To everyone who can speak Italian and/or has the patience to decipher Google translations, here are the transcriptions of the Kercher’s attorneys’ and my attorneys’ closing arguments. These occurred on the 16th and 17th of December 2013, respectively.
16 Dec 2013 - Closing arguments by civil attorneys E. Vieri Fabiani, Serena Perna, & Francesco Maresca for the Kercher family. Original Italian.
17 Dec 2013 - Closing arguments by defense attorneys Luciano Ghirga & Carlo Dalla Vedova for Knox. Original Italian.
Thank you again to everyone who is taking the time to look into this case.
For everyone’s convenience, I’ve started taking notes on these closing arguments, starting with the civil attorneys for the Kercher family. I haven’t made it all the way through (it’s emotionally difficult), but here, so far, are the arguments of this civil party:
Guede was definitively found guilty of having committed murder with accomplices. There is no reasonable alternative for who Guede’s accomplices might have been.
Knox was definitively found guilty of having committed slander. The slander is connected to the murder. It is further proof of her involvement because it was an attempt to lead the investigation astray.
Sollecito’s claim that his DNA on the bra clasp was the result of contamination is phoney. The contamination doesn’t exist.
Sollecito always carried a pocket knife with him, and he did the night of the murder. It was just never found.
Even if there’s the minimal chance that the DNA on the blade isn’t Meredith’s, it is the DNA of someone whose throat was cut with the knife.
Knox knew that the violence was perpetrated by a person of color. She accused Lumumba instead of Guede because she wanted to lead the investigation astray from her companion and his apartment.
Knox knew that Meredith screamed.
Knox knew that Meredith’s throat had been cut.
Knox knew that there was blood everywhere and that Meredith’s body had been covered.
The independent review of the forensic evidence is not the principle proof of guilt because it is subject to diverse interpretation.
The principle proof of guilt is the congruence of the circumstantial evidence.
There is no valid and reasonable alternative to the evidence of guilt.
The motive is irrelevant because the will to murder has been amply demonstrated.
The claim that Guede committed the murder alone is not sustainable.
The criminal act occurred after the consumption of drugs. A light drug is enough to diminish one’s inhibitions.
Knox does not share the same sensuality as Meredith. Knox takes sex to the extreme.
Knox and Sollecito needed to consume drugs.
The murder was committed by more than one person because so many wounds were inflicted against Meredith in the seconds that the assault lasted.
Knox, Sollecito, and Guede are persons of strong criminal capacity when their inhibitions are dropped, even if they don’t seem so.
They didn’t comprehend what brought them to commit such a horrible act such that they removed it from their minds and convinced themselves that they didn’t commit it.
Here is the English Translation of my defense’s closing arguments.