You are right, I did miss your point. OK, let me see if I have it now:
You say the Knox case was tossed because of weak evidence. Perhaps.
What I’m saying is, had this been a “standard” murder (one that did not involve the steam and drama this one did), it would not have even warranted a 2nd look.
Society “wanted” to find these 2 innocent, so they found the facts to support a way off the hook.
Where I think we disagree is, you believe that a person’s motive will not taint the truth.
I believe that a motive (or a bias) will allow you too see the facts the way you want to see them.
And if you read the story from a non-media angle, you’ll agree, the facts could lead you to any conclusion you want to reach.
So, now do I get and adress your point?