Amanda Knox just can't catch a break. After being convicted last month for the now infamous 2007 murder of roommate Meredith Kercher, her ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito is now admitting that he has questions about Knox's behavior on the morning after Kercher's murder, according to the Daily Mail.
"Certainly I asked her questions," Sollecito said in the interview for Italian TV, which aired in part on the Today show on Monday.
He specified, "Why did you take a shower? Why did she spend so much time there?".
These are questions he says he doesn't have the answers to. After the two have stuck together in their alibi for that night for so long and have refused to turn on each other in exchange for reduced jail time, why would he change his tune this late in the game?
Sollecito could possibly be taking precautions by distancing himself from Knox, according to NBC legal analyst Lisa Bloom.
"He's saying that there's some evidence that may apply to her that doesn't apply to him." she said. She could be right. There would be many benefits to distancing himself from Amanda Knox, however, earlier this month she denied the growing speculation.
Knox states in her personal blog, "It has been claimed that, in this most recent round of closing arguments and in interviews since the latest guilty verdict, Raffaele and his defense attorneys have finally betrayed their resentment and started to put distance between him and me legally and personally. This is not the case. Actually, Attorney Bongiorno’s closing arguments and Raffaele’s latest statements pinpoint and attack a fundamental weakness in the prosecution’s case against both Raffaele and me that has been ignored for far too long: Raffaele is not a slave."
She then added, "Raffaele has plenty of reason for resentment, but not against me. The only reason he has been dragged into this is because he happens to be my alibi."
Knox also says that Sollecito has been in contact with her by email, and recently said this to her, "I don’t want to be punished for, nor have to continue to justify, those things that regard you and not me. Obviously the evidence demonstrates both of our innocence, but it seems that for the judges and the people this objectivity is of no importance."
So is this implication of his attempt at distance true or simply a ploy to insist on her guilt?
Image via YouTube