More significant, it seems to me (though still rather weak evidence), is the Alessi testimony, about which I actually considered posting on the March open thread. Still, the story is enough of a surprise to marginally lower my probability of Guede’s guilt.
I hadn’t heard about this—I just read your link though, and maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see how it lowers the probability of Guede’s guilt. He (supposedly) confessed to having been at the crimescene, and that Knox and Sollecito weren’t there. How does that, if true, exonerate Guede?
The Aviello testimony would exonerate Guede (and hence is unlikely to be true); the Alessi testimony is essentially consistent with everything else we know, and isn’t particularly surprising at all.
I hadn’t heard about this—I just read your link though, and maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see how it lowers the probability of Guede’s guilt. He (supposedly) confessed to having been at the crimescene, and that Knox and Sollecito weren’t there. How does that, if true, exonerate Guede?
You omitted a crucial paragraph break. :-)
The Aviello testimony would exonerate Guede (and hence is unlikely to be true); the Alessi testimony is essentially consistent with everything else we know, and isn’t particularly surprising at all.
I’ve edited the comment to clarify.
Ahhhh… ok I see where the misunderstanding was now.