Amanda Knox was given milk and biscuits by her three cellmates

[The so-called “bloody footprints” of hers weren’t actually blood, just footprints. She lived there. That’s not evidence.]

Luminol reveals blood specifically as it shows up bright blue. This distinguishes it from other substances that also show up using luminol. This is a common technique regularly used by criminologists that work on crime scenes. Much of the blood evidence was successfully cleaned up (too bad for Knox those cops showed up unexpectedly). Why was Knox's and Meredith Kercher's DNA found mixed in blood in multiple bloody footprints and in 3 instances in the bathroom (where it was watered down from attempted cleaning).

[The knife was from their common kitchen.]

That could not be proven as the other two roommates said the knife was not from their kitchen and the knife was found at Sollecito’s house and had been cleaned with bleach. Why was it there?

The bathroom had 3 instances where Meredith's blood was mixed with Amanda's blood. Amanda tried to explain it away as a earring incident. However, she testified that there had been no blood in the bathroom the day before.

[The only actual bloody footprints and fingerprints were those of Rudy Guede, who testified in his case that nobody else was there at the time.]

Not true. One bloody footprint, left by Sollecito was visible to the naked eye on the bathroom rug. The blood was Meredith Kercher’s and the footprint was incompatible with Guede but matched Sollecito. It was testified at trial by forensics scientists that is was “likely” his.

And Guede gave 3 different narratives of what happened. In one, he placed both Knox and Sollecito at the scene. Knox in her own admission placed herself at the scene (in one of her many versions of events).

[But the case against her was very flimsy on real evidence.]

I disagree. In addition to the physical evidence there was a pile of additional “circumstantial evidence” that it is impossible to get into it all. For instance, the many times the Knox and Sollecito changed there alibis. At one point Sollecito even threw Knox under the bus saying she wasn't at his house. Eye witnesses placed them near the house. Both of them had just happened to turn there phones off prior to the time the murder took place and back on at 6:00 AM in the morning when they both claimed to have been asleep? Sollecito and Knox were standing outside the residence with next to a mop and bucket when the police showed up. The police showed up unexpectedly because the victim's 2 cell phones were found in the park where they were dumped (they were taken when she was left in her room to bleed to death). Why did Knox not call the police when she came home that morning? She tried to claim that she had but phone records proved that untrue. The exact time of the police arrival was documented and caught by a surveillance camera. The crime scene had been cleaned and staged—the body moved. Who other than Knox would have motive to come back to the residence and eliminate all evidence implicating herself and try to point police in another direction? Who else would have known that her roommates wouldn't be back? (Interestingly, the defense did not dispute the crime scene had been cleaned just that Knox and Sollecito had done it.) Knox accused her boss of killing her roommate both orally and in writing and in the process placed herself at the scene (many crimonologists say someone does not place themselves at a crime scene unless they were really there). Why did she falsely accuse her boss? Knox claims the oral accusation was coerced but there is not physical evidence to support this claim and other witnesses that testified it was not coerced. Multiple witnesses, including the other two roommates, testified as to Knox's inappropriate behavior the morning the victim's body was found. At one point, she callously spoke of how Meredith “bled to death.” Sollecito’s blood was found all over the clasp of the victim's bra (which is believed to have been removed after the murder. This was determined by blood patterns. Defense claimed it was "contaminated" but we have all heard that before. They made no such claims regarding the evidence implicating Guede. They did not prove it was contaminated. The crime scene was secured immediately following the crime. Sollecito claimed to have been home surfing the net but computer records proved that was not true. All the other roommates and close friends were questioned. None of them told multiple stories and kept having to change there alibi as they were repeatedly proven lies. I could go on and on with circumstancial evidence. Anyway, this case struck my fascination as I originally saw it on 48 Hrs. months ago and thought Knox and her boyfriend were falsely accused. Then I started researching. The report released by the judge after the Guede trial and in explanation for holding Knox/Sollecito over for trial is fascinating (Micheli Report). I followed the trial closely. Such a report will be issued based on this trial in March (this is something done in Italian courts). They have to explain the verdict, sentence, supporting evidence, and why they ruled the way the did. I don't know if it will contain information from the dissenting jurors. The one thing I see missing in the trial is motive. I just can't wrap my head around why they would have committed this crime (I'm not sure it was premeditated but a result of a series of events that spiraled out of control). Most likely drug-related, IMO. It is sad that a vibrant 21 year-old was mercilessly assaulted and killed, left helpless to bleed to death, and we will most likely never have an explanation of what really happened and why. I really hope justice has been served, although, I doubt that will help Meredith Kercher's family sleep at night.

I guess it depends on whether you believe tabloids or not. I tend not to. You obviously do. OK. So be it.

Experts testified at trial that the knife found at Sollecito’s apartment was compatible with the wound that killed Meredith Kercher. A second, smaller knife was used as well. This is the knife that left the imprint at the scene.

This is all information as presented at trial. I guess you think the evidence is irrelevant to the verdict and case if it doesn’t support your idea that Knox and her boyfriend are innocent. I’d rather base my conclusion on facts.

if she was a lesbian abortionist there wouldn’t be as much fascination either

so what?

its true of politicians, and celebrities in general...in fact, its a lot easier to get any job if you look good.

when you look good, when you project that you are happy, that you feel good...and then have solid conservative values, yes, we like you.

that makes us....human.

Oh, I know what was presented at trial. We all do, thanks to the tabloid press in Italy and their willingness to print whatever makes the best headlines. You believe whatever headlines say. I understand that... lots of people do. I tend to be more of a skeptic of what journalists spoon-feed me.

The Italian tabloids have been painting Miss Knox as a filthy American Slut since day one. I’m unconvinced that this is fair.

No doubt what you say is true.

Human nature. Boys will be boys.

Did they videotape the milk and biscuits thing? Will it be in the adult section?

Wonderful.

I figured someone would overreact.

Do you not agree that Sarah’s attractiveness adds to the favor she achieves in the public eye?

The reason I support Sarah so much, is that besides appearance, she really is a very strong and good person.

Amanda Knox may receive less punishment, due to the influence her appearance has. Just look at the comments on this thread.

So, they both are being treated a little differently because of their ‘appearance’.

Are they not?

Yes, I agree.

I also completely agree with your assessment of Sarah Palin.

(BTW, you do understand that my abuse button comment was tongue in cheek?)

(BTW, you do understand that my abuse button comment was tongue in cheek?)

Not at first.

Sarah at her 'worst' outshines Michelle Obama at her best.

You betchya!