No, I'm watching the Big British Immigration debate

Yes - watching now.

I wanted to watch but got a recording clash ....so will have to catch it on Wednesday ...

Yes ........very interesting. I know very little about this case.

Poor Meredith

Indeed 

Knox and Sollecito's confusing story seems very strange so far

I've said before that the (English-speaking) reporting of this case has been awful. There's been very little coverage of what actually happened to Meredith, which is why the defence supporters have been able to continue promoting the "lone killer" theory. In practise it was a very brutal, prolonged attack which would be virtually impossible for one person alone.

And yeah: poor Meredith...

If only the caribinieri had done better evidence gathering 

You mean apart from Solecito's knife which matches the profile of the murder weapon and has Meredith's DNA on the blade and Knox's fingerprints and DNA all over the handle?

A couple of links some might find interesting...

This one summarizes the Knox PR campaign since the Apeal Court verdict:

http://www.tekjournalismuk.com...n-pr-goes-wrong.html

This site details the case history and all the evidence. The "Evidence Synposis" and "Myths Debunked" sections are particularly worth checking out. Everything is linked back to the court records:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Main_Page

Thanks for the links Eugene. Interesting to see Alan Dershowitz's view.

The BBC 3 programme rather skimmed through things.

Well ........I think she's guilty (although I wasn't paying full attention). I rather think it was payback for Merediths disapproval of her lifestyle.

TBF, there's a heck of a lot to get through in only an hour. Personally, I thought they touched on all the main points, although a lot of "small stuff" went by the wayside.  

The biggest thing I thought was missing was much discussion of her calunnia conviction for falsely implicating Lumumba. This was finalized by the Supreme Court in March last year: she is therefore a convicted liar. Incidentally, she has never payed any of the fine that's due to Lumumba as part of her sentence...

I haven't read much about it, but what I can't understand at all is this: did the guy convicted of her murder implicate Knox and Solecito and if so, where are the transcripts?

A letter by Guede was presented at Knox and Solecito's first appeal in 2010. It was referenced in the programme, and a transcript can be found here:
http://themurderofmeredithkerc...s_Testimony_(English)

[Edit]

I'm having problems with the link. Trying going here:

http://themurderofmeredithkerc...te_note-testimony-18

and selecting Note 18 from the bottom (Rudy Guede's Testimony).

[/Edit]

Can't understand why Knox implicated Lumumba and not Rudy Guede, can you? Unless the three culprits made a pact that they wouldn't testify against each other and Guede said he would leave the country? When Guede was in fact found and brought back, Knox couldn't then backtrack on her already convoluted story. 

It doesn't add up.

Just reading a bit more now, it does feel that the odds were maybe stacked against her. Hardly any Italian, no solicitor, endless interrogation late into the night. That said, the Italian judicial process isn't some tin pot dictatorship's, so I think she probably knows more than she's willing to let on. I feel it's academic now because she will never go back to Italy to serve her sentence. She will more than likely spend a huge chunk of her life appealing and trying to clear her name, which feels a bit futile from were I'm standing.

Of course, but it's the presence of Meredith's DNA on the blade (near the tip) as well that's the important thing.

It wasn't mentioned in the programme, but when he first heard about the DNA evidence, Solecito originally tried to explain it by claiming Meredith had pricked herself on the knife while cooking round at his place, When pushed on it, he eventually had to admit that he made that up - Meredith had never been round to his flat. Even Knox stated that in her book (she'd hadn't known Solecito for long herself, and Meredith barely knew him). It's the repeated lying like this that's the clincher for me. Why would anyone make something like that up if they were innocent?

There's still other forensic evidence though, such as the blood smears (both Meredith's and Amanda's) in the bathroom. In the programme, one of the defence lawyers claimed the samples could have got mixed accidentally during the course of normal events, although to be honest I can't see how that amount of Knox's blood could get smeared on the tap "accidentally" without anyone noticing and washing it off. Besides, Knox squashed that theory herself:  in her declaration she claimed that the bathroom was clean and blood-free before she left the flat earlier in the day.

I didn't follow everything but have seen bits and pieces during and after the case and some has made me wonder about them being being found guilty.

What I didn't know until it was in the News some weeks back was that the man convicted was given a lesser sentence by implicating Knox and Solecito, and that he will be released in the near future. The truth is always out there but what it is I've no way of knowing.

 There has been a lot of misreporting on this: Guede was not given a reduced sentence for implicating Knox and Sollecito.

By the time Guede appealed against his original conviction, Knox and Sollecito had also been convicted. Their sentences were reduced due to "mitigating factors" (basically their young ages), so although Guede's conviction was upheld, the apppeal judge also reduced his 30 year sentence to 24 years for the same mitigating factors (he's actually younger than Sollecito). Another 8 years (a third) was knocked off because he'd chosen a fast-track trial (there's no direct equivalent to that in the UK, but it's a little similar to the way in which prisoners who plead guilty here get reduced sentences for saving court time).

Guede therefore ended up with his sentence reduced to 16 years. Again as in this country, prisoners in Italy rarely serve their full term, but are let out early on good behaviour, so it was always unlikely he'd serve the full 16 years.

Knox, on the other hand had the previous reductions on her sentence removed by the latest appeal judge because of her repeated lying and calunnia...

As for the truth always being out there: for me, one of the biggest problems with this case is that for years the English-speaking media have been effectively complicit by not reporting the Italian court findings properly, but instead getting most of their information direct from the defence and in particular Knox's PR team. That's why tonight's programme was so important: most of the evidence presented would be already well-known to an Italian audience, but very little of it has been properly covered here in the UK, and even less in the States...

I watched the repeat last night and each time I thought I knew who had done what something else was presented that made me rethink my conclusions. One part I did find strange is that they could not get evidence from the computers because they were damaged!!! Knowing a fair bit about this I would say they would have to have been run over by a tank to prevent any information retrieval. Also Amanda said she was on her emails. This can be verified by using her account and checking her activities around that time, the email host would also have information to impart from the server side.

I'm leaning to Amanda and Sollecito being involved in Merediths murder, but I could not put my hand on my heart and say 100%.

It also sounds like the Italian Police evidence gathering could have been better.

Both Knox's and Sollecito's alibis regarding computer use were blown apart by the internet records. There was no recorded activity that would have required human interaction after 6.27pm when a movie download (Amelie) was started, and no activity at all after 9.10pm.
http://themurderofmeredithkerc...of_Computer_Activity

Another deeply suspicious aspect was that they both turned off their mobiles at the same time fairly early in the evening, There are numerous inconsistencies in their alibis regarding phone calls.

As for the computer disks: I'm no expert on the peculiarities of the Italian legal system, but I've a vague recollection that some decision was made by the prosecution that there wasn't any need to go to the expense of recovering the disks as they had enough evidence from the phone and internet records. I do agree that it seems an omission, but there you go. There was apparently evidence of Sollecito having some particularly dodgy tastes in porn, though...

In this country by an large all electronic devices are siezed and examined. The computers may have held information pertinent to the investigation. Internet searches for example may have given an insight into what they were thinking and if they had researched something which has a direct link or bearing on the events surrounding the murder.

To my mind it's better to eliminate devices than not have sexamined them in the first place and possible miss something crucial.

This whole thing does not make me think that the Italian system is completely on top of everything or have the right practices in place.

I did a bit more hunting on the site I quoted ealier, and you can find the defence computer expert report here:

http://themurderofmeredithkerc...mputer_Expert_Report

Whether anything should be read into the fact that the investigation was done by the Defence, I don't know...

Eugene, I found that site after the appeal verdict was overturned and found it really interesting, there's certainly a lot that either wasn't reported here or I just hadn't heard about it  There is a lot of evidence that is hard to explain away, and it did feel like the defence was stretching at times - like with the mixed DNA or the bloody footprints...

I've just watched the documentary from last night - my feelings are generally unsure about whether she had a part in it, but that she was definitely there and helped to clean up/stage the break in. 

Yeah, she's got killer good looks.

So how long until Knox and Solecito are back in prison?

they've both got one more appeal to lodge then Sollecito will be back inside quick as, due to being an Italian citizen and Italy can then decide to seek Knox's return from the USA should the last appeal uphold the guilty sentence.

the question of course is, will the USA extradite her to Italy if the decision is that she's guilty??????

I believe the Appeals Court Judge has 90 days (from the verdict) to file his "motivations" report (a detailed breakdown of the reasons for the court's verdict). The Defence will then have (I think) 45 days to lodge an appeal. They'll almost certainly do that (they've already said they will), but until we see the motivations report we can only guess at what grounds they will try to base an appeal on.

Any appeal will probably be held at the end of this year or early 2015. If the convictions are finally confirmed, I believe Sollecito will be arrested imediately.

Knox is another matter of course. There's no guarantee that Italy will apply for extradition, but if they do, the process could take years. However, if an international warrant is immediately taken out on Knox I think there's an onus on the local police to put her in custody (remember that she's publicly stated that she's prepared to become a fugitive). That could mean her sitting out the extradition process in an American jail. If that happens, I suspect it will come as a dreadful shock to Knox. If she thinks her time in an Italian jail was bad, she's going to consider it a holiday camp compared to an American one...