The case for the defence - New Netflix documentary lets Amanda Knox tell her side of the story

AMANDA KNOX, the controversial new documentary from Netflix, is an intensely disorientating watch â especially if you are one of the many who has already reached a firm opinion regarding the guilt or innocence of the American student accused of the grotesque, sexually motivated murder of her flatmate in Italy in 2007.
âWe are all interested in these true crime stories and trying to solve these whodunnits. We forget there is a tragedy behind them,â says Brian McGinn, producer of the doc, which arrives on the streaming service today.
âEverybody is interested in this idea of a sex crime â this idea of girl on girl crime. The media really ran with that because it is so appealing.â
Knox and her former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, were finally acquitted of the killing of University of Leeds student Meredith Kercher by the Italian High Court last year, with crucial police DNA evidence connecting them to the crime deemed deeply suspect.
And yet the Seattle native is still widely perceived as having escaped justice on a technicality and to have indeed been responsible for the death of her house-mate at their apartment in Perugia. The Netflix documentary invites us to at least consider the possibility that Knox was stitched up by an excitable media, led by the British tabloid press, and by an Italian justice system which, owing to Knoxâs colourful sex life, rushed to caricature the accused as a she-devil and temptress.
CELEBRITY STATUS
Thus, McGinn and director Rod Blackhurst suggest, she ended up on trial, not for what she had or hadnât done, but because of who she was: an attractive outsider confident in her sexuality.
âThe immediate point of entry is that people know a little bit about the story and they think they know a lot,â says Blackhurst. âEvery single one of the people in the case â it feels as if their version of what happened has not been fully heard out. When something complex gets reduced to headlines it automatically encourages the public to leap to conclusions.â
Knox cuts a strange figure throughout the film â at once naive and steely, and clearly ill at ease under the spotlight. When she speaks about the case it is in hippyish aphorisms.
âPeople love monsters,â she says, âwhen they get the chance, they want to see them.â
As Blackhurst and McGinn remind us, somebody was convicted of the killing of Kercher. Perugia neâer do well Rudy Guede, who received a 16 year sentence for murder and sexual assault (later reduced to nine years). The point the movie makes is that Guede was a far less enticing villain than Knox. He was a local miscreant of African extraction, she a glamorous American christened âFoxy Knoxyâ by the tabloids.
âA group sex crime⊠a sex game⊠Meredith killed for refusing sex. What a great story, a fantastic buzz,â says Nick Pisa, the former Daily Mail reporter in the documentary. It was Pisa who published Knoxâs leaked prison diaries in which she detailed the seven men she had slept with in Italy â a list compiled after she was falsely told by the Italian police she was HIV positive.
âIt was a particularly gruesome murder, throat slit, semi-naked, blood everywhere,â says Pisa.
Having finally put the case behind her last year, why would Knox wish to talk about it again?
âYou have to remember, for a large portion of this, she was in prison,â says McGinn. âYou had people photographing all these headlines. It didnât feel as if she was being treated as a person. She was being looked at as a concept. As she says in the documentary, even today she will be in a grocery store and people will go, âWoah â itâs youâ. She became an accidental celebrity.â
âNobody had really heard from her at any length. there was a lot of noise,â adds Blackhurst. âHaving her and the [Italian] prosecutor ... you get a lot of point and counter point.â
At its heart Amanda Knox is more interested in holding a mirror up to the audience than uncovering new bombshells regarding Knoxâs guilt. The press whipped itself into a frenzy over the idea of a 20-year-old temptress killing Kercher in a sex attack gone wrong. It was a narrative the world was happy to take at face value. McGinn and Blackhurst invite us to consider our own culpability in all of this.

PERFECT COMBINATION
âHere was the perfect combination,â says McGinn. âYou had this beautiful old town, an ancient way of life. Then all of these young people from all of these countries. There was something about it â the headlines wrote themselves⊠Amanda was portrayed as unnatural, bestial, sexual. Her prison diary, leaked to the press, talked about her sexual partners.â
Nine years on, the appetite for juicy true-crime stories is arguably stronger than ever, as testified by HBOâs The Jinx and Netflixâs own Making A Murderer.
But though the latter, in particular, has been a major hit, but the producers have also been accused of manipulating the facts to tell a better story.
So it is natural for viewers to wonder if the same is not happening here. Kercherâs family are not interviewed (they appear in archive footage) and, though prosecutor Giuliano Mignini is granted screen-time in which to present his case, itâs Knoxâs perspective that is nonetheless front and centre.
âThere is a tenuous connection between the true crime story and justice,â says McGinn. âWe are perhaps at a point where we can have that conversation. You start going from, âWow this story is unbelievableâ to ask yourself, âWell, why am I so interested in this?
âOne idea she brought up is that people have been looking into her eyes, looking at how she behaves. She points out that this isnât objective evidence at all. That is a powerful moment in the film.â
Do the filmmakers think she is guilty?
âIt is a natural question to ask,â says McGinn. âBut there has been a final word on that. The issue we wanted to tackle is why is everybody asking the question? Why are they coming to conclusions on one side or the other?â