Amanda Knox: innocent or guilty? What do you think?

Amanda Knox won her appeal and is heading home, although there's a possibility that she may yet be recalled for another trial. Her mum and dad have spent a fortune on getting her freed; in their place we'd probably all do the same. But do you think she's innocent? I think she probably is, but the case seems to have been so badly bungled by the Italian police that we'll never really know. What do the rest of you think?

 

Hmmm, tricky one this, there must have been significant evidence against her for her to be convicted in the first place, but now they say that it could have been contaminated? I agree with the verdict though, if there is a shred of doubt the person should be considered innocent.
I hope she doesn't make money out of it though, a young girl has still been murdered................!!

Val

 

I think they'll almost certainly be a lucrative newspaper deal and possibly a book. Mind you, her parents have mortgaged and borrowed in any way they possibly can to get her home, so perhaps they feel they need to recoup their losses. If her parents had been poor, I wonder whether she'd now be back in the USA. I read somewhere that the cost of legal representation etc has been around a million dollars.

Mum and dad are due back in court themselves next year, accused of slandering the Italian police.

 

I keep wondering, if she and her ex didn't do it, who did? They seem to think the guy who has been convicted did not act alone - I think the DNA evidence must have been really badly bungled otherwise they'd know, wouldn't they?

 

I think she was guilty of something wrong that night. She behaved so oddly after the murder and was inconsistent. But... the italian prosecution and police clearly messed this up hugely. I don't think the truth will ever be known. I hate the fact she is off to a book deal and the poor Kercher family have one guy convicted, who says he committed the crime with others, and only got 16 years.

 

I always thought that Guede was the culprit ...

is she an accomplice? .... hard to say, as you will never know what really happened behind the scenes ... she says no

but saying that ... Karma always comes back to haunt you .... if she is guilty, she has to look at herself everytime she applies makeup and looks in the mirror

and if she is guilty, she will have to look at her family and grandchildren in the eye

we will never know the truth on this case and there will always be speculation

just goes to show .... countries that still have the death penalaty may stand up now and think more carefully about their laws .... judges do (and will) make errors

 

Who cares?

 

That's a bit harsh. Care to explain?

 

Well, me, for a start. I feel for the family of the victim (can you imagine if it were your child and you'd waved her off thinking she was going to have a magical time in a beautiful Italian town?) and I wonder about Amanda. I can only imagine what both sets of parents have been through.

 

from the internet:

Edit: I have now added the original source of the report from the internet:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,664493-2,00.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,664493-2,00.html

snip:

The indictment is based on circumstantial evidence and very little witness testimony. The witnesses include an Albanian who claims to have seen the couple that night. Investigators found mixed traces of Knox's and Kercher's DNA in five locations. Knox's DNA was found on the handle of the kitchen knife, and a tiny trace of Kercher's blood was found on the blade, which had been carefully cleaned, almost too carefully. However, there was too little blood to allow for sufficient testing of the sample.

Guede is the only suspect who has admitted to having been at the scene of the crime that night. He claims that he had diarrhea and was sitting on the toilet when the murder was committed. In October 2008, Guede was sentenced to 30 years in prison. He did not implicate Knox and Sollecito at the time, but now, in the appeal proceedings, Guede has testified for the first time that he saw Knox and Sollecito running away from the crime scene together.

Sollecito is sitting only a few meters from his former girlfriend. His laptop is open and he hunches over documents without looking at the prosecutor. He doesn't even make eye contact with Knox anymore. Sollecito has not testified during the trial. The two defense teams have successfully prevented any of the defendants from incriminating the others.

The defense attorneys repeatedly argue that the only evidence is circumstantial, and that there is no clear proof, no confession and no motive. They owe their most important victory to sloppy forensics work. For instance, although investigators found traces of Sollecito's DNA on the victim's bra clasp, it had been lying around the crime scene for days after the murder. In addition, the officers did not change their gloves when handling the evidence. These are serious mistakes.

Key Questions

Giulia Bongiorno, a top attorney and the legal expert of Italia Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's People of Freedom party, is a member of the defense team. She has already successfully defended former Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti against charges of Mafia involvement. But even such highly paid legal wizards have no answers to certain key questions.

Neither Knox nor her boyfriend Sollecito has an alibi for the time of the murder. Prosecutors have evidence that both turned off their mobile phones at the same time, before the murder, and then switched them on again in the early hours of the morning -- even though both testified that they had slept in until 10 a.m.

In Italy, the circumstances accompanying a crime are often taken more seriously than in Germany, particularly when the defendants contradict themselves. Knox had initially stated -- under pressure from the female police officers who had questioned her, she later claimed -- that she had seen Patrick Lumumba, her boss at a bar called "Le Chic," at the crime scene that night. As a result of this statement, Lumumba, who was later found to be innocent, spent 10 days in prison.

The Italian newspapers provided detailed accounts of Knox's behavior immediately after the murder of her roommate, of how she turned cartwheels and did the splits in the waiting room at the police station. Her behavior in the courtroom was also not helpful to her case. She flirted with journalists and seemed more interested in her appearance than the charges.
...

In the eyes of Knox's supporters, the more overwhelming the circumstantial evidence is, the subtler the conspiracy against her must be. Knox's parents, who are divorced, have even hired a PR consultant to help them prepare for their television appearances.
...

Two of Sollecito's lawyers gave up their shared office after a dispute, and several forensic scientists who were called to testify left in protest against the defense's strategy. Kercher's mother only manages to cope by taking psychiatric medication, while her husband, a journalist, has been forced to write a book about the case to cover their legal fees.
...

 

Amanda Knox Was freed on some of the following--
Reasonable Doubt.
Forensic Errors.
Unreliable Witness.
Pr Campaign.
Character.
Motive.
Lack of Proof. Just some of the factors her Defence used at the Appeal. I understand the Prosecution may be lodging an Appeal to the highest court in Italy,so its a question of ,watch this space. as regards to the money she could make. If She Is Exonerated by the highest court
she will make millions. Film/Book/celebrity status...etc etc etc....

 

She makes millions, already got 3m upfront and a private jet home
The Kerchers parents of the victim are spent up broke and in debt, just so as they could witness, the trial and seek justice

As for Knoxy, If you had just discovered your flat mate with her throat cut, would you go have a shower, and stand around kissing your boyfriend ?

If she was half a friend of her murdered flat mate she would give half of her millions to Kerchers parents
(Says it all really we know Knox's name and details but not Kerchers without google

Jack McHammocklashing

 

I always thought she was guilty as hell........
So ,good job I am not the jury.
It was something about her character.....strange girl.
Although the Italian courts don't come out of this with much credit.

 

I was looking at the pictures of her on the front of this mornings papers and I was imagining how I would feel if I had been wrongly arrested and dragged through the courts for something I absolutely did not do, I think I would be distraught to say the least not beaming from ear to ear!!!!!

Val

 

Yes - her behaviour and reactions have been weird all the way through this case. Mind you, that doesn't necessarily make her guilty. She could just be a bit odd. Strange people often get wrongly accused of things, because we're all programmed to expect individuals to behave in a certain way and when they don't, our 'weirdo' radar goes off. It's very cultural too; I remember that when a young British nanny was accused of shaking a baby to death in the USA, the American public was convinced she was guilty simply because to them she appeared unemotional and unnaturally 'cold' in court. She was a northern lass and probably wasn't given to histrionics. (She may also, of course, have been as guilty as hell but my point is I don't think anyone could tell just from her demeanor.)

The European press has been pretty hard on Amanda; this Rolling Stone article is very pro-Knox. But it's always interesting to read an alternative perspective:-

The Neverending Nightmare of Amanda Knox | Culture News | Rolling Stone