Dershowitz: ''I have some doubts on the verdict on Amanda''
The giurist from Havard explains why there are some clouds on the decision taken by the jury in Perugia
(La Stampa, December 11, 2009)What do you think of the trial against Amanda Knox that finished with a verdict that gave her 26 years of jail?
It’s a very questionable verdict based on circumstantial inferences from weak evidence. I don’t believe it would have satisfied the United States requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt and of eliminating all reasonable inferences consistent with innocence.
If the same trial for the same delict would have been done in a Us Court the verdict would have been different?
It might have been different. American juries are also influenced by media coverage in high profile cases. One big difference is that the jurors would have been sequestered—that is kept isolated—during the case or at least during the deliberations. The trial would have also been far shorter in duration.
Amanda Knox was declared guilty for the killing of her roommate Meredith in good part because of the fact that her dna was found on the knife but many observers in America object that the quantity of the dna wasn't enough for such a verdict. Can you please explain to the Italian public the issue of the quantity of the dna for the American law?
There are several issues relating to the DNA. There is the quantity—that is, is there sufficient DNA on which to make a certain judgment of identification? Second, there is the quality of the DNA, which relates to the manner of collection, preservation and testing. And third, there is the issue of whether DNA could have gotten on the handle in an innocent fashion. Most recently, there have also been questions about the planting of DNA and even the fabrication of DNA. A recent article in a scientific journal suggests the possibility that DNA can be manufactured and planted, though it seems unlikely that that is what happened in this case.
After the verdict one senator for the State of Washington accused the Italian judge and jury to be anti-American. Why some in the US had this impression?
It does not sound like it reflects anti-Americanism to me. In my experience, most Italians seem to like Americans, especially Americans who come to Italy to study.
Hillary Clinton said that she "will listen" any claim on the case. What can she do? Which kind of step can she make with Italy?
The Secretary of State, by expressing interest in the case, can increase the possibility that the appellate court will scrutinize this verdict with great care, because it realizes that the eyes of the world are on the Italian justice system. But Americans should not get a higher standard of justice than defendants from any other country, just because we are a powerful nation. To be fair, justice must be equal for all.
In the US media the Amanda case was the story of an American girl wrongly punished by a corrupt system while for the Italian media she was a kind of Devil landed in Perugia that before killed and then wanted to escape justice. Why this case is making the emotions running so high between two countries that are so close?
The emotions are high in this case because what happened to Amanda Knox is every American parent’s nightmare. Americans, particularly those with college aged children, identify with Amanda. And because the Italian system of justice is somewhat different from our own, many Americans have less confidence in its outcomes. But all Americans and Italians have one hope in common: that when the case is decided by the higher courts, not only will justice actually be done but justice will also be seen by everyone to be done. That’s all that one can expect from any imperfect system of human justice.