Amanda Knox guilty: .01
Raffaele Sollecito guilty: .01
Rudy Guede guilty: .99
I've become highly familiar with this case since the verdict came down. Over the last 2 years, I've heard bits and pieces about it and all along had assumed Amanda and Raffaele were guilty. I'm a little embarrassed to admit how much time I've spent reading up on the case recently - I think I'm motivated to learn more because I'm perfectly appalled at the amount of misogyny (not necessarily anti-Americanism) I see from the prosecution and the European media with regards to Amanda Knox. I'm also appalled at how much rumor is reported as fact.
I consider myself to be highly familiar with both sides' arguments, but did as you suggested and also spent some time looking over both sites you recommended - my opinion did not change.
I'm pretty confident our opinions are shared.
Looking forward to your thoughts on this experiment of yours.
I, too, find myself oddly fascinated by the case. I assumed Sollecito and Knox were guilty until just before the verdict came in, when the story was gaining more traction here in the U.S. I can't recall what it was that I read that made me question their guilt, but it set me off on a quest to learn as much as I could about it. I've basically taken details reported in the media, blogs, etc., that disturbed me and looked for the defense's OR prosecution's take on that detail. Here are the main points, and what I understand to be the truth behind the "evidence" - listed in no particular order: I wish I could provide sources, but I haven't kept track.
One of the main things that I keep in mind as I read about the case is that the prosecution leaked many details to the public which have since been proven false and public opinion was turned against Knox & Sollecito very early on based on a lot of incorrect information. The same incorrect information still abounds on the internet and in many minds.
Bleach. I had read a number of times that Knox and/or Sollecito had purchased bleach around 7 AM of the morning following the murder. I'd even read that there were receipts confirming this. However, upon further investigation, I've read a few things refuting this. Most importantly, there was no mention of bleach in the prosecution's case. Supposedly there IS a receipt, but it's dated a month before the the murder.
DNA. I tend to believe the defense on this. The miniscule amount of DNA on the victim's bra clasp and the miniscule amount of victim's DNA on the knife blade cannot be discounted as contamination in the lab. Also, if there was really a sex game gone awry as the prosecution claims, you'd think there'd be a whole mess of DNA from all parties involved. And as to the presence of Knox' DNA mixed with the victim's DNA in the bathroom, well any rational observer could explain that as a normal consequence of cohabitation. On the other hand, there appear to be abundant examples of Guede's DNA throughout the crime scene.
Guede's confession. I'd read that he did NOT implicate Knox or Sollecito in his original confession. But later (presumably after he had been made aware of their status as suspects) he changed his story to include them. Naturally - as their involvement would be very useful for scapegoating the actual murder.
Knox' "confession" and implication of the innocent Lumumba, her boss, which many take as a sign of her guilt. I'd read that the police used a text message she'd sent earlier in the evening to Lumumba, after he'd given her the night off, which said "see you later." Apparently, the Italian police took this to mean they had an actual appointment to see each other later, instead of as a generic farewell. I'm assuming the police were considering Lumumba as a potential suspect, and I wouldn't be surprised if their line of questioning when interrogating Amanda led to this suggestion in her mind as well.
Knox' behavior. This is where the trial strikes me as most ridiculous. The fact that she turned cartwheels after police questioning doesn't really surprise me all that much. Perhaps this is how she alleviates stress. Who knows. I'd probably think it was a little weird, but certainly not evidence of guilt. She was seen buying "lingerie" (underwear) a few days after the murder, and she was with Sollecito. Well, as it turns out, she was shut out of her apartment and had nothing but the clothes on her back. I'd probably run out to buy underwear right away too. And as to the suggestive remark Sollecito was overheard making, well, so what. He claims it was in jest, and that wouldn't surprise me at all ... again, like the cartwheels, maybe a little humor alleviates their stress.
Knox' sex life. I'm shocked at how irrelevant it is to this murder case. She was (falsely) told she was HIV positive while in jail so that she'd give up the names of her sex partners, which totaled 7. 7 partners In her entire life, not in the weeks she'd been in Italy. Again, it's irrelevant, but many minds were poisoned against her by little tidbits like this.
Knox' character. You'd think that there'd be signs of something not quite right in a person who could do as the prosecution alleges. Yet in interview after interview, Amanda's friends, family and others who knew her could not point to anything that might reveal a side to her character capable of such horrific acts. I recommend reading this article, http://www.friendsofamanda.org/files/Radar_Knox.pdf, - linked from the FOA site - especially for the quotes from Lisa Pasko, a criminology professor at the University of Denver who specializes in young women who commit violent crimes. "If Amanda Knox is guilty, says Pasko, “this crime goes against everything we know about criminology.”
Based on all of the above, I believe the probability that Knox and Sollecito are guilty of Kercher's murder is extremely low.