Vixen, as a long time reader and first time poster itt, may I ask what your goal is in continuing to argue about this case? I would also be interested in what motivates those who still find it necessary to defend her, though I'm p. sure I already know their rationale: if they don't then a few folks not really familiar with the case will be misinformed by your 'lies.' Of course, why that is necessary with Amanda back home and going on with her life remains open to question, and the fact that if they stopped responding to your claims this thread would soon die and nobody would see them.
Does anyone know if Amanda herself has participated in any of these debates, or believes they still serve a useful purpose?
I watched Piers Morgan tv doc interview with Erin Caffey, a 4'11" woman who wiped out her family when aged 16, with the help of her smirking boyfriend and two others (acbytesla claimed 'people always murder alone' huh!) They armed themselves up to the gills with knives and guns, killing her two little brothers - one being stabbed by a samurai sword repeatedly through the closet door, behind which, he was desperately trying to hide. The mom had her neck hacked and her dad miraculously survived several gunshot wounds including one to the head. Caffey said, after the killings "Holy ****, that was awesome!"
She then went back to her boyfriend's trailer to have sex.
The motive for the crime was entirely trivial and futile ("My parents tried to break up me and my boyfriend"). It was also carefully premeditated.
She shows no remorse and has no concept of the enormity of her crime.
There are many startling similarities to the Kercher murder. IMV Amanda wanted Mez 'dealt with' and goaded Rudy and Raff into being accomplices, as she was - like Caffey - the reckless, irresponsible mastermind, using the promise of sex and driven by jealousy and spite.
In the USA Amanda would be serving life without parole, on the evidence, or even the death penalty, so congratulations, Friends of Amanda, for defending the indefensible.
In the US, there have been many cases of wrongful conviction, and while not all have been corrected, as of May 15, 2016, there have been 1,783 exonerations of the wrongfully convicted since 1989. Source:
http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/about.aspx
It is indeed an interesting phenomenon that a few anonymous internet posters focus on one case of wrongful provisional conviction in Italy, which was corrected by the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation one year ago, by their acquittal of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito of the rape/murder of Meredith Kercher.
Only Knox's allegedly wrongful final conviction for calunnia against Patrick Lumumba remains legally standing, and that case awaits review by the European Court of Human Rights, which will, based on ECHR case-law, be certain to find that Knox's defense rights were violated in that conviction (IMO).
It is striking that a first-instance Italian court has recently provisionally acquitted Knox of the charges of calunnia against the police for claiming in her trials and appeals that Italian police had mistreated her during her November 5/6 interrogation to coerce her to make statements against Lumumba. That court found that Knox was not guilty - had not committed the crime of calunnia against the police - because her defense rights had been violated during the interrogation.
Many of the posts against Knox and/or Sollecito misrepresent the facts or assume that an accused must prove themselves innocent, rather than that the State must prove them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt under Italian law.
Thus, for example, the State must establish that DNA profile results were obtained accurately and were not the result of contamination; it is not the obligation of the accused to demonstrate that there was contamination. In fact, a careful reading of Stefanoni's results show that there was indeed contamination in her DNA lab results in this case; see:
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contamination-labwork-coverup/
The contamination would more likely affect the allegedly incriminating evidence against Knox and Sollecito rather than the evidence against Guede.
The amount of DNA allegedly on the blade of the knife taken from Sollecito's kitchen was actually "too low" to be detected by the Qubit fluorometer used by Stefanoni for quantification. Thus, any DNA attributed to the knife blade is likely to be merely contamination. It is up to the State to show that it somehow was not. And the State did not show that it wasn't contamination, or that validated procedures of DNA profile analysis were followed. The suppression of DNA electronic raw data by the State show that the State is hiding something - most likely widespread contamination in Stefanoni's DNA lab.
The DNA on the bra clasp included that from several males, several of whom remain unidentified. The clasp was shown in the police video tape to have been handled by the dirty gloves of the scientific police when recovered. This is contamination by definition.
So the posts continuing to claim that they are somehow guilty, contrary to the final and irreversible acquittal of Knox and Sollecito by the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation, and contrary to all the evidence and lack of evidence as understood from a scientific and reasoned viewpoint, are indeed one of the larger mysteries of this case.
