I went and reread the article and, just to demonstrate the completely contradictory nature of the situation, here's Rich, from the 'Rolling Stone' piece:
"The police refused to break into Kercher's bedroom, claiming respect for the girl's privacy. But on Romanelli's insistence they relented, standing by while one of the bofriends, seizing the moment, kicked down the door."
And here's Coulter:
"Also highly suspicious, when the police first arrived and Knox was the only roommate there, she lied to them, driving them away from Meredith's locked bedroom door by assuring them that Meredith always locked her door, even to go to the bathroom.
So the police continued to investigate the alleged burglary and ignored Meredith's room, until Filomena arrived, found out Meredith's door was locked and demanded the police break it down, telling them -- contra Knox -- that Meredith never locked her door."
Rich: "During Sollecito's interview, investigators accused him of covering up for Knox. He asked for a lawyer, and to speak with his father, but his requests were denied. 'Confused and nervous,' as one of the officers described him, Sollecito finally stated that Knox could have left his apartment for several hours on the night of Kercher's murder while he was asleep."
Coulter, on the other hand, writes that it was "Sollecito's admission that it was a lie" that Knox stayed at his house all night.
There are others: According to Rich, Knox wasn't in the house that night, and signed a confession she couldn't read, and gave out the club owner's name because of an intense session in which she was physically hit by the police.
So when I read such wildly varying accounts, with Coulter (who I think you'll admit is more than willing to be bold at the expense of accurate) making these claims, I have to admit I was skeptical of her position.
This is not to say I believe Rich, whose cart before the horse reasoning and fawning view of Knox read at times as downright unprofessional. It reads far more like propeganda than investigative journalism.
But as I am utterly ignorant of the Italian legal system, I thought it best to ask someone whose opinions I respect and knows more about this issue than I do, as I'm far more curious at this point on WHY people are defending her than her guilt.
Re: My Two Cents
I went and reread the article and, just to demonstrate the completely contradictory nature of the situation, here's Rich, from the 'Rolling Stone' piece:
"The police refused to break into Kercher's bedroom, claiming respect for the girl's privacy. But on Romanelli's insistence they relented, standing by while one of the bofriends, seizing the moment, kicked down the door."
And here's Coulter:
"Also highly suspicious, when the police first arrived and Knox was the only roommate there, she lied to them, driving them away from Meredith's locked bedroom door by assuring them that Meredith always locked her door, even to go to the bathroom.
So the police continued to investigate the alleged burglary and ignored Meredith's room, until Filomena arrived, found out Meredith's door was locked and demanded the police break it down, telling them -- contra Knox -- that Meredith never locked her door."
Rich: "During Sollecito's interview, investigators accused him of covering up for Knox. He asked for a lawyer, and to speak with his father, but his requests were denied. 'Confused and nervous,' as one of the officers described him, Sollecito finally stated that Knox could have left his apartment for several hours on the night of Kercher's murder while he was asleep."
Coulter, on the other hand, writes that it was "Sollecito's admission that it was a lie" that Knox stayed at his house all night.
There are others: According to Rich, Knox wasn't in the house that night, and signed a confession she couldn't read, and gave out the club owner's name because of an intense session in which she was physically hit by the police.
So when I read such wildly varying accounts, with Coulter (who I think you'll admit is more than willing to be bold at the expense of accurate) making these claims, I have to admit I was skeptical of her position.
This is not to say I believe Rich, whose cart before the horse reasoning and fawning view of Knox read at times as downright unprofessional. It reads far more like propeganda than investigative journalism.
But as I am utterly ignorant of the Italian legal system, I thought it best to ask someone whose opinions I respect and knows more about this issue than I do, as I'm far more curious at this point on WHY people are defending her than her guilt.