My interest in most things Italian and in true crime has led me to contemplate the acquittals of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in comparison to two famous murder defendants in the U.S. about whose guilt many questions have been raised.
Amanda Knox
|
Lee H. Oswald
|
O.J. Simpson
|
|
Motive
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
Means
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Opportunity
|
Uncertain
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Reliable evidence linked to defendant
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Suspicious post-crime behavior
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Good police work
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
In Knox's case, the suspicious post-crime behavior (turning cartwheels, a browbeaten and concocted "confession," buying lingerie) is easily explained away. Not so for Oswald (he murdered a policeman) and Simpson (contemplated suicide and fled). If the police work had been better for Simpson, or the motive clearer for Oswald, there would be very little doubt about their guilt by anyone. What lingered for Simpson should have been removed when photos of him wearing Bruno Magli shoes emerged after his criminal trial (rare and expensive shoes identified from the crime scene, but not linked to Simpson until his civil trial). If you're one of the 80 percent of Americans who believe Oswald didn't act alone, then of course I don't expect facts and evidence to matter anyway.
0 comments:
Post a Comment