An unknown motive when the case is based on weak indirect circumstantial evidence and when the prosecutions theory of the crime makes zero sense seems to matter a great deal.

Only to those who don't understand school-level probability theory or are emotionally invested in the Knox side.

Which is it for you?

I haven't even seen the defenses theory of the crime (or a theory, for that matter), besides "Rudy did it!"

Burglary turned sexual assault turned murder is pretty much just as much of a stretch as two people (one with violent rape obsessions) giving false confessions and/or alibis and generally acting suspicious being totally innocent.

just to toss one out there (please go ahead and correct it)

Rudy scales the wall, opens the shutters
Rudy throws rock through window
Scales wall again, unlatches window, climbs through.
Ransacks room, does not take anything.
Goes to take a ****, hears meredith come home, doesn't flush.
He confronts her or is confronted by her
He tries a sexual advance, is rejected.
He proceeds to sexual assault her and stabs her to death.
He goes to take a shower in the bathroom, washes off.
He moves and covers Meredith's body.
He finds Meredith's money and runs out the front door.
He doubles back, goes to Amandas room to get her lamp (maybe to help find keys).
Finds her keys, locks meredith's door and leaves.

Is that fair?

Murder is a slight red flag. At the absolute legalistic minimum, the supreme court determined that Knox was present when her roommate was murdered, that she washed the victim's blood from her hands, that she had no alibi, that she lied to investigators and that she falsely blamed an innocent man to protect an associate who could incriminate her.

Knox, of course, put out a press release calling the supreme court's report 'a forceful declaration of innocence,' knowing that most Americans wouldn't read the thing, which is a fairly typical psychopathic lie.

The Micheli court, of course, found that Knox and Sollecito not only committed the crime but cold-bloodedly faked the crime scene to try and get away with it, which again could be considered pretty psychopathic. The motive would be simple boredom, opportunism and need for stimulation, which are psychopathic factors, and the appeal judge Nencini found that if Knox hadn't been given the night off work the crime wouldn't have occurred.

Most people with psychopathic traits don't commit violent crimes. (Because prison is a bore.) So the fact that Knox hasn't re-offended since release doesn't really come into it.

In terms of some of the risk factors in Dr Bob Hare's Psychopathy Checklist -Revised (the 'PCL-R'), Knox exhibits grandiose self-estimation. She keeps trying to market herself as some kind of celebrity when she isn't one, and the Netflix doco, made by adoring admirers of hers, is merely the latest example.

Her history in Perugia, and before, suggests someone easily bored and in need of stimulation. She lies easily and glibly: she did it in interviews with detectives, she did it on the stand in court, and she's still doing it with dumb TV hacks and adoring doco-makers.

She shows a complete lack of remorse. She's never paid Patrick Lumumba the damages she owes him and claims it's all the fault of those baddy-bad foreign cops.

She shows callousness and lack of empathy. She showed it that night at the Questura ('Whaddaya think, Natalie? They cut her throat! She ****ing bled to death!' -- this addressed aggressively to one of Meredith's grieving friends). She showed it again on the stand in her bizarre 'Bleeagh' speech and then claimed, 'I only knew her a month and I'm just trying to get on with my life.'

She has a parasitic lifestyle. She took $4m for a book written by someone else, her ghostwriter Linda Kulman, and she's now made herself a fixture at the West Seattle Herald by shagging the owner's son, Chris Robinson.

Her poor behavioural controls were on show in Perugia, as soon as she was out from under close parental supervision -- though she'd already hosted that rock-throwing party in Seattle -- and she duly shagged three men in one month, plus the coke-dealer Federico Martini ('Cristiano' in the ghosted memoir) a few weeks before, and for no reason tipped a drink over a DJ's head and got herself thrown out of the club. Meredith got her readmitted, but if you know anything about narcissists (and Dr Hare defines psychopathy as 'aggressive narcissism') you will know that doing a narcissist a good turn makes them vengeful because they think it puts you 'one-up' and they don't like that.

Another item on the Hare checklist is 'many short-term marital relationships.' I don't know how a clinician would score Knox on that one, but, within a few weeks of her release in 2011, she claimed she was in a 'trial marriage' with James Terrano. Then a year or so later she was suddenly 'engaged' to Colin 'Thunderstrike' Sutherland. Then a year or so later she was suddenly moving in with Chris Robinson, son of the owner of the West Seattle Herald which publishes her slightly embarrassing weekly column.

The PCL-R lists 20 factors, and the clinician is supposed to score the subject 0, 1 or 2 ('Does not apply,' 'Partly applies' or 'Fully applies') on each factor, giving a maximum of 40. It's worth bearing in mind that Karla Homolka, one of Canada's most notorious serial killers, was officially scored at only 5 out of 40 -- yip, for a known serial killer -- where her husband and co-perp was scored 35 out of 40, if I recall aright. People, including clinicians, have a hefty bias in favour of young women.

Something like that, sure. Pretty straightforward really.

And all notorious criminals or criminal defendants attract these strange fans or groupies. It happens. It's a thing. It relates to the sexual perversion of hybristophilia and it also provides an outlet for various forbidden drives symbolised by the criminal and the crime, such as racism, nationalism, xenophobia, sadism and misogyny.

And as you can see with the fans of serial killers and of personalities like Adolf Hitler and Osama bin Laden, the groupies always express their admiration of the idol's crimes by pretending to believe that the idol did not commit those crimes.

lol no

actually yes. ever heard of charles manson? he has a ****load of groupies

The murderer?

I'm watching the Netflix documentary. The single person that comes off looking the worst is Nick Pisa, the British reporter. Mignini is a close second.

Mignini is an easy target. I have not seen the doc., but I have read that many of his answers were actually to questions about a prior case called the "Monster of Florence." It also falsely portrayed him as a misogynist by presenting comments of his falsely and/or out-of-context.

In any event, I have not seen it, so I don't know one way or the other. I do understand why he comes off poorly, however. From what I have seen (other interview, etc.) I think the language barrier is not helpful as the subject matter is usually somewhat complex or technical and the presentation in English can be shaded drastically depending on the interpreter.

Don't trip over each other rushing to take that free 239 money.

i wouldnt trust any of these scumbags to pay a dime

What does it say about you to be so involved with Knox and her every movement and opportunity to talk about her? And you criticize the opposition saying they are obsessed??

Jesus, you are a deranged person. Get some help.

Yeah, that 57 post is, um, really something

Lol. You transparent, spineless jellyfish.

It's called an escrow, and I'll put up $5k on Doug..er 239's side.

Or you could just admit you're wrong (which you already know) and just move on.

I don't think anyone really cares if his name is Doug or not.

The number of times he's got himself into a hole, it's more likely to be Dug.

Jesus, this ****show of a thread is still going? How has it not been locked yet?

At this point, anyone with more than 10 posts here should have their account deleted.

Howard is established to be a knife collector, an author of rape fiction, a reader of brutal rape/slasher comics, and a known associate of the Max Factor rapist. Can we just go ahead and put him in jail now?

hi doug...er 239

If:
- His bloody footprint in the victim's blood is on the bathmat at the murder scene
- He implicates his girlfriend and says she left the house the night of the murder and told him to lie for her alibi when questioned about why he called the police after they'd already arrived.
- When told about knife DNA, he makes up a lie that says the victim was at his house cooking and pricked herself with the knife.
- His DNA is on the victims cut-off bra clasp at the murder scene
- His footprints are found in luminol at the murder scene

Then sure, go ahead and put him in jail...

I'm sure my planned slaughter of hundreds of small animals won't help my defense either.