AMANDA KNOX and RAFFAELE SOLLECITO: GUILTY as SIN!

My opponent just makes isolated and *conclusory* statements. He offers no evidentiary support and no unified theory of what happened that night. I"ll address a few general points. === Means, Motive, and Opportunity === To prove a murder by circumstantial evidence (i.e. without an eyewitness that saw the *whole thing*), the prosecution must prove that a suspect had means, motive, and opportunity. In the current case, Knox lacked means and motive. --- Motive --- My opponent mentions the prosecution's new theory: Knox killed Meredith because Meredith complained that Knox didn't flush the toilet. [9] This new theory is no better than the older ones about a demonic sex cult. Roommates have minor disputes about cleanliness all the time. These rarely, if ever, escalate to murder. Knox was a Dean"s List student with a bright future. She wouldn't have murdered her roommate for asking her to pick up more often. --- Means --- Knox is alleged to have perfectly erased any presence of herself and Sollecito from within Kercher's room. Putting aside the impossibility of actually doing this, no evidence was ever presented that Knox had the forensic expertise necessary to do so. The police searched Knox's and Sollecito's computers and never found any searches relating to how to clean up a crime scene. In addition, my opponent claims that this was a crime of passion - Knox killed Kercher because of a roommate spat. Yet, if the murder weapon was a kitchen knife from Sollecito's apartment, Knox would have needed to premeditate the murder and bring the knife with her to her apartment. Thus, the means [murder weapon] does not match the motive [roommate spat]. === The Alleged Cleanup === My opponent claims that it's been proven that the crime scene was cleaned up. This is not true. Using luminol, the police tested both Sollecito's and Knox's apartments for a cleanup. The luminol illuminated footprints both in Sollecito's bathroom and in the hallway in Knox's apartment. However, there are three reasons this doesn't prove a cleanup. Reason #1: there is no evidence of a cleanup inside *Kercher"s room.* The prosecution claims that Knox cleaned up in the hallway and bathroom of her apartment and in Sollecito's apartment. But, there is no evidence of a cleanup in Kercher's bedroom. Police did not find bleach residue or other telltale signs of a cleanup inside the murder room. In addition, it would be *impossible* for anyone to clean up their entire presence from Meredith's room while leaving *so much* DNA evidence from Guede in the room. It is hard to believe that Knox meticulously cleaned the common areas but said "fugg it, let's leave the actual room that we killed her in alone." Reason #2: police have no idea what the substance was. Police tested for bleach using luminol. Luminol turns blue in the presence of bleach, blood, and about twelve other substances. [10] As Steve Moore - veteran forensic expert at the FBI - explains, luminol always requires further testing to determine whether a substance is bleach, blood, or something else. [10] Police never did any further testing on the lit up footprints. [10] Instead, the police perjured themselves at trial about how luminol works in order to secure a conviction (that was later overturned on appeal). [10] Reason #3: a bleach-cleaned crime scene shows telltale signs. As Steve Moore explains, "A crime scene cleaned with bleach wouldn't have footprints or fingerprints; it would have wide swaths of bleach, many times in arcs that give away the tell-tale motions of cleaning and wiping . . . You would see luminol reactions everywhere; it would look like a huge florescent blue paint spill." [10] This is not what the police found at Knox's and Sollecito's apartments. [10] They found a few unidentified footprints and fingerprints. As Moore explains, any cleaning agent contains chemicals that will cause luminol to light up. [10] If a person ever cleans his or her bathroom, there will be some luminol reactions in his or her house. [10] Conclusion: there was no cleanup. It is illogical that someone would clean up part of the apartment, but not the murder room. And the luminol evidence actually shows the opposite: no telltale signs of a cleanup. If there was no cleanup, the prosecution has no way to explain why *no traces* of Knox were ever found in the murder room and why only one really sketchy piece of Sollecito's DNA was ever found, whereas massive amounts of Guedo"s DNA were found *all over* the room. The DNA evidence is far more consistent with Guedo acting alone than with Knox and Sollecito assisting him in the crime. === Did Meredith fight back? === My opponent claims that Meredith had no defensive wounds. However, I cited Steve Moore's analysis of the autopsy photos: Meredith had 46 wounds consistent with a violent struggle. As forensic expert Ron Hendry explains, Meredith's body contains fewer defensive wounds than one might expect from a *prolonged* struggle, but is consistent with one large male quickly overpowering and killing her. [11] In addition, as Steve Moore explains, during a struggle with a knife, the attacker usually cuts his or her own fingers because the attacker's hand slips over the blade while stabbing. [3] Guede's hands showed three cuts on his fingers consistent with just such a violent struggle over a knife. [3] Knox and Sollecito showed no evidence on their bodies that they were engaged in a violent struggle. [3] === The Knife === My opponent claims that Sollecito was known to carry a knife. His father testified that he sometimes carried a pen knife, which is a very small knife. [3] The police found no evidence of Kercher's DNA on the pen knife. Guede was known to carry a switchblade. [2] The police never found this weapon. Remember, the Italian Medical Examiner testified that of the five stab wounds on Meredith"s body, Sollecito's kitchen knife could *not* have inflicted four of them and *maybe* could have inflicted one of them. [2] It is more likely that the kitchen knife is not the murder weapon. Guede's switchblade is. === Proof that Guede and Knox knew each other === My opponent claims that Kokomani saw Guede and Knox together on two occasions. The evidence I cited last round says that Kokomani claimed to have hit Knox with his car (because he mistook her for a garbage bag???). He didn't see them on two occasions - he changed his story and said he hit them on two different dates. His testimony was proven completely incomprehensible at trial. It is strange that if Guede and Knox/Sollecito knew each other, they *never* called or texted each other. Guede was a drug dealer/criminal. Knox was an honors student. It seems unlikely that they ran in the same crowds. During her torturous interrogation, police pushed Knox to identify a suspect. Knox identified her boss (Lamumba) as the likely killer. If Knox had really staged the crime scene to look like a break-in and erased her presence there (but not Guede's), it would have made more sense to identify Guede [who had a history of burglary and his DNA was all over the room]. Why didn't Knox identify Guede to police? Because she didn't know him. === The Alibi === Knox and Sollecito's alibi is that they hung out together at Sollecito's apartment, ate dinner, watched a movie on his computer, and went to sleep. The computer shows evidence that it was accessed during this time period by someone, and Sollecito's friend has testified that he came by Sollecito's place half an hour before the murder and saw Sollecito and Knox together at Sollecito's apartment. No evidence has proven this alibi to be untrue. === Conclusion === In spite of massive police misconduct, the evidence is still more consistent with Guede acting alone. Pro fails to meet his burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Vote Con. [9] http://tinyurl.com... [10] http://tinyurl.com... [11] http://tinyurl.com... [12] http://tinyurl.com...