Italian court OKs evidence review

PERUGIA, Italy – Amanda Knox won an important victory in her appeals trial of her murder conviction in Italy on Saturday, when a court ruled that it will allow an independent review of crucial DNA evidence after defense claims that samples were inconclusive and possibly contaminated.

The lower court trial, which convicted the former University of Washington student a year ago and sentenced her to 26 years in Italian prison, had rejected a similar defense request for an outside review of DNA found on the bra clasp of the victim, her British roommate Meredith Kercher, and on a knife the prosecution alleged was used in the fatal stabbing attack.

Kercher’s body was found in a pool of blood on Nov. 2, 2007, her throat slit, in the apartment she shared with Knox. Forensic experts said she was killed the night before.

Knox burst into tears, in a sign of a release of tension, said her stepfather, Chris Mellas. “She’s a happy mess,” he said, smiling.

She was convicted of sexually assaulting and murdering Kercher in the rented house they shared in the university town of Perugia, where both were studying. The co-defendant in the appeals trial is her ex-boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, an Italian who was convicted of the same charges and sentenced to 25 years. Both deny any wrongdoing.

Prosecutors maintain that Sollecito’s DNA was found on the bra clasp and that Knox’s DNA was found on the knife’s handle and Kercher’s DNA on the blade. The defense maintains that DNA traces presented at the first trial were inconclusive and also contends they might have been contaminated when they were analyzed.

The court handed the defense another victory. It will allow several witnesses the defense hopes will refute testimony that placed Knox and Sollecito near the house on the night Kercher was killed.

Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellman said after 90 minutes of deliberations that the DNA evidence review was needed “to remove any reasonable doubt.”

He said two independent experts, from Rome’s Sapienza university, would either make new analyses of the DNA traces found, or if that isn’t possible, would review the analyses that had been carried out by previous forensic experts and assess whether they are reliable.

DNA evidence was crucial in the first trial, where a clear motive did not emerge for the brutal killing.

The experts will be formally assigned the task of the review at the trial’s next session, on Jan. 15.

The review will take at least 30 days, and with new witnesses being heard, the trial is expected to go until next spring.