GUILTY: AMANDA KNOX, at The Very least, Was Involved in the Murder of MEREDITH KERCHER

I'm going to summarize my opponents arguments that Amanda was somehow involved in meridith's murder and then address her/his points one by one. The case against Amanda Knox, 1. She is a cold hearted liar therefore she was involved in the murder of Meredith. 2. There was a break in staged therefore Amanda Knox did it. 3. There is no evidence Amanda Knox wasn't involved so she was. This is clearly a very weak case against Knox. Even without taking into account the unwarranted attack on her character and the fact that a Judge overturned the conviction because of lack of evidence and the political motives involved in seeing her " burned at the stake". My case for Knox, I made arguments showing the Italian judicial system being biased and corrupt in this specific situation. They were corrupted and biased by inherently being corrupt, political motives and jurors being biased by the media's character assassination on Amanda Knox. My opponent has simply ignored my arguments. Rebuttals, I want to address every point my opponent makes so I will be numbering my responses to correspond with his/her arguments at the beginning of this round. 1. A. Lack of evidence Amanda didn't commit murder isn't evidence that supports that she did commit or was involved with murder. B. Mixed DNA in the bathroom and other shared rooms is evidence of cohabitation not of murder. When the murder weapon and Merideth's room was tested for DNA only Guede's and Merideth's were found. C. DNA evidence is microscopic it is ridiculous to claim that evidence was selectively removed that would implicate Knox and Sollecito by the accused. You can't pinpoint your own DNA in a crime scene and remove it. Where would anyone get the ideal that this is a feasible scenario? 2. This statement is just an attack and a smear on people doing their job to make sure all sides of a story get told. It's an honorable thing to attempt to ensure a fair trial is to be had by someone already convicted in the court of public opinion. 3. I've tried to verify the statements you've made where possible. I went into this debate not knowing much about the Knox trial. I was excited to take on this debate so I've probably read over a 100 articles on this subject since we've started. However coverage outside of Italy doesn't go into the same details as Italian coverage does. Even if you cite sources that are entirely written in Italian, it would be extremely useful in helping me verify your statements so I can do my own analysis on the subject instead of depending on your interpretation. 4. Yes, like I said the defense experts testified that one attacker commuted the crime. These 2 experts disagreeing is plenty of reasonable doubt to the 2 attacker theory. 5. I don't understand this statement. If there is some sort of cultural differences that can be discussed that will explain it that would be helpful. Where I'm located I can walk into some of the worst neighborhoods and knock on doors and people will generally open the door without thinking. I you need verification of this I can leave the numbers of some Jehovah witness churches in my area in the next round to verify it. 6. This is where sources would come in handy. How would the conclusion be made that a break in was staged the next day? I understand that your saying a break in was staged but how do you conclude that it was the next day instead of the night of ? 7. All of this is speculation. Some of the speculation is silly such as the ability to flush rubber gloves down the toilet. There must be some extremely powerful toilets in Italy. Knox's supposed statement to Filomena can't be verified and Knox's refusing to deny it is not and admittance to saying it. 8. Guede has plenty of reason to lock the door. It delays the body being found and gives him time to seperate himself from the crime. 9. Regardless, the statement still stands. They had no reason to inspect a rotting corpse as opposed to pictures taken shortly after death. The pictures would likely still paint a superior picture of what happened. 10. It doesn't help or hurt it is besides the point. When Knox pointed the finger at the wrong guy it was clear she was speculating and the speculation only came after being slapped around, denied food and water by cops, and denied a translator. 11. These behaviors don't indicate guilt. She is clearly being affectionate with her boyfriend to seek comfort in a time of great distress. The splits and cartwheels are clearly exxagerated from an incident that happened when she was left alone in the interrogation room. She has been sitting in the same chair for hours And her stretching out was oddly somehow used to make her into some sort of villain. The smirks in the courtroom don't indicate a cold heart either. Even in the face of tragedy and intense political persecution people still ussually seek a sense of normalcy. 12. Alibis are typically a little inconsistent. People don't realize that they are going to be thrown in the middle of a police investigation and therefore don't keep track of everything they are doing. Murderers typically are consistent with their alibi though the alibi can't ussually be supported. 13. I already covered this. We don't know for a fact the break in was staged and we don't know it was staged the next day because as opposed to the same night. No evidence has been provided to me or the readers. 14. I've covered most of these points. Disputes with room mates is the norm it's not a motive for murder. Her behavior has been unfairly interpreted as cold. Her drug use is greatly exxagerated I've only seen evidence of some recreational pot smoking. 15. I provided a link to a photo. I just rechecked the link it still works fine. 16. What a 43 year old experienced person would do in a situation is going to be completely different then what a teenage girl would do. You're comparing apples to oranges her behavior in situation won't match anyone else's behavior in that situation guilty or not. I await my opponents response.