Amanda Knox Innocent? Case’s ‘Profound Lack Of Evidence’ Makes 2014 Trial ‘Unjust,’ Claims Lawyer

The Amanda Knox case has been stretching on for years now, with the trial not expected to come to come to an end until 2015. Attorney Theodore Simon believes the court is working with an “absence of evidence” and claims the proceedings are “wholly unjust.”

In a related report by The Inquisitr, Raffaele Sollecito recently graduated from college and wrote a thesis stating he was innocent. After the Italian courts reversed itself by declaring Amanda Knox guilty again, Meredith Kercher’s family believes Knox needs to be extradited back to Italy. The judges in the case believe Knox delivered the final blow to Kercher and Knox’s alibi has been challenged by both surveillance videos and her own ex-boyfriend. In addition, Knox’s alleged ties to a cocaine drug ring that specialized in servicing “university students and young professionals” is claimed to be enough to drag her back to Italy. The prosecutor’s reports from January 2008 explain the drug angle:

“During the course of the investigation into the Meredith Kercher, we have confirmed that a person whose initial is ‘F’ would occasionally supply drugs to Amanda Knox, as well as having a relationship with her supposedly of a sexual nature.”

Lawyer Theodore Simon has been involved in a good number of high profile cases, representing convicted murderers, drug kingpins, and even unborn children. When he was asked if a case tested his conscience, Simon replied:

“No, it didn’t. And I think that goes to the whole aspect of today’s media impact on high-profile cases. Even your very question implies: ‘Well, wait a minute — is there something too horrific about the nature of the client?’ Why shouldn’t we be looking at the most critical, venerated principles of criminal law? Why are you not asking me, ‘How does the presumption of innocence or the burden of proof affect this case?'”

In the case of the Amanda Knox trial, Simon explained his involvement:

“I got involved after her initial conviction at the end of ’09. On her appellate trial, she was actually found innocent. Thereafter, the prosecution appealed to the country’s Supreme Court and had her innocent verdict reversed. She went back for a new appellate court trial, where she was convicted. And now, it’s back on appeal.”

Interestingly enough, when the lawyer was asked if the “trial is ever going to end,” Simon implied that Knox is innocent:

“There’s only one thing that is consistent about this particular case: There’s a compelling and profound absence of evidence. It’s a nightmare that should end, and it’s completely and wholly unjust.”

Of course, before Simon became directly involved with the case he did not always seem to have the same opinion.

What do you think about Amanda Knox; guilty or not guilty?