Tuesday, June 28, 2011

GQ Italy: Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito Are Innocent


Click here to view the original article in Italian.

English Translation

"This could be one of the most important judicial errors of recent years. And the reason is simple: there is not enough evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for a conviction. In other words: as far as a court is concerned, they cannot have killed Meredith Kercher." So says criminologist Giorgia Quadri, commenting on one of the most notable crime and legal stories of the last few years: the Perugia murder. Rudy Guede, an Ivorian, has already been definitively sentenced (to 16 years in prison) for the killing of English student Meredith Kercher, which happened on the night between November 1 and 2, 2007. The appeal trial of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox, sentenced at the first level to 25 and 26 years [respectively], is still in progress. And just yesterday, Guede blamed the two youths [for the crime]. "But they have a number of things going for them", says Quadri. Here are seven of them:

1. "The 'proof' that convicted Sollecito consists of two items: a shoeprint -- which however the judges acknowledged to be Guede's -- and a tiny trace of DNA on Meredith's bra clasp. Which, however, was collected 46 days after the first inspection and -- it should be stressed -- with quite a few errors on the part of the law enforcement personnel on the scene. In sum: that miniscule trace could have ended up there due to a technical error".

2.  "Of Knox, however, there is no trace at all at the crime scene. The 'smoking gun" against her is the slander against Patrick Lumumba. But let's not forget that Knox named Lumumba after 53 hours and 45 minutes of interrogation. The kiss given to Sollecito outside the Perugia cottage, with Meredith's dead body still inside, also carries weight. But let's not forget that at the time, Amanda was hardly more than a kid -- she was 20 years old -- she was in a country other than her own, and found herself at the scene of a horrible crime".

3. "They say that they found the knife that was used to kill Meredith at Sollecito's house. A 31-centimeter knife that Amanda, according to the prosecution, was carrying around in her purse to defend herself with. But who goes around with that kind of weapon in their purse? There are DNA traces of Amanda on the handle of this knife, very tiny traces of Meredith on the tip. They washed it with bleach, according to the prosecution: is it possible that the washing was selective, and didn't remove Amanda's DNA from the handle?"

4.  "Sollecito is also accused because of his calls to the Carabinieri, which were allegedly made subsequent to the arrival of the Postal Police at the house on Via Della Pergola. But this timeline was later refuted; [and] who would call the Carabinieri with the Police on site, and why?

5.  "There's actually no proof that Guede knew Knox and Sollecito. Rudy himself has always said he saw "a figure that resembled Sollecito", but nothing more. And there's another anomaly: usually, in these cases, the people who are accused start accusing each other in turn, absolving themselves. In the case of the Perugia murder, this has not happened".

6.  "The reconstruction of events by the prosecution is somewhat fanciful: Guede supposedly became aroused on seeing Knox and Sollectio's displays of affection; he entered Meredith's room, started to assault her, the screams would have brought in Raffaele and Amanda who, thinking it was a game, would have bound, assaulted, and killed Kercher. There's no reason why two people in the process of exchanging affections, who enter a room where a stranger is assaulting Amanda's roommate, would take it upon themselves to torture Meredith. And in fact, the only thing the judges wrote was that Amanda and Meredith hated each other. Hardly enough for this kind of murder, don't you think?"

7.  "Even if we accept the version of the facts that came out of the first-level trial, how is it possible that Guede leaves traces everywhere -- including feces in the bathroom of the house, where he didn't flush;something that could also be a sign of guilt, given that feeling ill after a criminal act is not unusual -- and Amanda and Raffaele leave none? With all this excitement going on, is it [really] possible that the only trace would be a miniscule DNA finding on the clasp of Kercher's bra?"

No comments: