
Second, isn’t it logical that some of Ms. Knox’s DNA would be found on the handle of a kitchen knife kept at her boyfriend’s apartment? I presume that she helped him cook occasionally – even if it was just chopping onions?
Thanks for the detailed explanations. I’m not a forensic expert and I doubt that DCJ is either.
Norbert
hello,
i was complete wrong because i messed something in my mind. i feel deeply ashamed because of my blaba.
i enjoyed reading this very insightful and analysing blog and TJMK too. they helped me alot to understand, what most likely happened in perugia.
i asked my girlfriend, “is it possible that all three murdered her ?” my girlfriend doesnt know the case in detail, only from my talkings. she answered, ” yes, its possible, UNDER DRUGS you want to know and you can go beyond the pale (i hope its the right idiom). and thats what in my opinion happened. knox most likely manipulate both men to murder meredith kercher because of lust and greed.
bye
guido
The TJMK blog has a lot of good information and certainly the intentions are honorable: justice for Meredith.
However, as many observers have noted, the site is heavily slanted in favor of one side or interpretation of events.
Guido,
It’s good to get a German perspective on all of this.
But I don’t think we know that Ms. Knox was the controlling force behind Meredith’s murder. I think it’s very likely that her anger just got the best of her while she, Sollecito, and Guede were trying to give Meredith a little scare. Don’t forget that they may have been under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The murder was not necessarily premeditated! And I don’t think it has been proven that Knox was actually holding the murder weapon. This could be a central point in terms of asking the appeals court for leniency.
Please don’t take this wrong, but I think that Germans often like to jump to conclusions. Like dcj, I’m going to keep an open mind on this.
It’s important to not just read the “True Justice for Meredith Kerchner” site – which is bit academic for my taste.
You might also want to read the “Perugia Shock” site, which is obviously run by the pro-Amanda folks. This will give you a fair & balanced perspective.
Let me also say that even if my daughter were guilty of murder, I’d do and say ANYTHING to get her out of jail. If that means hiring a PR firm to control the information flow, calling my Senator, bribing the judge, or even making Meredith herself look like a bad person, so be it.
I’d do WHATEVER IT TAKES to get my daughter free!
Norbert
I fully agree with Norbert. One should seek a balanced view on this case.
The “if my daugher was guilty of murder” scenario is interesting. I would like to think that if I knew my daughter was guilty, I’d let justice take its course.
In the case of the parents of AK and RS, they believe their children are innocent… We have no indications to suggest otherwise. Certainly, they’re throwing resources at this case to fight for their children’s freedom.
I do not fault them for it. And I don’t fault AK’s parents for the PR effort in the U.S. This case was generating big media attention and most was not favorable to AK. To get the other side of the story out there, they hired a PR firm. I understand why. Some say they’re trying to cover up the truth, but I don’t see it that way. I think they’re trying to draw attention to what they see as an injustice.
Norbert: Is this really the best place for comments such as this:
Let me also say that even if my daughter were guilty of murder, I’d do and say ANYTHING to get her out of jail. If that means hiring a PR firm to control the information flow, calling my Senator, bribing the judge, or even making Meredith herself look like a bad person, so be it.
I’d do WHATEVER IT TAKES to get my daughter free!
I expect the Kercher family would be delighted to know this about you.
I’m closing the comments on this thread. They have gone way off topic. In future I’d appreciate you ALL sticking to the post topic and leaving Meredith’s family out of this (scroll down to previous reprimand for example).
Please consider what you write and how it may sound before you write it.
Miss R