Amanda Knox’s documentary was released in September 2016. The film was created by ardent long-time supporters of Knox. The film centered around Amanda’s experience of the tragic death of a 21-year-old British exchange student Meredith Kercher. The documentary flashed many crime scene photographs, including some showing Meredith’s lifeless body. These photos were included ostensibly without permission from the victim’s family. After the movie aired, many incomprehensibly turned to social media to attack a journalist name Nick Pisa.
Why would people who watched this Netflix movie about the brutal killing of a beautiful young woman named Meredith Kercher, decide to attack single journalist? Hundreds if not thousands of reporters covered this murder. The answer is that many who watched this show were manipulated by the pro-innocence producers and directors of this film In this article I will be covering the way the creators of this Amanda Knox film edited and distorted events in order to mislead viewers.
“Subliminal perception is a deliberate process created by communication technicians, whereby you receive and respond to information and instructions without being aware of it. Messages in the form of printed words, pictures or voices presented either very rapidly or very obscurely bypass your conscious awareness. Anything consciously perceived can be evaluated, criticized, discussed, argued, and possibly rejected. Anything programmed subliminally to your subconsciousness meets no resistance. This subliminal information is stored in your brain and capable of influencing your judgment, behavior and attitudes.”
Through omission of the facts, creative storytelling, and selective editing it is clear in the first half hour of this ‘documentary’ how this story will develop. The story line is led by Foxy Knoxy who narrates the film and tells you what ‘really happened’ (spoiler: it appears the journalist did it.)
First we are introduced to the main protagonist and star of the show, Amanda Knox. The viewpoint is of sitting next to her as she drives her car home. This gives the message, “Amanda is in the drivers seat, and she will be controlling where this story goes. You are just a passenger who gets a free ride.” Then the camera shows her alone, in her little home, she is making a home cooked meal of meatballs as she cuddles her kitties. The impression the viewer receives is of being fed dinner while sitting down to listen to her story in a cozy, intimate atmosphere. You, the viewer, are in her house aka on her side.
Next videos of a much younger and attractive Amanda in 2007 fills the screen. Her laughing with her sister and friends as she is drinking and visiting Italy. Present day Amanda then continues this youthful enthusiasm in retelling her brief romance with Raffaele. They both speak like hormone raging teenagers, all giggles and swooning. What is not mentioned is that Amanda slept with many men in Italy and she spoke to her roommates about how she really loved her boyfriend back in the U.S. (D.J) and felt like she was cheating on him with Raffaele. In her memoir, Amanda says she thought Raffaele was moving too quickly into a relationship that she wasn’t ready for a commitment with him.
All of this is put aside as Amanda gushes about buying Italian perfume. Raffaele slurs about their having a “Happy Ending” the first night they met. Yes they smoked dope and slept together within a few hours of meeting each other. So romantic, no?
Amanda’s new version of things makes it sound as if they developed feelings over time. The reality is much different.
The filmmakers appear to have coached the normally cantankerous and strident voiced Knox in an attempt to portray her as a naive girl but even Amanda Knox can’t act that well. Amanda and Raffaele spin their story like 13-year-olds instead of acting like the mature 30-year-olds they actually are, about their seven day ‘romance.’
Raffaele swirls around his version of events in a sleepy, slurring way in the hopes of embodying the fantasy of the Italian dreamboat. He closes his eyes a lot and looks out into the horizon (or beyond the camera) to emphasize the sheer ecstasy of being with Amanda. Or perhaps it was of the hashish fog of smoke surrounding their first jump in the sack a few hours after meeting.
It might be news to some that Raffaele took away Amanda’s alibi for the night of the murder, which is what led to her being arrested in the first place, but who wants to deal with facts when a good romance sells so much better.
Back to Amanda’s story. This supposed teenage, heart skipping love going on between the two lovebirds is reinforced by the filmmakers with a shot of a couple of pigeons on a building at the end their fairy tale. The cheap filmmakers couldn’t splurge for cuter birds? Pigeons are often referred to as ‘flying rats’ by urban dwellers but perhaps that does make them a more appropriate choice for the movie.
Amanda chirps that the reason she flew to Perugia, was to spread her wings and become an adult. A billboard is shown with a clear subliminal message. There is a man holding up his hand and looking away, as if pushing against the flyer next to it which has the word Perugia. A not so subtle way of sending the message, “No, not Perugia! Back! Stay away!”
Next we meet the prosecutor Dr. Mignini. He is introduced in the film with the camera (and audience) looking down on him as he quickly makes his way up the driveway and into the cottage on the day that Meredith Kercher was found murdered.
The subliminal message here is that he is invading the cottage and he is to be looked down upon. He is this little man in the introduction who swoops in and blames Romeo and Juliet for the murder.
Why you may ask? Well according to this narrative that Amanda drove us into, Mignini sees the lovepigeons kissing and that is that. This documentary doesn’t even scratch the surface of the overwhelming evidence against Knox and Sollecito, outlined here, including Amanda and Raffaele’s footprints in Meredith’s blood, Knox’s DNA mixed with Meredith’s blood, Amanda and Raffaele’s numerous lies,changing alibis, and much, so much more.
Back to the video. Mignini is looked down upon and then he is in front of the camera, with his arms around himself. One wonders if the film makers lowered the temperature of the room because he looks like he is trying to warm himself up. However, it can also make him appear defensive, which is helpful to Amanda Knox’s side of the story. While she acts like an open and honest child, ‘big bad’ Mignini is shown looking stern and daunting by the cameramen.
The filmmakers then subliminally reinforce the notion of Mignini being overly religious by viewing him from above, God’s perspective. The clip of Mignini driving up towards heaven in the film which causes a vertigo effect upon the viewer which is nausea inducing.
Then the filmmakers show Mignini driving in slow motion as he talks about being a Catholic, as most Italians are. The slow motion is emphasized by a motorcycle speeding past, meant to give the viewer the impression that Mignini is old-fashioned, in a different dimension. He is from another time and place where killers are held responsible for their actions.
He couldn’t possibly understand the young, hip, highschoolers like Mandy and Raf who like the young man on the motorcycle travel in a different new world. Oh and Mignini must be too far gone with his religious beliefs, look how he drives so slow and out of touch with reality.
Its also interesting that the only two people shown driving are Knox and Mignini. As if to say “Mignini is in control of the story in Italy but Knox is in control of the story in America.”
The way the Kerchers are introduced is nothing short of offensive. The creators of this documentary actually introduce Meredith’s family from afar and behind a fence. In order to portray them as invaders to Romeo & Juliet’s life, the film shows a plane landing, then Meredith’s parents and sister disembarking. The viewers only catch glimpses from a distance of them stepping onto the ground when the filmmakers decide to introduce “Meredith Kercher’s Family” title. Really? So here the subliminal message is that Meredith’s family as this distant, aloof group of people.
They are introduced behind a fence, to convey the idea that we are not allowed to approach them and perhaps they are not to be trusted. The idea that they are caged similar to animals or prisoners. The filmmakers give viewers these unspoken messages through this insidious intro.
The video editors then jump to the Kercher’s first press conference. The focus of the camera is shoved uncomfortably close to Meredith’s sisters face. It is very similar to the way Amanda Knox shoved a camera in Meredith Kercher’s face in a never seen before vide clip shown in movie. The focus goes in and out, a silent message that the paparazzi were unprofessional and did a poor job of covering the this case.
Why did the documentary makers decide to use such close video? One reason may have been to chop out John Kercher, Meredith’s father. He wrote a book about Meredith that Amanda Knox supporters have attacked on Amazon. Although he is sitting there right next to Stephanie, they completely cut him out of this press conference shown in the documentary. The film makers do show Meredith’s mother, the same picture of her, over and over where she looks unhappy and uncomfortable being in the spotlight.
The documentary shows Meredith’s body being removed from the cottage. While the paparazzi take numerous pictures nonstop, people are heard pleading with the photographers to stop taking pictures. Cries of “Enough please, stop it.” and “As a courtesy please stop. Have some dignity.”
But those ruthless, heartless paparazzi don’t stop! This is the perfect springboard to introduce the main villain of Amanda Knox’s documentary, the one who is demonized in this flick – Nick Pisa.
Nick, like the Kerchers, is also introduced as an interloper, arriving in a taxi and admitting that he has never covered a case in Perugia before.
Nick’s objective perspective as a journalist is juxtaposed with the most hear-wrenching moments of Meredith’s story. The film makers show a clip of him laughing about the buzz of a good story just before showing a clip of Meredith’s funeral. Below he is shown right after Meredith’s body is being taken out of the cottage. This deceptive editing makes it appear as if he is laughing about her death. However, the reality is that it became a huge story, partly because Amanda Knox’s father hired a Public Relations firm to help generate more publicity.
Soon after Nick arrives he is shown walking out onto a balcony overlooking Perugia, giving the unspoken message that he is the one who is lording over the nasty media coverage. It’s all his fault. this is false. Forget all of the evidence which clearly points to multiple attackers and the fact that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were found guilty twice. Forget that in the Italian Supreme Court’s final report they say Amanda and Raffaele were at the crime scene and Knox washed Meredith’s blood from her hands. Forget that the Italian Supreme court upheld Amanda Knox’s conviction for criminal slander (calunnia) for falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba of murder. Who needs complicated evidence and facts when we have a reporter to crucify? smh
Why does Amanda Knox hate Nick Pisa? Apparently it’s because he was one of the first reporters to publish Amanda Knox’s Prison Diary. The one and only time the director of this documentary is heard speaking is when he shouts out the question, “Who leaked Amanda’s diary?”
Or is seems that it was revenge of the producer of this Amanda Knox Documentary who tweeted disparagingly about Nick Pisa. Article about Stephen Morse’s hatred for Nick Pisa here.
R.I.P. Meredith Kercher
4 thoughts on “How you were manipulated to hate Nick Pisa by the Amanda Knox documentary”
Much like alternative media has popped up as a counter to the liberal main stream press to present, what is essentially the truth, there needs to a counter documentary to correct the wrongs of this affront to human decency.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Liz for this !
A valuable work. Please keep on.
Think people need to see:
“Redirection needs an alternative direction.
Distraction only needs a manipulation of alertness.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
The key point is that the documentary was not neutral. The film-makers are Knox-boosters from way back. I did like the author’s snappy rejoinders to some of the subliminal messages she perceived.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great article True Crimes! Now that the Netflix fake doc has been thoroughly debunked, be sure to see a much more balanced and accurate documentary of this case here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf_8BDVRWrc
LikeLiked by 1 person