She first claimed to not be at the apartment the night Meredith was murdered, but then changed the story to directly accuse an innocent man of murdering the coed.
This is evidence of what? all it proves is she had lied and given that she may have had good reason to lie (ie. corrupt interrogation) it really is evidence of nothing.
She was reportedly spotted at a store in the early morning hours before the police were alerted to Meredith's body -- accused of buying bleach.
This is kind of ridiculous, if they had used bleach to clean up the crime scene as this reasoning suggests there would have been obvious evidence of that.
She reportedly showered in the apartment after discovering an unsettling amount of blood, before police were aware of Meredith's body. It's odd that this would be her first action after noticing an apparent break in and potential crime, isn't it?
She didn't realize something major was wrong is one way of looking at this. Again, its not evidence of anything!
Amanda appeared to stage her "attempt" at contacting Meredith by calling her English phone, knowing that she used her other phone in Italy. After she is told to try contacting the woman (when telling their other roommate about the blood and apparent "break in") She finally calls both phones, but neither calls last even long enough to listen to Meredith's voicemail.
She appeared to stage her attempt? Your presenting your interpretation (or the prosecutors) of a simple set of events. This really is not evidence of anything!
Both Amanda and Raffaele couldn't get their stories to match up during the investigation.
Suspicious, sure. However its plausible that one of them got scared during the interrogations and lied, multiple times. Knox changed her stories multiple times, so of course their stories didn't match.
Amanda lied to police and told them that Meredith always kept her door locked -- when it was the contrary.
You can't even prove that she lied with this statement. A much easier logical jump is that she didn't remember the truth. She had lived with girl for two months so maybe she got this wrong?
Raffaele Sollecito knew that nothing had been stolen from Meredith's bedroom before police were even able to enter it.
Huh? Hadn't seen that but how could someone know something like that? Sounds like someones words got twisted to fit the narrative the prosecution presented.
Amanda knew details behind Meredith's murder (such as where some of the wounds on her body were) and shared them with friends, even though the details hadn't been released and Meredith's body was found covered with a blanket.
Meredith had been stabbed 47 times. What details did she really know?
A homeless man saw Amanda and Raff in a "heated argument" at the flat where Meredith's body was found at around 11:00 p.m., the night she was reportedly murdered.
People argue. I argue with my gf all the time, sometimes outside!
A knife was found in Raff's possession with Meredith Kercher's DNA on one end (the blade) and Knox's DNA on the handle. The knife was scrubbed with bleach and had only trace amounts of DNA.
This was basically the only real evidence the prosecution presented. Yet even it looked manipulated:
Umm as a scientist I can pretty much assure you that this evidence wasn't established scientifically. There is a reason why confidence intervals/statistical significance is calculated and used as a limit to evaluate the validity of experimental data. Outside of confidence intervals things such as bias can become determining factors in the outcome resulting in false positives.
My final statement is really important. Amanda Knox's defense hinges that there was a lot of bias against her. All of the "evidence" presented by the prosecution could be based on preconceived notions. Given that no real evidence was ever presented I'm not sure how anyone can be sure that she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.