TLDR: Wait 60 days for the final verdict
The verdict with its reasoning is only coming out 60 days after the verdict, you will have to wait and see. The final verdict in August will clear everything up.
What is known so far...
Ein Berufungsgericht in Florenz verurteilte die US-Amerikanerin Amanda Knox überraschend zu drei Jahren Haft, weil sie einen offensichtlich Unschuldigen verleumdet haben soll. (ZDF)
The German Media Outlet ZDF reported three days ago, that the court had been convinced, that Amanda Knox claimed that someone else did the murder. This was, so the report goes on, already part of the initial murder charges that were levied and from which she was released. However, she was sentenced to just 3 years, which she had served previously, so the verdict was "times served".
This verdict goes back to an act that happened allegedly right after Amanda Knox initial arrest:
Nach ihrer Festnahme hatte sie zunächst einen mit ihr befreundeten, offensichtlich unschuldigen Barmann der Tat beschuldigt, [...]
After her Arrest, she at first claimed that the act was done by a barkeeper that was obviously innocent...
While she did appear at the trial to try to resolve this in her favor, it seems that the courts were not persuaded by the arguments brought.
The reporting of the ZDF does not go into details, but digging through the italian coverage, which is heavily filled with repetitions of the same interviews, I found a report by il Giornale that was a little less tinted. It does recount the basis for these 2024 case as such (google translate):
The facts date back to November 5, 2007, four days after the murder of Meredith Kercher. That evening Knox was at the police station and indicated Patrick Lumumba, [her] employer, to the investigators as the alleged murderer. What instilled doubt in the investigators was an exchange of text messages that took place a few hours before the crime between the man, at the time the owner of a pub in the center of Perugia, and the young student from Seattle. Specifically a message: " See you later ", written by Amanda. The investigators believed that the two had agreed on a meeting in the house in Via della Pergola, the scene of the tragedy, translating the text of the text verbatim: " Ci vediamo più tardi [See you later] ". Actually, the correct translation would have been " Ci vediamo [See you] ". In the days following the interrogation, Knox denied the initial story by speaking of " a dream ". Lumumba, unjustly detained in prison for 14 days, was later acquitted as he was totally uninvolved in the facts.
[...]
Appealing the ECHR's decision, and article 628 bis of the code of
criminal procedure which provides for the possibility of " eliminating
the prejudicial effects " deriving from an established violation,
Knox's lawyers appealed the sentence and requested a new trial. In
October 2023, the Court of Cassation annulled the previous verdict,
referring the assessment of the feasibility of the crime to a new
panel of judges.
As you see, the whole case hinged on one police interview, and a bad translation, but the impact of that statement was very severe. We will only see what the judges exactly thought 2 months down the line, when their verdict will be released.
Update: 13th August
According to Perugia Tomorrow, the verdict released around August 9th could be summarized roughly like this (via Google Translate):
The Court of Assizes of Appeal of Florence has justified the conviction of Amanda Knox for slander, concerning the accusation against Diya Lumumba in the context of the murder of Meredith Kercher. Knox, initially arrested for the murder in 2007, had written a memorial on November 6, 2007 in which she accused Lumumba of the crime, an accusation that later proved to be completely unfounded, leading to the complete acquittal of the Congolese.
According to the judges, the memorial represents an “ indictment ” against Lumumba, who was found not to be involved in the facts. The Court stressed that the text was written “spontaneously and freely ” by Knox, as confirmed by the defendant herself. For this charge, Knox was sentenced to three years in prison, already served thanks to the almost four years spent in prison.
But what was the crime?!
But what was Ms. Knox actually convicted of? Not normal slander, that much is clear. We need to look at the Italian report translated aboveto see the correct word because slander is a mistranslation:
La Corte d’assise d’appello di Firenze ha motivato la condanna di Amanda Knox per calunnia....
That's not slander (ingiuria) or libel (diffamazione), but a separate and entirely different thing. Calunnia is defined in criminal code Art. 368. It's defined as (bolded what applies here):
Anyone who, by means of a report, complaint, request or application, even if anonymous or under a false name, addressed to the judicial authority or to another authority that has an obligation to report to it, accuses of a crime someone whom he knows to be innocent, or simulates the traces of a crime against him, shall be punished with imprisonment from two to six years.
This is better translated as false accusation than just slander or libel. The standard is, as a crime, beyond a reasonable doubt according to Code of Criminal Procedure 533.
