The Italian Supreme Court of Cassation is scheduled to rule on the prosecution’s appeal of the Amanda Knox appeal verdict tomorrow. In 2011, Knox and her Italian boyfriend at the time Raffaele Sollecito were released from an Italian prison, on appeal, after previously being convicted of participating in the murder of her British roommate Meredith Kercher in 2007. Based on the Galati-Costigliola Report (112-page final appeal document), the prosecution’s appeal attacks the approach of the appeals court and their handling of trial from both a procedural and a reasoning standpoint.
The Galati-Costagliola appeal also surmises that the Hellmann-Zanetti Report (original appeal decision – 144 page-report) not only cherry picked certain pieces of evidence while neglecting the totality of the evidence as a whole, but it also points out how they cherry picked certain aspects of a single piece of evidence while overlooking other qualities of that same piece of evidence. The Galati-Costigliola Report goes as far as calling the Hellmann-Zanetti Report “illogical” and “contradictory,” brining up several instances where their reasoning had no logical basis for conclusion.
It is also important to note that the Italian Supreme Court has already ruled on Rudy Guede’s final appeal, and their verdict acknowledged that Guede did not act alone, even going as far as stating that the forensic evidence points overwhelmingly to three assailants having been present. This is important because it put the Supreme Court on the record, and it was the only time they were ever heard from in this case up to this point.
That being said, there are two ways that this can go for Knox and Sollecito. (1) If the Supreme Court upholds Knox and Sollecito’s acquittal, threat of them ever returning to prison for this crime is officially over. (2) Or, the court could rule that the Galati-Costigliola Report has merit, meaning that the points of contention raised in their report will be looked at again. It’s not truly considered a retrial, but rather a closer look at the decisions of the previous appeals trail. It is doubtful that other evidence from the original trial—that was not contended in the appeal—will even be brought up in this second appeal.