"Give half to the guy whom she did not mention in her initial statement, and whom the police forced her to incriminate even though she had tried to insist that he was not involved"
As, according to the 'Media', she intends to say things she didn't say in court then just maybe the book is a celebration of aquittal and not innocence. If she is to provide information which she withheld from the court then the Italians would appear to be justified in appealing the judicial decision?
If these things were 'withheld' because they were ruled 'inadmissible', etc. but would have gone to show her innocence in any other court than the one she appeared in, she has every right to include them.
Actually, as an innocent person she can write what the heck she likes about her ordeal.
I know she has been declared not guilty, but I just don't believe she is innocent. I have argued the toss over this one, so I will just leave it at that.
I have every sympathy for the Kerchers - the very thought of losing my daughter makes by blood run cold - but the fact of the matter is that Amanda Knox owes them absolutely nothing.
She did not kill their daughter.
The court found her not guilty, and whether people believe she is guilty (a belief that has been gained from the TV and newspapers and not by knowing the evidence) is utterly irrelevant.
I have never believed her story, but good luck to her. I hope she will pay back her parents to begin with. Whatever else she does with it is up to her.