Amanda Knox Case

“Either I’m a psychopath in sheep’s clothing, or I am you” (Gittens). Amanda Knox stated in her new documentary. In the court case of Meredith Kercher’s murder, Amanda Knox’s profile developed from a student studying abroad to a cold-blooded killer. Amanda Knox was accused and acquitted of the murder of Kercher. Debate continues about the case, as the evidence from both sides is highly disputable. In the controversial court case of Meredith Kercher, the innocent verdict correctly acquitted Amanda Knox for three reasons: DNA proved unreliable, no witnesses could testify, and investigators mishandled evidence. The assumed murder weapon received improper testing, and DNA found on the knife proved unreliable. No blood was discovered on the knife

The result was negative. There was no blood on the knife” (Truth… Knife). It has been believed that there was blood found on the knife; however, this is a false statement. There was no blood on the knife, which makes committing a crime with it near impossible. The knife was also improperly tested while searching for DNA on the blade. Mark C. Waterbury, Ph.D, stated that no control experiments were performed on the knife before testing, making contamination from the lab very possible (Truth…Knife). The lab that tested the knife handled large amounts of Meredith’s DNA at the time, making cross contamination very possible. When the knife arrived at the lab, the blade did not contain any of Meredith Kercher’s DNA. Patrizia Stefanoni was the scientist that performed these DNA tests, and she used a very new, unproven technique called low copy number DNA profiling, which she was not certified to do. This discredits the reliability of the tests done in Stefanoni’s lab, as she used unproven techniques with improper equipment in an improper laboratory. “Touch” DNA was found on the knife, but no blood was found. According to Elizabeth A. Johnson, Ph.D, if a knife

Antonio Curatolo was the only person that claimed to have seen Amanda and Raffaele near the scene of the murder shortly before. According to the organization Injustice in Perugia, “Curatolo testified nine times that he saw Amanda and Raffaele hanging around outside from 11:30 pm to 12:00 am” (A Witness). This testimony contradicted the timeline that the prosecution attempted to prove. The prosecution called this witness, and it backfired, as Curatolo actually disproved their evidence. This evidence gives the defense, and Amanda Knox, a foothold against the prosecution. Antonio Curatolo was deemed an unreliable witness. Injustice in Perugia claims that Curatolo’s testimony after the conviction confirms what the defense had been trying to say the whole time; that Curatolo was not a reliable witness, and that the prosecution would not be able to base their whole case on this one witness (A Witness). Anthony Curatolo admitted to using heroin on a regular basis, but the court still accepted his testimony. This was the first warning sign of mendacious behavior. Once his testimony was denied, no witnesses put Amanda and Raffaele at the scene of the murder in the prosecution’s time frame. The court did not base its decision on Curatolo’s testimony, but rather on what it wanted to hear. The court rejected nine out of ten statements made by Anthony Curatolo, all nine of which provided an alibi for Amanda and Raffaele. Judge Massei