Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannonball996
I followed the initial trial, and remember thinking she did it, and ironically there are quite a few similarities between Amanda Knox and Jodi Arias. her story did not make sense, it was full of holes, her foot print was in the blood. what really got me was that she stated she took a shower in the bathroom in the morning yet did not see the dead body and all the blood in the small bathroom.
|
Forensics proved that
no bloody prints belonged to Knox and the prosecution offered no evidence that they did.
She did notice blood in the bathroom and said so.
She could not have seen the body because it was in the bedroom,
behind a locked door!
The prosecution also claimed that luminol revealed Knox's bloody foot prints in the house. What they didn't say was that luminol reacts to many common things including some cleaning products and rust. They also didn't say that the foot prints were tested using the definitive test for blood and they all came back as negative for blood.
Although I'm beginning to sound like a cheerleader for Knox, I am not. I simply don't like to see unverified information, gossip, hearsay, and the contents of a universally acknowledged, illegally obtained statement that is inadmissible in court, being posted without offering factual rebuttal from knowledgable, first person sources, including actual trial transcripts. My mind is still open on this issue, but to date, I cannot find actual evidence or testimony that points to her involvement, let alone beyond a reasonable doubt.