(By Michaelsmth)
As the jury adjourns for deliberations in the appeal of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito later this week, it is the hope of true justice seekers everywhere that they will look beyond the shenanigans of the prosecutors including (and definitely not an exhaustive list):
- The outrageous name-calling they’ve reduced themselves to
- The unfortunate and poor choice of displaying the pictures of Meredith Kercher’s body to the courtroom and, as extension, the public
- Tthe request for additional time added to their sentences as well as up to six months solitary confinement (For good behavior? For "enjoying" prison too much?)
The jury should ask themselves these 10 questions in determining the future of Amanda and Raffaele. They already have the answers; the defense presented each one clearly and unequivocably.
- Do you really believe the police did not know the bloody shoe print they used to arrest Raffaele on Nov.5th did not match his shoes (which they confiscated)?
- If Amanda was not a suspect at the time, and they did not plan to interrogate her, why did Matteini state at the hearing on Nov.8th that they thought she was dangerous and wanted her arrested before her mother arrived on Nov.6th ?
- Do you think it was just a giant coincidence that after the shoe print was proven (by Raffaele’s family) not to be his, and the police had absolutely no evidence against him whatsoever, they went back in and found the bra clasp? And the clasp just happened to have one spot of his DNA on it? Just a coincidental lucky break at the perfect time?
- Raffaele and Amanda are extremely intelligent, and by prosecution’s account diabolical. Therefore, they would have instantly known the police, upon arrival, would certainly break into Meredith’s room. If they were actually aware of her body in the room, wouldn’t they have shown (or by prosecution’s account faked) the same alarm Filomena did, and asked the room be broken into? Why would they want to misdirect police when it would have been obvious the body would be discovered? Isn’t their concern over the break-in proof they were clueless about what was in that room?
- Even though you are patriotic Italian citizens, don’t you see something wrong with being asked to judge Patrick’s civil case at the same time as the criminal one? Don’t you see as problematic that an interrogation ruled inadmissible by your own supreme court is entered anyway through the separate civil suit? Isn’t there a problem with the attorney for the civil suit making statements about Amanda’s guilt in the criminal one?
- Doesn’t the idea of a 20 year old girl being questioned throughout the night, without being allowed a lawyer when she asked for one, by 12 tough police officers, bother you? Do you think it accidental that they don’t have the video recordings? Have you seen the evidence proving Amanda was already a suspect?
- On that note, don’t you find it suspicious that not one single person who knew Amanda in Seattle saw her dark side? That during all her years in school, especially at Seattle Prep, her dark side never exhibited itself even once? I am a high school teacher, and I can assure you this is impossible! How can a girl with a ‘dark side’ hide it totally from everyone who knew her?
- Don’t you find it problematic that all the behaviors used to prove Amanda’s dark side were also exhibited by Meredith – and most other 20 year olds from the U.S. and Great Britain?
- Have you ever heard of any other case where someone committed a violent act due to the influence of marijuana?
- Have you ever heard of Occam’s Razor – that the simplistic answer is usually the correct one?
To the jury, it should be clear by now that the forensics are useless, and there are a great deal of problems with all the other so-called evidence. So there is only one more question:
What is your definition of reasonable doubt?
If it is the same as mine, it should only take 30 minutes or so for an acquittal! Please, do the right thing. Give Amanda and Raffaele their lives back.