Some of the evidence, including forensic, that exists against Knox:
1. Her italian boyfriend, also convicted, would not corroborate her alibi of being at his place all night.
2. A witness testified that he saw both of them in the square, contradicting knox’s alibi
3. Knox’s dna mixed with the victim’s blood in several places of the house, including the room that had the staged break-in
4. Knox’s DNA on a knife that also contained the victim’s DNA revealed through LCN testing. You can dispute the testing method, but it is still evidence entered into the trial; incidentally this is the same interpretation of a US Court ruling that recently admitted the results from an LCN DNA test into evidence at a trial
5. Footprints revealed via luminol that are close to a match for Knox’s foot size.
6. Knox cannot provide a consistent story of what she did the evening of the 1st
7. Knox’s third statement, provided voluntarily to the police, that admits that she cannot account for her actions or whereabouts that evening.
8. Telephone and computer records that conflict with Knox & Sollecito’s stories of what they did on the 1st and the 2nd.
9. Excuses from Knox as to why her DNA was found with the victim’s blood
10. A rationale from Sollecito that the victim’s blood could have been on the knife because she was over for dinner one night, which never happened.
Since much of the press outside of italy has refused to look at the details of the evidence presented at the trial, its easy (and lazy) to conclude based on a limited understanding of the case that the “evidence is flimsy”.