It is true that the British media was not as biased as the American press about Knox's trial. They told the public of the 'double life' she had, as she has received a criminal conviction for hosting a party that got out of control and yet was still seen as this angelic figure by her parents.
I was very interested with this case, and so began to research it. That is when I came across the film 'Amanda Knox: Murder on trial in Italy' where Knox was well played by actress Hayden Panetierre. I decided to watch it even though there was a possibility that it could have been biased, but it just confused me even more. Did she do it or not?
I know people morn differently, but if I had found out that my roommate had been brutally killed, I would be in state of shock, that I probably would not even be able to talk, let alone kiss my boyfriend.
She also appeared in court with a smile; was she smiling because she knew she was innocent and so had nothing to worry about? But who would smile in this situation? Your roommate has been brutally killed and you are a firm suspect...I certainly would not find this funny!
Recently, there has been proof that the evidence used against her was mishandled which shows that she may not have done it. But what if, the Italian forensic department made a huge mistake of not carrying the evidence properly, as because of it, there is a chance that Knox could be freed for a crime she may have done.
What are your views?
All The Gossips (Shammy)
xoxo
regardless, there are over 100 pieces of evidence to convict Guede. his DNA, fingerprints, footprints, etc. were all over the cottage and Meredith's room. even if all the prosecution had was the tiny DNA they found on the tiny bra clasp and the tiny DNA on the knife (which should be noted was proven not to be the murder weapon recently by DNA - but also by the fact it did not match Meredith's wounds, bloody knife prints on the bed, etc.) that's still only 2 TINY pieces of evidence in a room where their DNA should be all over the place if they were involved - as is Guede's. the fact there was nothing for the independent italian experts to even retest speaks volumes to how much was actually fabricated. when all is said and done - EXTRAORDINARY ACCUSATIONS DEMAND EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE, and it's simply not there.
ReplyDeletewhat I really want answers is for her behavior after she found out that her roommate had been killed. why was she not traumatised? Did she not like her roommate that much?
ReplyDeleteFrom the other roommates testimony, she was crying and sobbing like everyone else and with everyone else. it's just that it was not in front of the cameras. she did not have family in Italy, so she was being comforted by Raffaele, and maybe it was bad judgement to kiss him outside of the cottage that day, but that does not make her a murderer. at that point, she did not know she would be investigated and ultimately convicted of killing her friend and roommate. also, she was stretching while in police custody because they kept her there for days in a small room while being interrogated, but her "stretching" was leaked to the tabloids as her doing "kartwheels" the tabloids also spoke of her buying "lingerie" the day after the murder, but she was photographed buying underwear and clothes at a department store simply because she had no clothes. the cottage was a closed crime scene and all of Amanda's clothes were locked inside. She was being closely scrutinized by the media and her actions were turned around to look like something they weren't in order to support the case for the prosecution. and, after all, what is going to sell more papers for these tabloids - a robbery gone wrong or a sex-crazed orgy gone wrong with a pretty white girl as the knife-weilding devil in charge?? they weren't going to let little things like common sense or EVIDENCE get in their way.
ReplyDeleteyeah that's true, I didn't see it that way.
ReplyDelete