I'm open to all possibilities

That a pretty far fetched claim to make, Darktan.

It's a complicated situation, first and foremost because the Italian system of justice is essentially "guilty until proven innocent;" in other words, if you're charged with a crime, chances are in the eyes of the jury pool there's a good reason why you were.

I've often heard of police waiting to charge someone with a crime until they have enough evidence to prove it, because they only get one shot at it.

That a pretty far fetched claim to make, Darktan. There is no evidence pointing to that conclusion apart from a claim made by one of the suspect (OJ, anyone?). I'm interested in this because apart from some accusations and hear-say there is nothing to indicate that Knox isn't guilty.

I'm open to all possibilities but as of now but I think many in this thread are operating on an emotional level and not a rational one. Up to now we've had ad hominem attacks on the entire Italian judicial system and even the vague notion that because she was American she was found guilty which is a weird one considering two other Italians are in prison for the crime as well. Frankly, unless someone can come up with a serious insight I'm chalking this one up to tribalism or nationalism.

Oh and the Perugian police have sued Knox's parents for defamation, a case they started in 2008. The claim that they beat a confession out of Knox didn't go down well, it seems.

Evidence: The knife
Who it hurts: The prosecution
The most contested piece of evidence in this murder case is the "double DNA knife," a six-and-a-half-inch kitchen knife found in Sollecito's apartment that has Knox's DNA on the handle—and, according to Italian forensic police expert Patrizia Stefanoni, Kercher's DNA on a groove on the blade. An officer testifying at the trial said he used "police intuition" when choosing that knife from Sollecito's cutlery. Officers testified that there was a strong smell of bleach in the apartment and that the knife had looked exceptionally clean. Stefanoni testified that it had tiny scratches on the side, compatible with intense scrubbing. According to multiple witnesses for the defense, the knife is compatible with at least one of the three wounds on Kercher's neck, but it was likely too large for the other two. And it does not match a knife print in blood that was left on Kercher's white bedsheet. More troubling for the prosecution is that, while the DNA on the handle is inarguably Knox's, the spot on the blade attributed to Kercher was so small that Stefanoni could not double-test it according to forensic protocol standards. And she did not test it with the defense experts present (they had been offered the opportunity to attend but didn't attend.) If Knox and Sollecito used this knife to kill Kercher, as the prosecution alleges, it is also puzzling why they would bring it back to Sollecito's apartment and put it in a drawer with the regular utensils to be used for cooking.

Evidence: Mixed blood
Who it hurts: Knox
The only forensic evidence against Knox is the presence in her house of five spots where the blood and DNA of the roommates had commingled. Of those five, the most damning is a drop of Kercher's blood with Knox's DNA found (with the aid of Luminol, a substance used in crime-scene investigations to find blood that has been cleaned up) in the bedroom of Filomena Romanelli, one of the two Italian women who also lived in the house. The prosecution alleges that a break-in was staged by Knox and Sollecito in Romanelli's room: the window was broken with a large rock and the room was ransacked, but nothing was taken—even though expensive sunglasses and jewelry were in plain sight. Clothes were pulled from Romanelli's dresser drawers but the glass shards from the broken window were found on top of them, leading police to believe that the window was broken after the ransacking took place, not before. Romanelli testified on the stand that the first thing she thought was "What a stupid burglar." The other mixed DNA spots were found in the bathroom the women shared—on the sink, the bidet, and on the side of a Q-tip box. The defense did not contest any of the lab results, provide a counter scenario to the staged break-in, or offer testimony to explain why Knox may also have been bleeding (except to say that it is common to find mixed DNA from two people who shared a house). Knox originally told police that her pierced ears were infected. Her mother, Edda Mellas, told NEWSWEEK that she was menstruating, though neither scenario was presented to the jury. Knox supporters suggest that Kercher's blood had been dropped by Guede on a spot where Knox's dried blood or DNA already existed, even though Guede's DNA profile was not identified in any of the five spots.

Evidence: Fingerprints
Who it hurts: The prosecution
No fingerprints or DNA belonging to Knox was ever found in the room where Kercher was murdered. In fact, the only fingerprint in the entire house attributed to the Seattle native was on a drinking glass in the kitchen sink. Those who support Knox's innocence say that lack of evidence in the crime-scene room should exonerate her. Those who think she is guilty say the evidence was cleaned up and point out that there are 19 fingerprints in Kercher's room that are unidentifiable because they are partial or smeared, meaning they may have belonged to Knox or Sollecito.

Evidence: Footprints
Who it hurts: Sollecito
Knox's bare footprints were found in the corridor outside Kercher's room after officers used Luminol. Because she lived in the house, these footprints are easily justifiable, even though the officers testified that they were likely left in blood (Luminol detects prints left in blood, bleach, and certain acidic juices). She testified that she had taken a shower and then seen blood on the floor, meaning she could have easily stepped in it and tracked it around unknowingly. A footprint in Kercher's blood on a blue bathmat is another story. It was attributed to Sollecito by the prosecution and what appeared to be a doctored version of the print was attributed to Guede by the defense. Several sneaker footprints in Kercher's room were attributed to Guede. A bloody footprint from a smaller shoe was found on the pillow beneath Kercher's head but it could not be positively identified as a match to any of the suspects.

Evidence: The bra clasp
Who it hurts: Nobody
Unlike Knox, Sollecito's DNA was found at the crime scene on the tiny metal clasp of the bra Kercher was wearing when she was murdered. The bra had been cut from her body by the assailants and the clasp and white material around it were separated from the rest of the bra. If the sample had been treated properly, the DNA would have damaged Sollecito's defense. But after the clasp was identified on a video of the original sweep of the crime scene, it was not collected into evidence until the third visit to the house, nearly six weeks after the murder. The prosecution maintains that the house was sealed the entire time and that contamination was impossible, since "DNA does not fly around the room." But Sollecito's lawyers have cast much doubt on the sanctity of this sample by focusing on the six weeks the clasp was left unattended in the house. In several videos taken during the investigation phase, the clasp appears to have been moved more than a meter from its original location. The only other DNA belonging to Sollecito found in the house was on a cigarette butt in another room.

Evidence: Circumstantial
Who it hurts: Unknown
Kercher's murder remains a mystery. There is not much forensic evidence, no clear murder weapon, no motive, and no confession as to what really happened the night of Nov. 1, 2007. So circumstantial evidence will have unusual influence on the judges' decision. The prosecution presented witnesses who testified about Knox and Sollecito's strange behavior after the crime. Phone records show that Knox and Sollecito both turned off their cell phones at the same time the night of the murder and turned them back on again within a few minutes very early the next morning, even though they maintain they woke up late that day. But it's not all bad for Knox. Forensic specialists have testified that the investigators made grave errors in collecting evidence—including not changing gloves between samples. And there are significant questions about some of the lab work.

Still, there are many anomalies that simply don't make sense. For instance, Knox testified that she came home the morning after the murder and found the door to the house open but went in and took a shower anyway. Then she testified that she saw blood on the rug and the floor in the bathroom. "I thought it was odd that she'd had a shower when there was blood all over the place," the women's roommate Romanelli told the court. "I really don't think that's normal." But this case has never been normal.

Darktan wrote:

I'm not sure that is any different from any other Western country. In theory, in both the UK and the US, you are innocent until proven guilty. However, at least some members of every jury may have the view that there is no smoke without fire, and so on. Personal preconceptions are a difficult thing to quantify, particularly as people are unlikely to consciously own up to making up their minds as to the verdict within ten seconds of seeing the defendant.

Yes, and most people seem to think OJ Simpson killed his wife. In the eyes of the law, he's innocent (of that, at least).