This post is intellectually dishonest. You yourself state that you have no interest in establishing Amanda Knox's guilt, but instead intend to "debunk komponisto's post" - what is the purpose of that? - and then proceed to list a bunch of cherry-picked details about the case, half of which you have not even sourced!

My belief is that komponisto merely accepted propaganda from the Friends of Amanda (FoA) at face value, even though most of their claims are incorrect. Unlike komponisto and FoA, I shall cite reliable sources for my claims.

Like TrueJustice.org? Which is more reliable than Friends of Amanda because..... you say it is?

Did you read the original survey post? As far as I can tell, there is no intent to mislead there, as the OP doesn't even state his position. Yet - somehow! - most members seemed to conclude that she had a low probability of being guilty. If you want to establish Amanda Knox's guilt, I suggest you read through those comments and see what factors influenced their opinions. I don't see that you addressed any of those factors in your post.

This should help you understand that DNA does not voluminously and constantly spew forth from humans in the way komponisto believes it does.

This statement, in particular, comes off as more "misleading" than anything komponisto claimed in his post.

If this post is not the result of a vendetta against a particular member, then the OP could have done a much better job of arguing this case. But frankly, this whole case has been discussed on this website at great length already, and in great detail. I would suggest examining the arguments that have already been made in the 3(?) or so other posts that have been devoted to this topic.