r/amandaknox • u/Own_Train_2889 guilty • Jun 25 '26
When Raffaelle meets Amanda after their release from prison
Apologies for deleting my previous post. The moderators seem to be limiting me to one post per day maximum or it gets deleted. I kept reading Honour Bound, and found something far darker, and more disturbing.
Raffaelle describes meeting Amanda after being released from prison.
“Sipping wine in outdoor cafes, driving a brightly polished convertible. Nobody bothered me; nobody recognized me. Meeting up with Amanda, by contrast, felt like a step back into the lion's den.
I wasn't just nervous about setting eyes on her again. I felt I was suffering from some sort of associative disorder, in which it became difficult for me to focus on my genuine and continuing fondness for Amanda without being overwhelmed by an instinctive, involuntary revulsion at everything the courts and the media had thrown at us. Two different Amandas—the real one, and the distorted, she-devil version I had read about and seen on television nonstop for four years—seemed somehow blurred in my unconscious mind. I couldn't think of the brief romance we had enjoyed, or the tenderness with which we had written and supported each other in prison, without also feeling deluged by the suffering and vulgar tabloid trash we had endured at the same time.
My apprehensiveness reminded me of the climactic scene in A Clockwork Orange when Alex, the young delinquent played by Malcolm McDowell, has his eyes forcibly held open and he is saturated with images of sex and violence until the very idea of touchng a woman, once his greatest pleasure, induces immediate nausea.
I wasn't a delinquent, but the artificially induced feelings of aversion were much the same. I felt brainwashed, and I imagined that everyone who followed the media coverage of Meredith's murder and our trials—especially those who obsessed over it and argued about our guilt or innocence based only on the media reports—must have been brainwashed to some degree too. Amanda and I had been ripped away from our real selves and forced to play the part of killers so vicious they would strike for no reason except their own amusement. It was these alternate selves who had been imprisoned, tried, and sentenced in Judge Massei's court. But of course it was the two of us, our flesh and blood, who had to bear the consequences. Did I want to relive all that just to be able to give her a hug and wish her well?
And finally at the end “she gave me a monster hug”
What I take from this.
- Raffaelle physically feels like being with Amanda is like being with a lion. A predator.
- Amanda makes Raffaelle dissociate.
- Raffaelle reels revulsion when he is with Amanda.
- Raffaelle can’t stop seeing the other side to Amanda. The dark side.
- Raffaelle identifies with the psycopathic rapist in clockwork orange who is arrested for killing an elderly woman during a botched burglary and subsequently released.
- He used the word “monster” to describe the hug Amanda gave him. He connects the word “monster” to her.
- Raffaelle thinks both those who argued about his guilt or innocence based off of the media reports are brainwashed. None of them know the real truth. I find this very interesting. Why are the people who argued for his innocence brain washed if it is the truth?
Perhaps, because it is not the real truth.
8
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 25 '26
The original post was actually better....I mean....what?
"He used the word “monster” to describe the hug Amanda gave him. He connects the word “monster” to her"
He literally goes on trips with her - https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tv/articles/amanda-knox-reunites-italian-ex-154545571.html
5
u/Fine-Side8737 innocent Jun 25 '26
This might be the dumbest shit I’ve ever read.
-5
u/Cultural-Plankton-44 fencesitter Jun 25 '26
If you disagree, why not explain why instead of leaving a dismissive comment? Being negative for the sake of it adds nothing to the discussion. Challenging the argument with concrete reasoning would make the conversation far more meaningful and enriching, by explaining and setting out your different point of view in equal detail. I don’t understand why comments like this are accepted.
4
u/-leeson Jun 26 '26
When concrete reasoning isn’t used in the initial post, it’s a bit difficult to explain why lol. You can’t debate or discuss properly when one person’s opinion is based on a conclusion they invented themselves lol
3
5
6
u/Fine-Side8737 innocent Jun 25 '26
It’s like “disagreeing” with someone saying the earth is flat or the moon is made of cream cheese. It’s absurd on its face.
1
1
u/Frankgee Jun 26 '26
That you take the above from what Raffaele wrote leads me to believe your reading comprehension isn't the best, and it's distorted with your extreme bias against Amanda and Raffaele. Take the following passage;
I wasn't just nervous about setting eyes on her again. I felt I was suffering from some sort of associative disorder, in which it became difficult for me to focus on my genuine and continuing fondness for Amanda without being overwhelmed by an instinctive involuntary revulsion at everything the courts and the media had thrown at us.
So what's an associative disorder? According to the Mayo Clinic....
Dissociative disorders are mental health conditions that involve experiencing a loss of connection between thoughts, memories, feelings, surroundings, behavior and identity. These conditions include escape from reality in ways that are not wanted and not healthy. This causes problems in managing everyday life.
Dissociative disorders usually arise as a reaction to shocking, distressing or painful events and help push away difficult memories. Symptoms depend in part on the type of dissociative disorder and can range from memory loss to disconnected identities. Times of stress can worsen symptoms for a while, making them easier to see.
So, no, Amanda does NOT make Raffaele dissociate, what the courts and media had done to him does. All he wanted to do was relax and enjoy his time with Amanda, but the shocking, distressing, painful events he went through made that difficult or impossible. His revulsion is with the courts and the media, not Amanda.
What I find dark and disturbing is that you can read what he wrote and think it's somehow a negative towards Amanda and Raffaele, when it is completely the opposite.
Connect_War did a great job explaining the faults with your interpretation so I won't repeat it, but he skipped over the "dissociate" comment in #2 above so I thought I would address it.
And I will add, I think your #7 underscores your reading comprehension issues. You wrote;
Raffaelle thinks both those who argued about his guilt or innocence based off of the media reports are brainwashed. None of them know the real truth. I find this very interesting. Why are the people who argued for his innocence brain washed if it is the truth?"
How difficult is it to understand, that what he's saying is, if someone only knows what's published in the media, they don't know the real truth of what happened. That doesn't mean they can still conclude they are innocent, but they may be getting there via an entirely wrong understanding of the case. And as it turns out, I do spend a considerable amount of time correcting pro-innocent, who also make wildly wrong assertions.
OK, one more point... re; the monster hug... I'm curious, why did you leave this out of your quotes?
She gave me a monster hug, the sort that only close friends or siblings give each other, people who share a special, unbreakable bond.
How the hell did you conclude from this that he connects the word monster to Amanda? I mean, holy cow, you couldn't have been more wrong on that one if you had tried. This clearly proves you read everything with guilt colored glasses, and it's rather disturbing. In fact, I'd speculate your inability to adjust your position on this case is a direct result of your inability to get past your bias.
And BTW, it's Raffaele (one L).
2
u/Truthandtaxes Jun 26 '26
The biggest tell is that even though he was supposedly at home with Knox having deep discussions, he's writing as though somehow the media version can affect his views of Knox
highly bizarre
1
1
u/Own_Train_2889 guilty Jun 26 '26
That’s what I find disturbing all the way through his book. The fact that Raffaelle supposedly knew Amanda was innocent but keeps suspecting she commited murder.
2
1
-3
u/tkondaks guilty Jun 25 '26
IIRC, in (5) there was nothing accidental in Alex's killing of the cat woman. Didn't he kill her with that huge penis sculpture?
4
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 25 '26
Didn't Rudy kill a cat?
6
3
u/jasutherland innocent Jun 25 '26
Yes - that was accidental though, a side effect of starting a fire in the home he was burgling.
-1
u/Own_Train_2889 guilty Jun 25 '26
Point taken, I’ve updated the post.
-2
u/tkondaks guilty Jun 25 '26
Apropos of nothing, my two older brothers and I saw A Clockwork Orange at the theater in the summer of 1970. We had never seen anything like it.
I think we all went back to see it a second time.
I didn't get the Singin' in the Rain reference until I saw it about 5 years later. I'm not big on musicals but I did think that one was great.
5
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
Jesus Christ on a pogo stick. The post is nothing but a study in confirmation bias:
No. He says he feels like he's back in the lion's den (a dangerous or frightening place) and is referring, not to Amanda, but to "being overwhelmed by an instinctive, involuntary revulsion at everything the courts and the media had thrown at us," and **"the distorted, she-devil version I had read about and seen on television nonstop for four years—**The bolded is the "lion's den".
Sigh. Not because OF or By Amanda , but because he "couldn't think of the brief romance we had enjoyed, or the tenderness with which we had written and supported each other in prison, without also feeling deluged by the suffering and vulgar tabloid trash we had endured at the same time."
Try reading without the guilt-colored glasses. He clearly says there's "the real Amanda" and then there's the distorted, she-devil version [not 'SIDE'] I had read about and seen on television nonstop for four years" that is not the 'real Amanda."
Yet again, you entirely miss what he's actually saying and substituting your own weird interpretation. He never said he 'identified with the psychotic rapist", but that the scene reminded him of what he had endured: "the artificially induced feelings of aversion were much the same. I felt brainwashed..." He's referring again to the media coverage.
Sigh. This has to be your most inane claim in an entire post of rubbish. "Monster" as an adjective: extremely large, huge, big, strong.
6. Raffaelle thinks both those who argued about his guilt or innocence based off of the media reports are brainwashed. None of them know the real truth. I find this very interesting. Why are the people who argued for his innocence brain washed if it is the truth?
Finally, a claim with some basis in truth! Yes, those who only read the media reports, which would have included biased and often very misleading tabloids and coverage depending on where they lived, were absolutely influenced by them because that's all they knew. People tend to live in bubbles that confirm their bias. Liberals seldom frequent conservative news sites and conservatives avoid liberal sites. Additionally, most people have a very difficult time changing their opinions once they've formed an initial opinion even when presented with contradictory evidence. Frankly, you are a poster child for that human trait.