The US recently released Ryan Ferguson, who had been in prison for a decade for the murder of Kent Heitholt. Ferguson and his supporters claim he was “wrongfully convicted” (a term that these days seems to only mean “someone who has amassed a vocal following”). Ferguson’s supporters say that he was found innocent, which isn’t quite accurate. Ferguson was released when an appellate panel declared he did not receive a fair trial, and overturned the conviction. The attorney general could have decided to prosecute again, but has not at this time (Huffington Post, Nov 2013).
Ferguson claims to have read Knox’s book while in prison. He recently posted about the case against Knox and Sollecito on a Facebook page for his supporters. Ferguson claims that the media got the case about him wrong and tries to pass along information about the case against Knox and Sollecito. Ferguson, however, pushes information about Knox’s case that has been proven to be misleading or false. Below are quotes from his message and the corrections to Ferguson’s information.
I do not hold any firm views on whether the pair are innocent or if they were involved. As various details in the case get reviewed, they generally fall into either support for the defense, support for the prosecution, or inconclusive. I also attempt to not make the dichotomy of guilty vs. innocent; in this case the two sides are either innocent, or proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the pair were involved. One article I’d read indicated that under Italian law, there is little distinction made between accomplises and those who commit the actual crime; if proven, they’re all equally guilty in the eyes of the law. I’ll have to go back and see if I can find that, or find another reference that supports that argument.
What follows are some preliminary thoughts of a case for the defense, based on what I’ve read up till now. I’m not putting them forth as what I believe- just an interpretation of what I’ve read that could be built to argue for the defense.
I have no doubt that others more familiar with the details can provide a counter-story. In coming days, I’ll work on an argument for the prosecution that would counter these claims. I’ll also extend this to look at the other testimony and evidence provided.
There are some things that are uncontested. Its uncontested that Knox & Sollecito were getting high the night of the muder. The next day was a holiday; they apparently had plans to go out of town
In arguing for the defense, the conflicting statements of time can easily be explained by the effects of the drugs; simply, you lose track of the passage of time. The conflicting stories about when something happened are thus easily explained away as confusion about time resulting from the use of the drugs. Depending on the usage and the quality of the drugs, this effect can be quite pronounced.