I am impressed by the level of knowledge about the case that has been demonstrated in this forum on both sides. People seem pretty entrenched on their positions here and I was wondering if anyone has changed their minds about as to guilt or innocence. And if they did switch, what was the item that turned the tide.
Personally, I was about 90/10 for guilt in the early days ( Jan ’08). Most of my input was from TJMK and PMF. Later in 2008, I started reading Perugia Shock, where I learned about the false HIV results and 3 fried computers. I started questioning the prosecution’s tactics, evidence and logic. By the end of 2008, I was about 50/50 on guilt. I actual trial was an eye-opener and hearing the “other side” has pushed me to 90/10 on innocence.
I would like to if you changed you position, what was the deciding factor. Or possibly, what would it take to change your mind. For me it was the tactics, evidence and logic of the prosecution.
I didn't pay much attention to this case right through until March 2010, when I happened to buy a book about it - "Darkness Descending". Naturally, my starting position was that Knox and Sollecito were both guilty (in a legal sense) and culpable (in a factual sense), since most trials in a modern judicial system end with a correct result.
When I read "Darkeness Descending", I developed further belief in their guilt, since much of what I read in that book was very incriminatory. However, some things concerned me - chiefly, the interrogations of the 5/6 November. This prompted me to join PMF*, where I argued that Knox and Sollecito could be guilty but still have been coerced into false confessions/accusations. I was surprised and alarmed at the way I was shouted down for even suggesting such a thing, and I decided that things might not be quite as they appeared. I read more about the case, and learnt the truth about many of the things that had previously convinced me of Knox and Sollecito's guilt - chiefly the kitchen knife, the correct sequence of phone calls on the morning of the 2nd November, the activity on Meredith's phone on the evening of the 1st, and the bra clasp DNA evidence against Sollecito.
When I added into this a review of contemporaneous press accounts of the trial, I started to change my belief towards one of wrongful conviction. I wasn't sure whether Knox and Sollecito were or were not actually involved in the murder, but I became steadily concerned that they were not properly convicted judged by the evidence placed before the court.
My subsequent learnings (including knowledge of the autopsy findings and their relation to Time of Death, and further understanding of the way evidence was collected and analysed/interpreted), has led me to lean towards a current belief that Knox and Sollecito may very well have had nothing whatsoever to do with the murder of Meredith Kercher. But I remain open-minded on this.
* As many people like to point out, I described myself on PMF back in April as a "firm guilter". I make no apologies for having said that - it's what I believed at the time. But it was very early in my knowledge path regarding this case, and I was also trying to fight against instinctive attack. It didn't, however, take me long to learn enough about the case to change my view. That's what can happen when you learn more about a subject. I am guessing that Copernicus, in his youth, would have strongly asserted that the Sun rotated around the Earth. Then he learned better....
