I think with reasonably high confidence that you will be on the ‘K/S are innocent, and G guilty’; perhaps 70% confidence
My sources are occasional articles in the NY Times, a few other mainstream media by way of Reddit, and 30 minutes of reading through the 2 linked sites. The blog one seemed very bad to me; I gave up reading it in disgust about halfway through the post on the telephone chronology, because I was tired of the breathless insinuations that if someone has a detailed phone-call, obviously they must remember it flawlessly hours or weeks later even despite an incredibly number of events & conversations in between, and any claim to the contrary is just a cover-up. I wasn’t surprised to see the pro-Knox website mention that the one-fingerprint was not significant according to the fingerprint expert witness.
(This makes sense to me—if Knox were industriously cleaning up the entire cottage, how could she miss a glass cup? I mean, you can actually see fingerprints on glass cups, so I don’t how she could very competently clean up all the hidden and obscure fingerprints that there was insinuated to exist and then have a sudden fit of utter incompetence with the dishes.)
My original opinion was roughly 50%, moving to 60% when I heard of the conviction, but if the anti-Knox’s case is that bad… And I have difficulty with the explanations of why Guede would kill Knox in conjunction with 2 others.
~40%
~20%
~60%
I think with reasonably high confidence that you will be on the ‘K/S are innocent, and G guilty’; perhaps 70% confidence
My sources are occasional articles in the NY Times, a few other mainstream media by way of Reddit, and 30 minutes of reading through the 2 linked sites. The blog one seemed very bad to me; I gave up reading it in disgust about halfway through the post on the telephone chronology, because I was tired of the breathless insinuations that if someone has a detailed phone-call, obviously they must remember it flawlessly hours or weeks later even despite an incredibly number of events & conversations in between, and any claim to the contrary is just a cover-up. I wasn’t surprised to see the pro-Knox website mention that the one-fingerprint was not significant according to the fingerprint expert witness.
(This makes sense to me—if Knox were industriously cleaning up the entire cottage, how could she miss a glass cup? I mean, you can actually see fingerprints on glass cups, so I don’t how she could very competently clean up all the hidden and obscure fingerprints that there was insinuated to exist and then have a sudden fit of utter incompetence with the dishes.)
My original opinion was roughly 50%, moving to 60% when I heard of the conviction, but if the anti-Knox’s case is that bad… And I have difficulty with the explanations of why Guede would kill Knox in conjunction with 2 others.
(And now to look at what everyone else wrote!)