Who here believes Amanda Knox is innocent? And Why?
And now her mother is charged with slander...
- Xavier's Mommy ツLv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
They arrested three people for murder in this crime. Rudy Geaude (16 years), Amanda Knox (26 years) and That Raffele person (25 years), and Amanda Knox was gaven a longer sentence than the other people. From the shape of the victims body (she had what, 20+ bruises, countless stab wounds) they couldn't tell how many attackers they were (but, that many bruises, either it was one person who seriously hated her, or more than one)
The police had found two cellphones laying in the bushes that belonged to [someone who wasn't arrested--dont remember the name] and the other belonged to the victim.
Amanda had called a friend to tell them that the door had been opened and their was blood, and she suspected someone had robbed the place because the window was shattered. As did, Raffele (however you say the name--the third person arrested and found quilty) who reportably phoned the police--saying their was a possible burglary. (both we're found outside--why would they call the police and stick around if they were guilty? i'd be getting out of there!)
When they question Amanda Knox, she said she was in the kitchen while Patrick Lumumba (the boss of the bar she worked) murdered the girl. Then took the statement back, saying she was being 'tricked' or whatever. (Okay, so shes lied? what I dont understand is why she lied? how can you be tricked into saying someone killed someone else while you were in the kitchen?) and then she goes on to say shes not 'for sure' where she was the night of the murder and that Patrick didn't do it. (okay? theirs another lie, and how do you not know where your forsure at? I think if I was being looked @ for murder--I'd be thinking real hard about where I'd been and what I was doing)
Guede's bloody fingerprint was found at the crimescene on her pillow, handbag, and a roll of toilet paper in the bathroom. (okay, so he infact had a hand in the murder)
Sollecito's DNA was found on the victmins bra--along with three other [unknown matches] on the metal clasp of the bra. (whose to say he didnt get intimate with her and take off her bra? maybe she wore the same bra more than once before washing it--thats not unheard of)
Knox's footprints were found inside the room (mixed with the victmins blood--so she stepped in the victmins blood and walked around the room), aswell as from a knife that had the victims blood on the blade they found at Sollecito's apartment. but no other DNA was found of KNOX'S in the victims house, besides a glass in the sink.
I'm unsure if I think shes innocent or not, but I do think she knows something, like how did the victims blood get on a knife that Knox's DNA was all over? Either she knows who killed that girl, or she helped kill her. But, also maybe Sollecito used that knife to kill the girl and wore gloves and since Knox was his girlfriend--sure, she could have used the knife at some point.
Theyre is just alot of questions in this case. Like why did she lie? (make those two statements, only to take them back) was she trying to cover for someone? It's obvious Gaeude murdered her (the bloody fingerprints and his dna everywhere in the room) and the only evidence linking Sollecito was his DNA on a bra clasp, that they didnt get until like a month after the murder took place and whose to say the victim didn't consent to have sex with him (before she was killed) and maybe, he really didn't rape or murder her.
I'm unsure, some evidence (such as the knife and her two statements she retracked) scream "guilty" but theirs also other innocent explanations that could make her "innocent"
- EisbärLv 71 decade ago
WOW! So glad I live in the US. We can't be criminally charged here for "slandering" the government.
I really can't definitively say she's innocent, but from all the media and Dateline episodes and stuff, it really looks like a botched investigation and all the so-called evidence they have seems really un-reliable. A guy already confessed to it and then got a lighter sentence by implicating her and her boyfriend. They also didn't follow proper police procedures for a homicide investigation and they didn't even properly secure the scene. They ignored important facts like open windows, and they took stuff from Amanda's home, found DNA on it, and then said she committed the crime. Gee, my DNA would be all over my house too if I lived there. They also didn't have any logical motive. Not one person said they ever had any reason to hate each other. And regardless of whether a "slap" occurred, they interrogated her for 24 hours. That can break down anyone and make them delirious with all the shock, and utter exhaustion she probably was going through. I don't think anything she said incriminating herself was done voluntarily. It would totally have been thrown out here. If she was tried in the US, I don't think a jury would have been able to find her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I guess only the victim really knows... but we can't ask her. I feel bad for her loss of life. It was such a tragic crime, but it is also a crime to have an innocent person suffer for a crime they didn't commit.
- AbeLincolnPartyLv 61 decade ago
Maybe not entirely innocent.
Suppose you had a college age daughter, and her room mate on occasion brought in complete strangers who were drug addicts to effect the purchases of drugs. That disregard for the safety of her room mate allowed criminal elements to be able to target the property and/or the people inside.
She deserves something, but the slander thing is crap.
- rmonLv 61 decade ago
i do. it just seemed as if the Italian media had pronounced her guilty from all the rumors and lies that were spreading, and the jury basically believed every word they heard.
oh yeah, and the FACT that they have NO EVIDENCE placing her at the crime!
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- milyfazLv 61 decade ago
i do, the physical evidence is telling she is not guilty.