Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fiona]

I'm not sure what your point is here. The cartwheels were brought up in the trial as evidence Knox was behaving oddly. I hear you to say you agree the cartwheels were such evidence of odd behavior.

But my argument has more context than just the cartwheels. The cartwheels were not unusual for a dumb young adult who was oblivious to the fact the police viewed her behavior as odd. I do think the false assessment of supposed suspicious behavior occurs in the US all the time. Some folks here seem to think I only think Italian police make such errors.

I do think that in context the Italian police did mis-read Knox's behavior in the police station. I also think at the time Knox was probably clueless her behavior was setting off alarm bells. And I think it only takes a little bit of a culture clash for behavior to be misinterpreted.

So what are you saying?

Are you arguing that young adults are oblivious to context? That they have no behavioural repertoire and no understanding that there are different expectations of behaviour in different contexts? That is the only way I can make sense of your belief that this young woman had no idea her behaviour ws setting off alarm bells

Are you saying that young adults do have such an understanding, but that it is perfectly acceptable to turn cartwheels in police stations in America? That is the only way I can make sense of yet another reference to "cultural clash"

The fact is, skeptigirl, that no one here would disagree that there is potential for cultural misunderstandings: but for me at least this is not one of them

The different expectations for behaviour between Italy and the USA are not so great: Italy is not Mars. Young adults in Europe and in America are well able to understand that a murder investigation is a serious business. They know perfectly well that you don't turn cartwheels in police stations. And they know that a frivolous attitude in those circumstances will indeed "raise alarm bells".

It is perfectly possible to argue that she did not think the alarm bells would lead to suspicion of her complicity: but she was not oblivious to the fact that she was making an impact on the police. It is not evidence that she committed the crime and nobody is arguing that. But it is evidence of a peculiar attitude. That might be no more than anti authoritarian rebellion. It might be something much more serious. We don't know and you don't know. But the police here, and in the USA, and in Italy would be strange indeed if they did not notice it and consider it. After all, they see a lot of people in police stations. They kind of know the range of normal reaction better than you and I.

I don't think the broken window proved anything one way or the other

Not by itself it doesn't, no. But what you do not seem to understand is that this does not stand by itself. If you are looking for the one absolutely irrefutable piece of evidence and nothing less will do I think you have been watching too many movies.

but it is my understanding the killer left via the window in Kercher's room.

How do you know that?

We don't know if he broke in or was let in or just came through an open door.

If he did not break in then who broke the window? The prosecution says that Knox and her boyfriend did in order to fake a burglary. Do I take it you accept that? If you do then why did they do that?

I see no reason why a killer wouldn't lock the body in the bedroom and leave out the window if that was the only way to leave the bedroom door locked.

Might do that: might not. I have no idea why locking the door might seem important at the time. I have no idea why he would leave the bedroom and then return to lock the door and go out the window in full view of a busy street. If it happened that way he presumably had his reasons. You don't know and I don't know. I don't even know that the door was locked from the inside because I do not know what kind of lock it was: whether there was a key: whether it could only lock from the inside. Or anything much really. Neither do you. I presume it was a fact explored at the trial though.

In either case the same would apply to Knox as it would the the killer. Whichever questions the locked door and broken window bring up for you, how does one scenario fit Knox being involved and one scenario not?

Again you cannot take each piece of evidence in isolation. If the window was broken by the killer it is because he broke in: if it was broken by knox it is because she was trying to mislead the police. Since the window was too high to get in without a ladder, and no ladder was reportedly found, there is reason to doubt the killer broke in. And that means that someone else broke it: who, if not knox and/or her boyfriend? I suppose it might have been a second random burglar; or the evil Italian police. Could be anybody really. Anything could have happened: but some things are more likely than others.

As for entering the house, isn't it possible Knox was unaware the window was broken until she went in?

Of course it is possible. Who suggested otherwise? If the window was broken when Knox arrived I would imagine it very likely she did not notice unless the front door was on that side and I don't think it was

And, she wasn't alone. Her boyfriend was with her.

Unless I have misread she was alone and this is not disputed.

I think if I had two roommates and found my apartment door unlocked I would just assume someone was home. I'd probably go in before I found out they weren't.

Indeed and I said as much. But when I found they weren't I would certainly be uneasy. I think most people would. Would you not have a look around, presuming you had taken your brave pills? Or maybe call someone if you hadn't. You know, given that your door was open and there was no-one home and there was blood in the bathroom?

A lot of things are possible. All you are demonstrating is you do not know and that puts you in the same place as the rest of us. But you choose to deny a whole lot of circumstantial evidence which is quite clearly there and quite clearly important.

 

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

The circumstantial evidence plus the behavior of Knox (and others) shortly after the murder would certainly be enough for me to give a "guilty" verdict. I haven't heard any other narratives with better evidence, circumstantial or otherwise.

I think the best other narrative is that Guede, and only Guede, did it. His DNA was all over the scene, including on the victim's body, toilet tissue, and tampon. His footprints and handprints were at the scene. There is no doubt he was there and had plenty of physical contact with the victim. By contrast, they had to stretch quite a bit to tie Knox or her boyfriend to the scene at all. The victim was supposedly held down, sexually assaulted, and stabbed in the throat, yet they found no DNA on her body from anyone but Guede, nor in the room itself, save for a tiny bit on a bra clasp that had been left at an active crime scene for 40+ days before being tested. And Guede had a history of burglary, including breaking and climbing in through a window higher than the one in this case.

Certainly it is a much simpler and far more common crime: a man sexually assaulted and then murdered a young woman. It is definitely a simpler scenario when contrasted with the prosecution theories, which included a Satanic rite, a sex game gone wrong, and then no real theory at all.

I'm not going to claim that narrative is what happened. I have no idea if she is guilty or not. But, IMO, it seems like a reasonable narrative that fits the evidence.

 

[Ryokan]

Are we any closer to establishing why cartwheels are of cultural significance and why the Italian justice system has misunderstood this?

Yes, didn't you catch it?

I think that kind of clueless behavior in a police station 3 days after the fact while they were waiting (I presume) not while they were being questioned would be pretty common among the youth in this country.

'Clueless behavior' is, it seems, an American trait that the Italians missed. Terrible cultural misunderstanding.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Please don't compare the scientific evidence for the Big Bang to your opinion that Knox isn't guilty or that cartwheels in police stations have some kind of "cultural significance".....it's pathetic.

Have people in this thread gone nuts? The point was only that scientific (aka rational thinking) is based on evidence, not on proof. The reply was to a post demanding I PROVE my conclusion.

The circumstantial evidence plus the behavior of Knox (and others) shortly after the murder would certainly be enough for me to give a "guilty" verdict. I haven't heard any other narratives with better evidence, circumstantial or otherwise.

Wow.

No one cares if YOU think a killers motive are ludicrous. This might come as a shock, but murder doesn't have to have some logical motive that "makes sense". Some people are freaking nutcases and are psycho....and they kill people.

If you honestly think that this girl is completely innocent then all I can say is that seems WAY more unlikely than her being involved based on her behavior.

Wow.

I'm am floored by this response. Oh well.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

After reading post #116, I'd say she was convicted on the evidence. The cartwheel didn't help, but people have been convicted on much weaker evidence without doing cartwheels.

Did you notice post #116 was nothing more than an echo of someone else's blog post? Completely unsubstantiated claims?

I'd be interested in reading a credible source for those claims. But in all the stuff I have read over the last couple years, I've not seen half that stuff mentioned, let alone validated.

OTOH, there are other links in this thread validating the fact both the circumstantial and the actual forensic evidence in this case is sorely lacking.

 

[JihadJane]

Yes, didn't you catch it?



'Clueless behavior' is, it seems, an American trait that the Italians missed. Terrible cultural misunderstanding.

Yawn.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yet you have shown no precedent to equate the individual arguments of bias.

Being American=bias yes

Odd behaviour=bias yes

Police in America seeing more odd behaviour than Italian police=huh? did I get that right?

Odd behaviour when nervous (or more specifically, cartwheels)=exclusive to Americans?

Maybe we are not following you, or is this what you are actually saying?

You want a precedent Italians view the behavior of a young American from a cultural perspective that might taint that view?

OK, I'll look for more information on the difference in cultural norms.

 

[NewtonTrino]

I think the best other narrative is that Guede, and only Guede, did it. His DNA was all over the scene, including on the victim's body, toilet tissue, and tampon. His footprints and handprints were at the scene. There is no doubt he was there and had plenty of physical contact with the victim. By contrast, they had to stretch quite a bit to tie Knox or her boyfriend to the scene at all. The victim was supposedly held down, sexually assaulted, and stabbed in the throat, yet they found no DNA on her body from anyone but Guede, nor in the room itself, save for a tiny bit on a bra clasp that had been left at an active crime scene for 40+ days before being tested. And Guede had a history of burglary, including breaking and climbing in through a window higher than the one in this case.

Certainly it is a much simpler and far more common crime: a man sexually assaulted and then murdered a young woman. It is definitely a simpler scenario when contrasted with the prosecution theories, which included a Satanic rite, a sex game gone wrong, and then no real theory at all.

I'm not going to claim that narrative is what happened. I have no idea if she is guilty or not. But, IMO, it seems like a reasonable narrative that fits the evidence.

This is how I see it as well. Give me a theory, any theory where all three of them are plausibly involved. It's got to be either him alone or them alone. Having the three of them work together doesn't make sense. Also, what's the motive? For murder. By a seemingly normal college student? Who also happens to be female (how many females murder people again?). The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

Everyone here knows that the jury wasn't sequestered and could watch media coverage of the trial if they desired?

Also I heard one of Amanda's friends on CNN last night say that she literally says something like "I saw jurors sleeping in court every day when the defense was presenting their case". I have no idea if that's true but if so that should be a mistrial.

 

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

If the NYPD or LAPD or any other police force in the entire United States brought in a suspect for questioning and that suspect- a human being over age 4- made a cartwheel in public and while awaiting investigation for murder, I can assure you they would think that individual a) insane, b) guilty, c) criminally heartless, d) all of the above. Whether said suspect was American or anything else.

In America, this would be considered as bizarre as it would anywhere else in the world, be it Italy or Uganda or India or Tibet.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

I had the strangest experience of seeing someone who looked just like Amanda Knox at Piccadilly Circus tonight. Very freaky.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So what are you saying?

Are you arguing that young adults are oblivious to context?

No. You totally misread that part of my post. I said all of Knox's behavior should be looked at in context. I didn't say anything about young adults being oblivious to context.

My entire comment about the cartwheel has been so totally distorted by people in this thread it is hard to get back to the actual issues, but I'll try again.


The issues: The Italian police observed Knox in their police station.
Knox did not behave as they expected.
The cartwheel was a symbol (in my thread title) of the Italian police's observation of Knox which they felt was indicative of guilt.
I think a cross cultural divide contributed to the Italian police's conclusion the cartwheel was indicative of guilt.

Keep in mind here the Italian police didn't say the cartwheel was indicative of nervousness on Knox's part. They claimed it was evidence she was indifferent and depraved and involved in a Satanic ritual killing. They later changed that to claim Knox was involved in a revenge killing because Kercher was not participating in extremely sexually liberal behaviors.

The cartwheel in the police station was presented as evidence Knox was depraved and indifferent. It was not something I gratuitously claimed was relevant. It was not something I merely threw in the thread title as a lure to forum readers. The cartwheel was used by the police as evidence against Knox. That is the context one needs to look at here regarding the cartwheel. And it was not presented as evidence Knox was nervous. It was presented as evidence Knox was a crazed sex orgy/Satanist. That was the context which the Italian police placed the cartwheels in.

That they have no behavioural repertoire and no understanding that there are different expectations of behaviour in different contexts? That is the only way I can make sense of your belief that this young woman had no idea her behaviour ws setting off alarm bells

Dumb immaturity is what I think a person doing cartwheels in a police station is expressing. I'm not sure what you are thinking it means. Do you think it meant sociopathic indifference?

Are you saying that young adults do have such an understanding, but that it is perfectly acceptable to turn cartwheels in police stations in America? That is the only way I can make sense of yet another reference to "cultural clash"

The fact is, skeptigirl, that no one here would disagree that there is potential for cultural misunderstandings: but for me at least this is not one of them

I don't get your point here except as how I've replied to it above.

The different expectations for behaviour between Italy and the USA are not so great: Italy is not Mars. Young adults in Europe and in America are well able to understand that a murder investigation is a serious business. They know perfectly well that you don't turn cartwheels in police stations. And they know that a frivolous attitude in those circumstances will indeed "raise alarm bells".

So are you saying the cartwheels in this case do indicate pathological behavior?

It is perfectly possible to argue that she did not think the alarm bells would lead to suspicion of her complicity: but she was not oblivious to the fact that she was making an impact on the police. It is not evidence that she committed the crime and nobody is arguing that. But it is evidence of a peculiar attitude. That might be no more than anti authoritarian rebellion. It might be something much more serious. We don't know and you don't know. But the police here, and in the USA, and in Italy would be strange indeed if they did not notice it and consider it. After all, they see a lot of people in police stations. They kind of know the range of normal reaction better than you and I.

So are you arguing police in the US would have thought Knox's behavior indicated pathological behavior as well?

While I am in total agreement the police in the US are just as capable of such an ignorant behavioral assessment, I don't think on its face that negates the fact the cultural differences here affected the Italian police's assessment of Knox.



The rest of my reply to your post will follow.

 

[Puppycow]

So, was there ever any evidence that Knox was, in fact, a Satan worshiper?

Italian prosecutor Giuliano Mignini had a theory: the day after Halloween, Meredith Kercher was murdered at the end of a drug-induced satanic orgy gone very, very wrong. In fact, at one point, investigators thought a bloody handprint on a wall at the crime scene was some sort of satanic symbol.

"Amanda and Raffaele were intrigued by sex and violence. They sort of hung themselves out to dry a little bit by their blogs, by their Web sites," says Pisa.

On her MySpace page, Amanda called herself "Foxy Knoxy" and bragged about having multiple sex partners. A picture of her on the site taken at a military museum became ammunition against her. On Raffaele’s page, he expressed a fascination with serial killers.

"I know the police have been looking at these Web sites and taking apart everything that these two have said," Pisa says. "To a certain degree, they haven’t done themselves any favors by putting this stuff on the Web for all to see."

Shades of old-fashioned witch trials.

 

[Ryokan]

The issues: The Italian police observed Knox in their police station.
Knox did not behave as they expected.
The cartwheel was a symbol (in my thread title) of the Italian police's observation of Knox which they felt was indicative of guilt.
I think a cross cultural divide contributed to the Italian police's conclusion the cartwheel was indicative of guilt.

I still don't get this 'cross cultural divide'. I doubt even the bigoted Italian police think it's indicative of guilt, but I'm sure the police of any country would think it suspicious enough to look into it.

Are you saying the US police would just ignore it totally? Is this really such common behavior that it's almost expected?

The only reason people are halfway making fun of you in this thread is because you label this a cultural misunderstanding, while it's obvious to most it really isn't - that someone acting contrary to what we would expect gets a closer look. You really need to either discard this, or better explain what you mean. Until you do, continuing to label this a cultural misunderstanding is just stupid.

 

[Fiona]

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C339/

This is a site which is dedicated to finding justice for Kerchner: but, acknowledging that, it seems to be serious in how it approaches things and there is a lot of good information there, including links to discussions of the DNA evidence and its status.

I do not know the qualifications of what they describe as their "DNA experts": the information may be there but I have not had time to read it all.

 

[volatile]

This is how I see it as well. Give me a theory, any theory where all three of them are plausibly involved. It's got to be either him alone or them alone. Having the three of them work together doesn't make sense. Also, what's the motive? For murder. By a seemingly normal college student? Who also happens to be female (how many females murder people again?). The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

Everyone here knows that the jury wasn't sequestered and could watch media coverage of the trial if they desired?

Also I heard one of Amanda's friends on CNN last night say that she literally says something like "I saw jurors sleeping in court every day when the defense was presenting their case". I have no idea if that's true but if so that should be a mistrial.

With hazy knowledge of the case, I'd been convinced she was guilty... but seeing the post-trial analysis, I'm with Newton and Chicken on this. There's no way she did it.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

I don't think the broken window proved anything one way or the other but it is my understanding the killer left via the window in Kercher's room. We don't know if he broke in or was let in or just came through an open door.

<snip>

I'm only picking out this one comment as an example. I don't mean to single it out as a particular 'smoking gun'.

Here is a site with an interesting discussion on the case and how it has been presented.

Among the things discussed is the apparent break-in into Filomena Romanelli's (the third roomate) room. This excerpt is interesting.

Filomena testifed that she found clothes strewn around her room the next day and that she had left the room tidy. She testified that glass from the window broken in her bedroom was on top of those strewn clothes. If the window was broken by someone entering the home who was intent on rape and/or robbery, then the glass would not be on top of the clothes as those clothes would not have been under the window then (Filomena also testified that she had valuables in plain view in her bedroom and that none were taken).


The evidence suggests that someone placed these clothes around the room and THEN broke the window to “stage a scene” (as there is no explanation for why anyone would have any motive to randomly take clothes and throw them around a room).

This is combined with many other aspects of the case that are not developed in recent U.S. news reports which provide a much less clear picture of railroading an innocent.

I had noted the case when it first broke, but have not followed it with great attention. When the media storm around the verdict blew up yesterday I was first dismayed, and then disgusted by the overwhelming and obvious spin being projected by U.S. sources. HLN was the worst, but all of them were guilty to some degree.

Understand that I approached this with no particular bias as to her guilt one way or the other, and no real study of the case as it has developed. If anything I would be inclined to hope that she was indeed innocent.

The presentation and vehemence of the media followup to the verdict, along with the style of approach used to spin a position set off alarm bells in my mind. There was virtually no effort to even contemplate the possibility that Knox was guilty. There was a definite aroma of "...doth protest too much." accompanied by a xenophobic stench.

I decided to start by taking a look at a true crime board I've found to be fairly even-handed. A quite large and well frequented one that generally manages good insights which usually prove correct. They started a thread on the case on 11/06/07, and developed an early consensus that there was a strong likelihood of Knox's guilt. That consensus did not change much over two years. It should be noted that most of the posters are American, even though there are many from overseas.

The more that I have reviewed different presentations of the story the less confident I have become that there is a slam-dunk case for prosecutorial misconduct. I won't list a string of links here. They're easily found if anyone wants to take the initiative to look. The thread I linked to offers many, and does so in the chronological order that the case developed, which allows for some additional insight all its own.

My suspicion, almost a certainty, is that if this tragedy had occurred in the U.S, and if Ms. Knox had been prosecuted in the U.S. with the evidence I have seen as available against her, even with all the extra protections of American jurisprudence, she would have been convicted, would not have been sentenced with less than LWOP, and would have been very fortunate not to ride a needle. Others have on far less.

If she's innocent then certainly that is much to be deplored, although it must be said that an erroneous conviction in Italy can bear much less .. fatal results than in the U.S.

If she is guilty then it might be that she should be grateful that she is guilty in Europe.

 

[stilicho]

This is how I see it as well.

Even though I live in Canada, I get a lot of cable coverage from the nearby Pacific Northwest. Needless to say, the case gets a lot more coverage here excepting the arrest and the recent conviction.

But this isn't the only guilty verdict against Ms Knox in this incident. She was also found guilty of defamation against Lumumba, a bartender who used to be her boss.

That's one part of this case that is seriously underreported. What would possess anyone to accuse their former employer of a crime--especially of rape and murder? That isn't just 'confusion'; it's utter irresponsibility. Even kids, when asked who broke the lamp, will simply reply "not me" out of habit. It takes a very special type of person to speculate wildly without any evidence whatsoever.

Her family and friends have sought to characterise Ms Knox as a faultless victim whereas the truth is that she'd already had a criminal conviction for hosting an out-of-control party near the University of Washington the same year she departed for Italy.

The cartwheels don't seem out of character for this woman. In fact, I was a little disturbed at the asides about her playing Sharon Stone earlier in this thread. From her past, it's apparent that's precisely what she was trying to do only it doesn't work in real life like it does in the movies.

The appeal should be interesting since it's been reported here that her broken family will have to mortgage themselves to the hilt.

-------------

Here's a sobering blog by someone in the Seattle region who covers crime stories:

http://www.seattlecrimeblog.com/tags/meredith_kercher/

That's got all the issues discussed here, and more, with frequent cites.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

So are you arguing police in the US would have thought Knox's behavior indicated pathological behavior as well?

While I am in total agreement the police in the US are just as capable of such an ignorant behavioral assessment, I don't think on its face that negates the fact the cultural differences here affected the Italian police's assessment of Knox.

<snip>

The demeanor of the accused is routinely used by both police and prosecution in the U.S. as clues suggesting guilt and as evidence presented to a jury.

I find the latter to be a seriously flawed technique which can often lead to egregious error.

I feel fairly confident that many D.A.s in the U.S. would have seized upon such behavior in exactly the same fashion. They have tried to make much more out of much less.

I don't see this as some peculiarly European or Italian expression of America bashing.

I'm uncertain exactly how much weight the Italian prosecution tried to attach to Knox's demeanor as opposed to other evidence during the trial itself. Do you have any sources which have addressed that in particular?

From what I have reviewed I don't consider the floor exercise episode to be a major part of their case, just one more detail.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Not by itself [the broken window] doesn't, no. But what you do not seem to understand is that this does not stand by itself. If you are looking for the one absolutely irrefutable piece of evidence and nothing less will do I think you have been watching too many movies.

I asked you to explain how the broken window fits with "Knox did it" better than it fits with "the lone murderer did it". You have not addressed my question.

How do you know that [the killer left via the window in Kercher's room]?

I don't. But whether he left by the door or the window doesn't implicate Knox or her boyfriend.

If he [the murderer] did not break in then who broke the window? The prosecution says that Knox and her boyfriend did in order to fake a burglary. Do I take it you accept that? If you do then why did they do that?

The broken window does nothing to implicate Knox or her boyfriend. It is more likely the murderer broke in via the broken window but regardless the broken window is not evidence that necessarily implicates Knox.

Might do that: might not. I have no idea why locking the door might seem important at the time. I have no idea why he would leave the bedroom and then return to lock the door and go out the window in full view of a busy street. If it happened that way he presumably had his reasons. You don't know and I don't know. I don't even know that the door was locked from the inside because I do not know what kind of lock it was: whether there was a key: whether it could only lock from the inside. Or anything much really. Neither do you. I presume it was a fact explored at the trial though.

Again there is no evidence here that implicates Knox.

Again you cannot take each piece of evidence in isolation. If the window was broken by the killer it is because he broke in: if it was broken by knox it is because she was trying to mislead the police. Since the window was too high to get in without a ladder, and no ladder was reportedly found, there is reason to doubt the killer broke in. And that means that someone else broke it: who, if not knox and/or her boyfriend? I suppose it might have been a second random burglar; or the evil Italian police. Could be anybody really. Anything could have happened: but some things are more likely than others.

Where is your source the window was too high to get in and how do you explain the fact the window was reportedly broken from the outside?

Of course it is possible. Who suggested otherwise? If the window was broken when Knox arrived I would imagine it very likely she did not notice unless the front door was on that side and I don't think it was

I thought you said Knox would not have reasonably entered the apartment if she arrived and found the door unlocked?

Unless I have misread she was alone and this is not disputed.

There are various versions in the news accounts of Knox being alone when she went home and being with her boyfriend. Again, the issue you raised was that it was somehow suspicious Knox would have entered her apartment if she arrived to find the door unlocked. How is the fact she did enter evidence of anything unusual or in particular of her guilt?

Indeed and I said as much. But when I found they weren't I would certainly be uneasy. I think most people would. Would you not have a look around, presuming you had taken your brave pills? Or maybe call someone if you hadn't. You know, given that your door was open and there was no-one home and there was blood in the bathroom?

Depends on how much blood and many other issues. I don't find the evidence of how Knox acted after coming home to be remarkable.

A lot of things are possible. All you are demonstrating is you do not know and that puts you in the same place as the rest of us. But you choose to deny a whole lot of circumstantial evidence which is quite clearly there and quite clearly important.

Again with the claims I know nothing about this case when in fact, I know a lot. This has been a very public case from the get go. How is it you assume I know so little? Is it because you know so little therefore I must know an equally 'little' amount?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The demeanor of the accused is routinely used by both police and prosecution in the U.S. as clues suggesting guilt and as evidence presented to a jury.

I find the latter to be a seriously flawed technique which can often lead to egregious error.

I feel fairly confident that many D.A.s in the U.S. would have seized upon such behavior in exactly the same fashion. They have tried to make much more out of much less.

I don't see this as some peculiarly European or Italian expression of America bashing.

I'm uncertain exactly how much weight the Italian prosecution tried to attach to Knox's demeanor as opposed to other evidence during the trial itself. Do you have any sources which have addressed that in particular?

From what I have reviewed I don't consider the floor exercise episode to be a major part of their case, just one more detail.

Except for your statement the cartwheel was not a major part of the case, I agree with you.