Yes, I don't think dishonesty is ever called for. If there is a case, prosecutors and police shouldn't have to lie. So it should have been worded that a call was placed to Mom (didnt Edda say 'leave and phone police' ?) when things were noticed to be quite amiss, but before it was known that a murder had occurred.
So there WAS an earlier call, but it was not placed before "discovering" things were quite amiss at the cottage.
So the prosecutor might have said, "There was an earlier call to your mother, prior to the police knocking down the door and discovering the victim. Why was this?"
and Knox might have answered, "To tell her things seemed awry at the cottage." ------ THEN the prosecutor might have skillfully said, "and you knew, didn't you, that things were far more awry than merely a simply break-in, right?" JMO:moo:
Police and prosecutors are under no obligation to feed their facts of the case to a suspect. Their job is to extract facts from the suspect. It is common for investigators to provide half a truth, or a complete lie, for the sole purpose of learning whether the suspect will provide the truth, or a whopper lie.