On October 3, 2011 I wrote a little piece expressing doubts about the innocence of American student Amanda Knox.
A few days ago I read that on her third trial in Italy Amanda Knox was found guilty again of participating in the slaying her roommate Meredith Kercher.
After researching her background again, I still think that despite her many claims of innocence, she was heavily involved in the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz arbors similar thoughts.
“This is not a case, as it’s been projected in the media, of no evidence at all. It’s a case of the kind that would have resulted probably in a conviction in most courts in America. And so yet, because she is attractive, and because she has created a media campaign all over the country, she’s become very popular. And I don’t think we should do justice by popularity or justice by the way a person looks. This is a case for extradition.”
The victim, he said, has largely been ignored by the American media, which has been supportive of Knox.
“In Italy, it’s exactly the opposite. In Italy, she’s Al Capone, she’s the worst murderer in history.”
************
Here is what I wrote in 2011:
My child is innocent
I have heard this a million times. Parents, relatives, friends, all refuse to believe that somebody they know could be guilty of any dastardly deed. And with scant details about a crime committed far away, they embark on a campaign to free somebody they perceive to be “innocent”.
Call me a curmudgeon, a heartless mud peddler or whatever you like, but I have always been deeply suspicious of any organized defense groups.
Why does anybody support somebody? Is it because they went to church or played golf with him/her? And does that make this particular person an all around good guy, incapable of doing the unthinkable?
I don’t think so.
How could any of these zealots really know if the accused person is guilty or not? And what do they really know about the case?
Only what the defense attorney will allow them to know, and personally I trust defense attorneys as far as I can throw them.
O.J. Simpson, Joran Van der Sloot, Anthony Casey, Dominique Strauss-Kahn… All these people were under a very dark cloud of suspicion but were set free thanks to very vocal support groups, highly partial family members, a battalion of attorneys and truckloads of money.
In the same vein, I read yesterday day that Amanda Knox, the angelic looking American student accused of being involved in the murder of roommate Meredith Kercher was set free.
But is the little doe-eyed angel really as innocent as she looks?
By her own admission, Amanda prior to her arrest was pretty much living a life of drugs, sex and rock and roll. She has acknowledged a few times smoking hashish and marijuana.
That doesn’t make her guilty, but it sheds a certain light on her moral character and tarnishes a bit the glow of her angelic aura.
As far as this crime is concerned, only three people would know the truth: Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito her Italian paramour and Rudy Guede, an African born petty thief. So far none of them have come clean.
Amanda for one, made several contradictory statements and told lies repeatedly. Duress she said.
So far, only Rudy (a man without any visible sign of public or family support) remains in jail.
The Knox’s family on the other hand, invested enormous means to win the freedom of their daughter.
Various funds were established for Amanda and Raffaele to help with these expenses.
The Knox’s family also engaged the services of a Seattle-based public relations firm, to buttress their case and sway public opinion in their favor.
They also spoke relentlessly with journalists and appeared on several TV talk shows, including the Oprah Winfrey Show.
This all out campaign obviously helped.
Under relentless pressure from high-powered attorneys and the media, the Italian prosecutors caved in and the original guilty sentence was reversed.
Has justice been served?
I cannot help but have lingering doubts.
Alain
