Dot writes: I’ve been thinking about all the hype surrounding the acquittal on appeal of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. So much of the hoo-ha over this case has been obviously fuelled by the fact that Miss Knox is young and extremely pretty. The language used to describe her has been the stuff of the wildest fantasy and stereotyping – a witch who ‘likes hot, wild sex’, an angelic exterior concealing evil (or not, as we must now suppose). In fact her looks worked against her, because she seemed to fit the myth of the fair but treacherous seductress so well. At the same time one can’t help agreeing with the comments of the victim’s family (quoted in another news article I can’t trace right now) that “Mez [Meredith Kercher] has been forgotten in all this.” Miss Kercher was also very pretty, but maybe not quite as pretty, and there has been little opportunity for the media to take any new photographs of her. So the case became the Amanda Knox circus, and remains so even now she’s been acquitted. However, I don’t entirely understand the Kercher family’s determination to back the prosecution’s appeal against the acquittal. They want justice for their daughter: but why does that have to mean convicting Knox and Sollecito, whom a court have found innocent – especially as someone else is still behind bars for the murder?