3 ms·
How exactly does the evidence against Guede affect the regarding of evidence against Knox? Assuming that everyone involved (if it was multiple parties) were equ
by zaphar 17y ago
How exactly does the evidence against Guede affect the regarding of evidence against Knox? Assuming that everyone involved (if it was multiple parties) were equally involved equally competent and hiding their involvement and left equal evidence of their involvement is just that an "assumption". It's not necessarily true and is in fact highly unlikely to be true.
In the article actual physical evidence is dismissed because it's "small in quantity". The amount of blood is far less important than whose blood it is. You only need a little dna to prove contact. And you only need a little blood to prove prescence at the scene of an injury. It sounds to me like the jury was doing it's job and the article's author was just looking for a point to make.
- demallien 17y agoBut it isn't just that it's "small in quantity" that means that there is a problem. Amanda was a housemate, it would be incredible if her DNA couldn't be found in her housemate's room. The simplest explanation for Amanda's DNA being in the room is that she had previously spent some time there talking to Meredith. To put this another way, have a think about where you would expect your own DNA to show up. At home, at your partner's appartment, at the office, at the cafe around the corner from the office, in your car, in your partner's car, at your best friend's home, your best friend's car. If a murder ever took place in one of these locations, how would you feel about the presence of your DNA being used to implicate you in the murder?