“• A knife with Knox's DNA on the handle and a trace of Kercher’s DNA on the blade. The defense argues the amount of DNA was to small to identify it as Knox's DNA.”
A kitchen knife that was used many times by her while using the kitchen and making meals. I bet if, God-forbid, there was a murder in your home and the weapon was a knife from your kitchen, the police would find your DNA on it
“•Two luminol-enhanced footprints presumably made by Knox in Kercher’s blood in the hallway outside her bedroom. The defense argues they could have been made in fruit juice, rust or cleaning agents and noted that no specific test for blood was conducted. One of the footprints was in a size 37. Knox's shoes were all size 37 or 38.”
She comes home and walks in the blood. If you come home and enter your home, find someone you know murdered, you likey already would have contaminated the scene by merely entering the location before you realized it, or you contaminated the scene because you went to the victim to see if you could help. Of course you would walk into the scene in any event and leave footprints.
“•Five drops of mixed-blood genetic material.”
But not her blood?
“•A staged burglary, yet valuables were not taken, and the body having been moved to suggest a sexual assault when none took place.”
Not unusual for sexual assaults that failed.
“The broken glass from the alleged entry window was found on top of the scattered clothing and items from emptied drawers, suggesting that the entry was staged after the burglary was staged.”
And this implicates her. . .how?
“•Witnesses to circumstantial evidence, such as Knox and Kercher arguing, Knox buying cleaning materials, etc.”
Arguing between roommates? And this somehow contributes to guilt? And those were bought when and with what other items?
“•Kercher’s bra clasp, which had been cut off the victim, found in Knox's boyfirend’s room, with a significant amount of the boyfriend's DNA on it. It wasn't picked up by the police until 46 days after the murder and in a slightly different place than photographed before.”
So, a piece from the victim bra was cut-off and photographed at one location, and then 46 days later (and Knox never being back to the secured scene), she somehow moved the bra item. . .and for what purpose? And the bra item was not picked up by the police until 46 days later. . .and important piece of forensic evidence that was over-looked but then “found” later by the police and it had some DNA on it. . .weird.
“•Knox blaming Patrick Lumumba for the murder.”
Yes. Not a problem at all. During police questioning they usually ask “who do you think might have done this?” She answered. (In university a guy that I didn't get along with had his car vandalized. . .the police asked him who he thinks might have done it. He provided a list of names, mine included. Does his pointing the finger at other people indicate he was guilty?)
And the victim's DNA on the blade? And the wounds on the victim consistent with that knife? That's possible.
"Five drops of mixed-blood genetic material.” But not her blood?
I wasn't clear. Five drops of mixed-blood genetic material consisting of Knox's blood and Kercher's blood.
Arguing between roommates? And this somehow contributes to guilt?
It's circumstantial evidence frequently used in United States courts to demonstrate motive. Is it indicative to guilt in all cases? Of course not.
She comes home and walks in the blood.
I don't remember the timeline, but Knox and her boyfriend claim not to have found the body until many hours after the murder. Blood dries, even if you are inclined to step in puddles of blood.
The bra evidence has nothing to do with Knox - it has to do with her boyfriend being involved with the murder. The theory all along has been that Knox and her boyfriend - and possibly a third party - committed the murder. There's no allegation Knox moved the bra clasp.
I didn't present a definitve list of evidence against Knox, such as the mop, the bleach, and so on.
Now, do I believe that Knox is guilty?
I said I'm not certain.
What I do know are a few things:
Knox was subjected to police misconduct and prosecutorial misconduct.
Knox was subjected to anti-American sentiments.
Knox was tried in the media and evidence that was inadmissible at trial, including Knox's own journal, was leaked in the media.
There is also DNA evidence pointing to the presence of a person in addition to Knox and her boyfriend.
Knox's supporters either ignore all forensic and other evidence supporting her guilt or immediately dismiss it, not matter what it is or how much there is.
The evidence against Knox is not definitive, as clearly shown by the original not guilty verdict.
Amanda testified there was no blood on the floor.