One of my stray thoughts about the Knox - Sollecito case was whether their prosecution on the murder/rape charges would - if it had happened in the US - be considered a
malicious prosecution. In summary, that means a prosecution conducted without probable cause and that causes damage to the person prosecuted*. In the US, as in Italy, the impugned interrogation statements of Knox and Sollecito could not be introduced as evidence against either of them in the murder/rape case. The only relevant evidence that could be considered in the case would be the alleged DNA of Kercher on the knife blade and the alleged DNA of Sollecito on the bra clasp. However, none of that evidence would be considered admissible because of the many defects in the forensic methods used to collect, test, analyze, and report the tests. In US court systems in which full discovery is required, the refusal of the prosecution to share the original automatically generated and digitally recorded DNA test and control data would invalidate that evidence from any further consideration. Thus, the prosecution would end early and the extent of damage to the defendants would be relatively small. However, if the US court system involved did not require full discovery, the possibility would exist that there would be an extended trial and the potential damage to the defendants would be greater; obtaining an acquittal would require an examination of the overall DNA evidence similar to that done by order of the Hellmann court in Italy. **
The Italian courts are relatively weak in their criteria for the admissiblity of evidence, probably a residual effect of their previous fully inquisitional system.
*
https://legaldictionary.net/malicious-prosecution/
** See, for example:
www.law.cornell.edu
Legal Standards and Procedures; The Defendant's Right to Discovery; Expertise; General Acceptance and Sound Methodology. Laboratory Error.
Part IV: Pretrial Proceedings
www.cbsnews.com
www.ilfattoquotidiano.it