There is nothing irrelevent about the argument about the crediblity of the investigation prosecution or outcome of this case in face that argument about the credibility is itself a major part of this story  Whether one chooses to believe it or not there are a lot of inconsistencies with the method of investigation enough so that part of Amandas interrogation was thrown out by the Italian Supreme Court prosecution the prosecution admitted that they believed Amanda was guilty early on simply because of her behavior httpwwwcbsnewscomhtml the prosecution DID admit to withholding key evidence against Raffale Sollecito the bra clasp halting the trial for a monthand the outcome it is a fact that the judge took cell phone calls and members of the jury fell asleep during the defense portion of the trial  These are facts   The purpose of Wikipedia is to tell the entire story not just the part that is convenient  People above are correct  this is not the forum to debate the trial but it IS the forum to define the trial  The trial definitely has in consistencies and that needs to be narrated  You dont have to agree to it but you do have to allow it  If not it is the editors here who are using Wikipedia as an incorrect venue to be a forum of proguilt only