General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGUILTY. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito found guilty again. She was sentenced to 28.5 years.
Last edited Thu Jan 30, 2014, 06:07 PM - Edit history (7)
Meanwhile, the actual murderer, Rudy Guede, was given a short sentence (for accepting a fast-track trial) and time off for good behavior, and is expected to be released within a year.
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/30/world/europe/italy-amanda-knox-retrial/
The retrial began last September, refocusing international attention on the case that grabbed headlines in Italy, Britain and the United States -- but neither Knox nor Sollecito were present in court.
It has renewed questions about the effectiveness of Italy's justice system given widespread doubts over the handling of the investigation and key pieces of evidence.
Prosecutor Alessandro Crini has said both Knox and Sollecito should be convicted and handed a 26-year sentence for homicide, with an additional four years for Knox for slander.
Both have maintained their innocence.
_____________________________
Legal experts are divided as to whether the U.S. would extradite her, if Italy asked.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/27/us-italy-knox-extradition-idUSBRE92Q01020130327
The legal question would be whether Knox was acquitted, as U.S. courts would define the term, or whether the case was merely reversed and still open for further appeal, said criminal lawyer and Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz.
SNIP
Other defendants who have been acquitted in other countries and then convicted on appeal have attempted to raise the double jeopardy principle to avoid extradition, without much success, said Mary Fan, a law professor at the University of Washington who specializes in cross-border criminal law.
The text of the treaty prevents extradition if the person has already been convicted or acquitted of the same offense by the "requested" country, which would be the United States in Knox's case because Italy would be requesting extradition from the United States. Because Knox was never prosecuted or acquitted for homicide in the United States, the treaty's double-jeopardy provision would not prevent Knox's extradition, said Fan.
While the issue is rare in the United States, several courts have rejected the double jeopardy argument in similar cases. In 2010, a federal court in California found that a man who was acquitted of murder in Mexico and later convicted after prosecutors appealed the acquittal, could not claim double jeopardy to avoid extradition to Mexico. That court cited a 1974 decision from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, that reached the same conclusion with respect to Canadian law, which also allows the government to appeal an acquittal.
SNIP
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/30/meredith-kercher-murder-knox-and-sollecito-appeal-verdicts-due-live
Amanda Knox has issued a statement:
First and foremost it must be recognised that there is no consolation for the Kercher family. Their grief over Meredith’s terrible murder will follow them forever. They deserve respect and support.
"I am frightened and saddened by this unjust verdict. Having been found innocent before, I expected better from the Italian justice system. The evidence and accusatory theory do not justify a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather, nothing has changed. There has always been a marked lack of evidence. My family and I have suffered greatly from this wrongful persecution.
"This has got out of hand. Most troubling is that it was entirely preventable. I beseech those with the knowledge and authority to address and remediate the problems that worked to pervert the course of justice and waste the valuable resources of the system: overzealous and intransigent prosecution, prejudiced and narrow-minded investigation, unwillingness to admit mistake, reliance on unreliable testimony and evidence, character assassination, inconsistent and unfounded accusatory theory, and counterproductive and coercive interrogation techniques that produce false confessions and inaccurate statements.
"Clearly a wrongful conviction is horrific for the wrongfully accused, but it is also terribly bad for the victim, their surviving family, and society."
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Gothmog
(145,487 posts)I doubt that you could get to a jury in the US on the evidence in this case
anneboleyn
(5,611 posts)Amanda will never go near Italy again for good reason.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)
mnmoderatedem
(3,728 posts)a very messy bloody crime scene would have left a trail leading directly to Knox if she were guilty, which it didn't. She must have the worst defense attorney in history. Lionel Hutz lives.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)I'm not quite sure what's supposed to make the Italians' that much worse than ours...
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)your entire legal system is a bad joke.
Holy crap: four edits to fix ONE typo!
hlthe2b
(102,340 posts)Not sure what else to say.... 
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)is going to happen on this, I doubt the Italians would even ask.
exboyfil
(17,865 posts)Justice Dept/State Dept have made a statement on possible extradition?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)pieces, or wipe their ass with in front of a camera.
I doubt the Italians will even request.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)
BeeBee
(1,074 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)in terms of extraditions to countries where the government can appeal a not-guilty verdict.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)Which will happen, but it could take months or even a year. After that, the Italians must request extradition before we'd consider it.
struggle4progress
(118,329 posts)the court to resolve exactly how the differences between US and Italian procedure must be reconciled, when applying US standards of fairness
Was she, for example, subject to double jeopardy? Well, it may depend on whether the US court regards the various trials as separate and de novo or as resulting from her appeals
Was she subject unfairly to a trial in abstentia? It may depend on exactly the time and circumstances under which she fled Italy, and again it may depends on whether the US court regards the various trials as separate and de novo or as resulting from her appeals
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)pnwmom
(108,990 posts)Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)PragmaticLiberal
(904 posts)As much as we complain about our country (and with good reason at times) it could be much worse.
MUCH worse. 
Aerows
(39,961 posts)"We're going to keep trying her until somebody finds her guilty!"
PragmaticLiberal
(904 posts)frwrfpos
(517 posts)the prosecutor can fuck off
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)they seem unable to accept that Rudy Guede did this alone, because he's a murdering rapist. if meredith had been out and amanda was home alone it could easily have been her that was killed.
italy wants to save face - perhaps the supreme court overturning these verdicts is the only way they can do it.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)unless some weird political situation occurs.
However, there is a European court of appeals and I think that will be the next step for Amanda and Raffaele after the Italian high court ratifies this verdict.
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)guede will be out on parole before this is over for knox and sollecito.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)The prosecution has asked that both of them be arrested or at least have their passports taken. This won't affect Amanda but it will affect him.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)pnwmom
(108,990 posts)StevieM
(10,500 posts)the European Court of Human Rights.
DeShawn
(14 posts)Of course, blame it on the Black guy.
Questions remain:
Why had the window in Amanda's apartment been broken from the inside in order to make it look like a burglary?
Why did Solliceto do a search on the internet for "How to clean blood with bleach?"
Why were they seen buying bleach by witnesses the morning after the murder?
Why did both Knox and Solliceto claim to be places where they weren't on the night of the murder?
How do you explain Knox's sociopathic lack of concern for Kercher, and the rest of her inappropriate behavior in front of the police?
Why had Amanda Knox written stories in the past, fantasizing about drugging, raping and assaulting women?
Look, we know she's guilty. Rudy Guede wasn't some random guy who broke into the apartment, he was already well aquainted with Amanda Knox. He was her drug dealer, and they had been texting each other the same day. Knox and Kercher had frequently had arguments because she was bringing strange men back to the apartment. Knox had stolen money. Even if she didn't directly do the deed herself, she was there when it happened, and she helped to cover it up, even trying to place the blame on several innocent men.
There's more than enough circumstantial evidence to convict Amanda, and her claims of police mistreatment are nonsense. I only hope if I'm ever on trial for murder that I have the Knox family PR team on my side. The way they and the US media managed to spin this into her being an innocent victim of a corrupt and incompetent Italian justice system is pretty mindblowing. Then again, I doubt the American public would be interested since I'm not a pretty, young white girl.
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)How are things in Britain, Tabloid Victim?
The "Blame it on the Black Guy" deflection isn't even clever. Keep clinging to your delusions.
DeShawn
(14 posts)This has nothing to do with Britain. Everyone in Italy, the rest of Europe, and the rest of the world, knows she did it because they were following it closely from the start. It was the media in the US that withheld vital information about this case and started a smear campaign against the Italian police and judges (even accusing them of anti-Americanism, despite one of the accused being Italian), and that's why many white Americans believe in her innocence.
Seriously, what is it about this girl? Why are some people so determined to defend her? She's pretty, but you're never going to get into her pants, so what's the point? Nobody would be doing this if she was Black, and you know it, and you should be ashamed of yourself for claiming people are playing the race card. Did you get lost on your way to FreeRepublic or something?
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)She's from my part of Seattle.
She is the same age as my kids.
She attends my alma mater.
"Nobody would be doing this if she was Black, and you know it", IS playing the Race Card. I am not ashamed to tell you that's crap.
DeShawn
(14 posts)You're admitting you're defending her because of some irrational, personal bias, rather than the facts of the case? I'm glad we cleared that up.
The narrative in the US media and the spin from the Knox family was that Amanda couldn't possibly have been involved in murder because she was a virginal Catholic schoolgirl who was "deeply in love" with her Italian boyfriend (who she barely knew in reality) and "enjoyed going to the opera", when the truth is she had a history of extreme promiscuity and drug abuse. Her "respectable" middle class family were in reality extremely dysfunctional, and everyone who knew her has come out to say she was always psychologically disturbed and a pathological liar. She wrote stories on her old MySpace page about drugging and raping women, for god's sake.
That is the true face of the person you're defending.
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)I know the milieu she is from, precisely. You obviously don't. You are swayed by character assassination.
Regardless, my bias doesn't change the reasons to believe her innocence. No one said she was virginal. No one said she didn't use Cannibis. She freely admitted it because it was her alibi.
Your bias is showing, Tabloid Victim. "Extreme promiscuity", "drub abuse", "extremely dysfunctional" family. You, in fact, are repeating the Tabloid slut-shaming that led to her conviction.
Now, tell me why Sollecito, the son of a doctor, participated in this crime that "eveyone who knew her" saw coming.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)until somebody finds them guilty. She's been acquitted twice. The guy from the Ivory Coast was the one who opted for a fast-track trial, because he was guilty. He'll be out and free before she gets taken off the docket for heaven's sake.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)... no way we should extradite if they request it.
IN my view, it's a clear violation of double jeopardy at the very least.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)
maui902
(108 posts)Amanda Knox never tried to "frame an innocent man." While she was being interrogated by multiple representatives of local law enforcement and the prosecution, in the middle of the night, without legal representation, in a foreign language she did not speak well, during an interrogation that, unlike the statements of almost all other witnesses, was not recorded, she was asked to "imagine" if Patrick Lumumba, her boss, could have been at the house at Villa de Pergola and participated in the murder of Meredith Kertcher. Based on what I've read, it was the interrrogators, not Amanda, who brought up Lumumba's name, likely due to the text they found from Knox to Lumumba, earlier in the evening, which said "see you later," in response to a text from Lumumba advising her she didn't have to come into work that night. After hours of questioning, and being asked to imagine if Lumumba had been present, Amanda Knox finally "admitted" to what the interrogators were suggesting, and signed a confession that was written by one of the interrogators/interpreters. Shortly afterwards, within 24 hours, she wrote her own statement claiming that was she was forced to say was not true. Still, without even bothering to look into possible alibis that Lumumba may have had (and indeed did have), the local police arrested him almost immediately, put him in jail, and didn't release him until two weeks later.
And if you don't believe this exonerates Amanda Knox from the claim of "framing an innocent man," ask yourself why would she implicate someone she had to have known would be able to prove he wasn't there, thereby weakening her case????
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)and they had found a fiber that made them think a black man was involved. So during an overnight interrogation, without food or water, conducted by more than a dozen tag-teaming officers, they harangued her, insisting that they KNEW she was with there with Lumumba, and even struck her. In her exhausted, confused state (she was naive enough to trust the police when they insisted they had evidence she'd been there) she finally caved in and signed a statement saying that she could "imagine" having been there that night, and that Lumumba was with Meredith in the other room.
A few hours later, she asked for paper and wrote out another statement in English stressing that the memory didn't seem real to her, that it felt like a dream, and they shouldn't taken any action based on it.
The police taped every other witness statement except hers, claiming that they didn't have the funds to do so -- even though the machine was available and recorded every other witness's statement. And they spent more than $180K on a cartoon depiction of the murder. But they couldn't afford to tape her being interrogated and giving a statement.
Also, the high court ruled that that "confession" couldn't be used in the criminal trial because it was done without a lawyer and an independent translator. However, they allowed it to be used in the civil trial that was held at the same time in front of the same jury.
Does all this sound fair to you?
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)If not, and this is what actually occurred, no it does not seem fair.
In any case, I have noticed that the more physically attractive an accused or convicted criminal is, the more likely people are to assume that they are innocent. This is particularly true when the criminal is a young lady. I wonder how much of that is happening in this case -- perhaps not with you, but in general.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)in the criminal trial because it was done without an attorney.
It is a matter of fact that they allowed the same statement to be given to the jurors for the civil trial (Lumumba sued Amanda for naming him in the statement). It is a fact that the same jurors sat for the criminal and civil trials concurrently, and they were supposed to disregard the statement for one trial and not the other.
It is also a matter of fact that the police either failed to record or withheld any tape of Amanda while she was being interrogated.
This is from the report prepared by Judge Hellman, the appeals court judge who found Amanda and Raffaele to be innocent in the second trial. You can read the rest of the report if you want to know more about why this judge ruled there was no evidence showing their guilt.
http://hellmannreport.wordpress.com/contents/reasons-for-the-decision/calumny/
"This Corte di Assise di Appello, while confirming the procedural ruling (ordinance) of the first-level Corte di Assise on this point, has nevertheless specified that, while they are usable with respect to the crime of calumny against Patrick Lumumba, they cannot be usable with respect to the other crimes against Meredith Kercher to the extent that, as the Corte di Cassazione has also confirmed (ruling no. 990/08, dated 4-01-2008), they are subject to absolute nullification in this regard (sono affetti, sotto questo profilo, da nullità assoluta), as having been given in the absence of an attorney by a person who had already assumed the role of a suspect (indagata)."
In this case, I strongly believe Amanda's pretty face worked against her. The media went crazy with the prosecutor's idea that the girl with an "angel face" had the heart of a -- get this -- Luciferina.
About Patrick Lumumba, the bar owner who initially claimed police brutality:
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/PatrickLumumbaWhosaccusingwho.html
Lumumba revealed this information in an interview with the Daily Mail. I certainly do not view the Daily Mail as a reliable source but Lumumba later confirmed everything with Katie Crouch from Slate.com.
“I was questioned by five men and women, some of whom punched and kicked me. They forced me on my knees against the wall and said I should be in America where I would be given the electric chair for my crime. All they kept saying was, ‘You did it, you did it.’”
“I didn't know what I’d ‘done’. I was scared and humiliated. Then, after a couple of hours one of them suggested they show me a picture of ‘the dead girl’ to get me to confess."
“It might sound naive, but it was only then that I made the connection between Meredith's death and my arrest. Stunned, I said, You think I killed Meredith?”
Lumumba spent two weeks in prison before being released because he had a rock solid alibi. Lumumba repeatedly told police that he was at his bar Le Chic at the time of the murder. Thankfully for him, a Swiss professor who had spent the evening in question at Le Chic talking to Lumumba came forward to confirm Lumumba’s whereabouts. Without this alibi, Lumumba could have easily spent a year in jail (like Amanda and Raffaele) waiting to see if the police decided to press charges.
At some point after his release, Lumumba decided to change his story about his ordeal with the police. It seems that money certainly played a major role in his decision making. Lumumba sued the police for his wrongful imprisonment seeking 516,000 Euros (approx. $700,000) in damages, but in the end he was only awarded $8,000.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)First point... this whole 'they refused or lost the tape' thing happens here all the time. It's pretty typical actually. Why keep a tape when a transcript and officer testimony is available? Not defending this, only making a point. That said, it is also typical, and the defense's job, to demand the sun and moon and stars as prosecution evidence in a continuous process of moving goalposts. No matter how many tests have been run the defense will act astonished that more were not done. Every. single. time.
Now to my question... why all this bother? If everyone, including the police, know she's innocent why spend the money and face the risk of further humiliation (and loss of tourist cash)? As I understand it, it's not even the same people. For those convinced of her innocence, why are you so sure? What, other than her angelic looks, do you even know about her? Is it not possible that the people in Italy who really DID know her are correct about her guilt? What did M really tell her parents before her murder-- because they damn sure don't believe pretty Amanda is innocent.
Personally, I have found this case impossible to follow. The real evidence is hidden behind mountains of BS. What I KNOW happened, and no one seems to dispute this, is that some spoiled and affluent privileged teen beauty went to Italy and went absolutely nuts with partying. And while she had an innocent face, she was apparently an absolute pig. Her roommate was slaughtered and Amanda was convicted. Twice. How many more trials should she get?
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)The prosecutor himself was under indictment for falsification of evidence when the murder occurred. He threw himself into the case, and to much fanfare announced "case closed" within a few days of the murder -- before any of the physical evidence was analyzed. He immediately decided it had to be a roommate, and Amanda was the one who called the police to their cottage, worried that there were signs of a break-in, and she was the only roommate in town -- though she said she was with her boyfriend in his apartment the night before.
One of the items the police found in the murder room was a black fiber that they thought was a black person's hair. Amanda's boss at the bar was a black man. His phone number was on Amanda's phone, along with a couple texts. He had texted her that he didn't need her to work that night. She texted him back, "See you later." Unfortunately, in Italian those words aren't just a way of saying , "goodbye" like they are here. The police thought Amanda was arranging to see him later that night.
The police also didn't like the way Amanda behaved. There are interviews you can read about this. One policeman said he could tell just by watching her that she had done the murder. Why? Because she didn't wail and cry the way a woman is supposed to. Because the next day she was seen in a restaurant eating pizza. Any Italian woman would have been at home in bed, crying, the cop said. And of course, she bought underwear in a store (she wasn't allowed to go into the cottage to get her things). Buying underwear with your boyfriend with you makes you a slut. Being a slut makes you a killer.
After a few days of interrogating her for hours a day, they finally kept her overnight in a tag-team interrogation, with no attorney and no neutral translator even though she'd only had a college course in Italian. The hammered at her that they knew she had been there with Lumumba, that they knew he had killed Meredith, till Amanda finally broke and signed the statement, written in Italian, that they wanted her to sign. A few hours later she asked for paper and wrote a statement saying she didn't trust what she signed earlier, that it all felt like a dream and not something that should be relied on. The police kept Lumumba in jail anyway.
And THEN the results of the lab came back. And nothing pointed to any of the three defendants. It ALL pointed to a man well known to them, a burglar named Rudy Guede. DNA, fingerprints, everything matched him.
At that point in a normal investigation they would have released Amanda and Raffaele and Lumumba -- but Mignini, the prosecutor, is slime. Instead of admitting that they couldn't just LOOK at people and decide who was guilty (before examining any evidence), they kept their whole theory of Satanic-ritual-sex-game-whatever and swapped in one black guy for another -- Rudy Guede instead of Patrick Lumumba.
Even though Amanda had met him only once in passing and Raffaele had never met him at all. Even though he didn't speak a word of English and Amanda barely spoke Italian.
Mignini didn't want to admit he'd been completely wrong when he made his big announcement. It was probably as simple as that.
However, there is one more question. And that is why Rudy Guede had been released by the police twice in the previous couple weeks after being caught redhanded in burglaries involving knives. If the police hadn't released him, he would have been in jail and Meredith would be alive.
You tell me. Is that another motive for the police to want to throw up a lot of smoke and mirrors and pretend there were two other murderers, too? Not just Guede, the guy they let run loose?
As far as what you "know" about Amanda, you are wrong. She smoked some pot in Italy. She didn't go nuts and she wasn't an "absolute pig." She also wasn't "spoiled and affluent." She lived in a middle class neighborhood in Seattle, she was a scholarship student at her high school, both her parents needed to work (her mother is a teacher and her father worked for a dept. store), and as soon as she got to Italy, she got a job -- to earn money.
I wasn't always a supporter. For the whole first year I ignored the case and assumed she was guilty. But something finally made me dig into the details, and here is the critical issue for me: The room where Meredith was murdered was a small room and it was covered in blood. It yielded up dozens of pieces of physical evidence the day after the murder and every single piece was linked to Guede: DNA in and on the body, on the purse, fingerprints, etc. Not a single speck was Amanda's. It wasn't till six weeks later that the police, determined to somehow link Raffaele to the crime, went to the room and "discovered" the bra clasp on the floor in a pile of rubbish. Then, on camera, they passed it from one visibly dirty glove to another. Then they put it back on the floor, took a photo, and entered it into evidence. The independent court-appointed experts said that there was so much contamination on it after that, that they could have found the judge's DNA on it.
The prosecution's answer to this is that Amanda and Raffaele used bleach to remove all traces of themselves from the room -- all their invisible DNA and invisible fingerprints -- and somehow leave only Guede's. You understand, I'm sure, that that would be an impossible feat of magic. So how could Amanda murder Meredith if she wasn't even in the room? Why was not a single piece of evidence found linked to Raffaele until they went back six weeks later? And yet there were dozens (more than 50 but I can't remember the exact number) of pieces of physical evidence linked to Guede. When I realized that this was impossible, and that so much of Mignini's case against Amanda was to make people like you think she was an "absolute pig" who was capable of anything, I realized that the prosecution case was so much smoke and mirrors. And so did Judge Hellman, the appeals court judge. He said there was "no evidence" showing they committed the murder, and declared they were actually "innocent."
murdererofmeredithkercher.com
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)After all that, including a corrupt prosecutor, the government had all they needed to let this case end. They would have saved face, American tourists would no longer fear their courts, everything back to normal.
They didn't. They got a new prosecutor and new jury, and after another trial in which the EVIDENCE was presented and debated, another guilty verdict. The people in Italy who knew Knox believe she did it, M's friends believe she did it, M's family believe she did it, Knox's boss believes she did it, the police and investigators and prosecutor believe she did it, and two different juries believe she did it. Pretty much everyone not employed by the families of the accused.
Want to know WHY?
Both Amanda and her boyfriend told an absolutely amazing number of very damning lies. Not one or two, but over and over and over again. They weren't lying under the grueling pressure of brutal interrogations, they were lying from their first contact with the police and they never stopped. We're talking Casey Anthony territory here. That's the portion of this saga the Knox defenders seem to always forget. Even Knox's mother thought her story didn't make sense.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)that Mignini was corrupt -- which they never have -- and that they had kept two innocent students in prison for FOUR YEARS.
What are the lies that they supposedly told? I have read their testimony, and the inconsistencies were on the night of the interrogation, when the police themselves were lying to both of them about what the police knew. This is why people need lawyers when being interrogated by the police. Police are skilled in manipulating people, confusing people, and getting them to say what they want them to say.
And what was this "evidence" you say was presented in the 2nd appeals trial? Both pieces of evidence supported innocence, not guilt. First, there was the testimony of the Mafia guy, to which I don't give credibility, but the Court had asked to hear it. (And it supported innocence, FWIW.) Then there was the testing of the knife -- which revealed NO DNA from Meredith, as the prosecution had expected to find. Instead they just found another bit of DNA from Amanda. Since the knife also contained a bit of starch, and was from the kitchen where Amanda cooked, this just showed this was a knife she used in the kitchen. The prosecution falsely claimed that this strengthened the case that it was the murder weapon.
Many people in Italy and Meredith's friends were duped by the mass hysteria in the media, an hysteria fed by Mignini in the years after the murder. They read "facts" in the media that were never even introduced at trial, or they made up their minds when they read the Massei report and never read any farther. Their opinions may be motivated by love for Meredith, but they're not motivated by love for the truth.
You never explained how Amanda could have killed Meredith without leaving a single trace of being in the murder room. Because there is no way she could have done that. And that is why Hellman, the judge of the appeals trial, said she is innocent.
Lies told about Amanda in the press:
http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/%EF%BB%BF-list-of-prosecution-and-press-lies-told-about-amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito/
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Because people desperate for a conviction will lie, i.e. former DA Ray Nifong of the Duke Lacrosse rape case infamy.
And? How does that invalidate Knox's rights to a vigorous defense and discovery?
Unless the state can provide a clear theory with verified supporting evidence then Knox should go free.
And that's probably all that matters for you. She's affluent and attractive so to Hell with her. She's had it too good for too long it's time she suffer like the common people and only a dubious murder conviction will bring social justice. She'll get her comeuppance!
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)Of course. This does not address my point however. Many have vilified the Italian police over this, claiming it wouldn't happen this way here. I was pointing out that this is nonsense.
And? How does that invalidate Knox's rights to a vigorous defense and discovery?
It doesn't, and she has had that vigorous defense -- twice -- and lost both times. My point was that it is easy and expected for defense teams to demand more evidence and more tests. The key is to listen to their demands or questions without embracing their conclusions.
Unless the state can provide a clear theory with verified supporting evidence then Knox should go free.
They did, twice, with two different juries. Consider this: basically everyone who knew the people involved-- friends of the victim, former boss, neighbors, the family of the victim, the police and detectives, prosecutors, everyone really -- all believe that Knox is a manipulative lying sociopath and killer. The people who don't are internet fans who think she's pretty.
And that's probably all that matters for you. She's affluent and attractive so to Hell with her. She's had it too good for too long it's time she suffer like the common people and only a dubious murder conviction will bring social justice. She'll get her comeuppance!
No, that's a fringe benefit.
TBF
(32,085 posts)there are too many holes in the story. Language issues, evidence doesn't point to Amanda doing it (and I have no problem convicting an affluent white girl). Maybe she wasn't beautifully behaved in Italy but that's a big jump to murder. I see a lot of reasonable doubt with this case.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)You seem to think it's okay to send someone to prison for 28 years for the crime of partying, having sex, being "spoiled" or being unlikeable.
My feeling is, the Italian authorities agree.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)with partying."
What does that have to do with anything?
It sure sounds to me like the prosecution's case is shoddy, but people don't like her and she's "privileged" and she "partied" and did nasty sex things, so throw the book at her.
mythology
(9,527 posts)where police have gotten false confessions by repeatedly badgering innocent people through prolonged interrogations. Is it really impossible to believe that the Italian police couldn't do the same especially when dealing with somebody who wasn't a native Italian speaker?
phil89
(1,043 posts)She's untouchable now, free to cartwheel to her heart's content. Wish she would have been convicted.
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)Then unconvicted. Then re-convicted today.
Do try to keep up.
And her extradition status is very much in question. It's Rudy Guede who'll be "cartwheeling" on parole, in approximately a year.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)brush
(53,830 posts)It says "the actual murderer", Rudy Guede . . .
Wasn't that the black guy they hustled off to prison so quick if you blinked you missed it.
C'mon, DU, haven't we seen enough of the "blame the black guy" sham tales to know better than to just accept that?
And of course the two whites are completely innocent and knew nothing of the crime, even though they were all in the same house at the time of the murder? Doesn't pass the smell test.
Amazing!
And the Italians, even though they jailed the black guy first, they didn't fall for the "blame the black guy only" variant of the sham.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)and his fingerprints, handprints, and shoe prints all over the room. Not a single piece of evidence linked Amanda to the murder room, which was covered in blood. And not a single witness put her there that night. Why do you say she was in the house? Because she broke down and signed a statement in the middle of the night, without food or water, or an attorney?
They didn't hustle Guede off. It was a year before he was convicted. Only in Italy does a year seem fast.
He had left the country after he did the crime. The police arrested Amanda and Raffaele, along with Amanda's boss Patrick, and said they knew they were guilty because of a psychological profile. (They thought they needed a black guy then because they mistakenly thought a black fiber was a black person's hair.) THEN the lab reports came back and SURPRISE -- they all pointed to someone else completely, a person with a recent history of burglarizing with a knife. Rudy Guede.
Oops.
But the police didn't want to admit that they were wrong in announcing they had the culprits a few days after the murder, so they swapped in one black man for another. All of a sudden, the new story was that Amanda, who had only met Rudy once at a party, and Raffaele, who had never met him at all, had all gotten together and killed Meredith in a sex game. When that theory didn't wash, they changed the motive. In the current trial, they seriously argued this motive: Meredith got upset because of Rudy's unflushed poop in a 3rd roommate's toilet. So Amanda and Raffaele rose up in Rudy's defense and killed her.
Raffaele. The man who had never met Rudy. He supposedly helped kill Meredith because Meredith was upset about Rudy's poop.
Yes, the black man had a fast-track trial, which means he was convicted in a year instead of six years. Does a year sound fast to you? And because he accepted the fast-track trial, the man whose DNA was inside the victim's body, and fingerprints in the room, got a reduced sentence and will be released laster this year.
brush
(53,830 posts)Like I said in my post, the old "blame the black guy" meme was alive and well with Knox.
She fingered an African night club owner (her boss) who authories then tried to coerce a confession out of but had a solid alibi.
The bar owner, wrongly named as the killer of Meredith Kercher by Amanda Knox (had a solid alibi) has condemned her as a ‘fantastic actress’.
Patrick Lumumba, 38, was arrested and spent two weeks in prison after Knox told detectives she ‘had covered my ears in the kitchen’ while ‘Patrick killed Meredith’.
However, the claim was false and Italian prosecutors alleged Knox had made it to throw suspicion off herself."
Something is surely remiss about this case. But hey, you believe what you want.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)got Lumumba's name off Amanda's phone. And since they were already sure a black man was involved, they tag-teamed her overnight with more than a dozen police officers, telling her they knew Lumumba had been there, till she broke down and signed the statement they had prepared, saying that she could "imagine" that she had been in the cottage and that Meredith and Lumumba had been in the other room. Then, a few hours later she asked for paper and pen and wrote out another statement saying that that memory felt like a dream, not something real, and asking them not to take any action based on her earlier statement.
The POLICE left him in prison for two weeks AFTER Amanda wrote out the second statement saying that she thought her memory was wrong -- and after they had already collected the physical evidence showing that only Guede had been in the room.
Why wouldn't Amanda have simply "fingered" Guede, if she had been at the cottage that night? It would have made much more sense to name him, and let him take all the blame, then to try to do that to Lumumba -- who, if she hadn't been so exhausted her brain wasn't working, she would have realized was working at the bar all that night and had a solid alibi. But she didn't name Guede because she didn't know he was the murderer BECAUSE SHE WASN'T THERE.
brush
(53,830 posts)pnwmom
(108,990 posts)no attorney, no translator, and a policewoman whacking her on the head, and signed the paper (in Italian, even though she'd only had one course in the language) the police put in front of her. The police either failed to tape her interrogation or lost it somehow -- even though they taped every other witness statement.
The high court ruled that the statement was inadmissible in the murder trial.
Nothing else needs to be said.
brush
(53,830 posts)No excuse.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)They harangued her and hit her till she finally broke down and complied. A few hours later, after getting a little sleep, she voluntarily wrote out a new statement asking them not to take any action against Lumumba based on her first statement, which felt like nothing more than a dream.
It was the police who were at fault because even after getting the second statement, they kept Lumumba in jail for two weeks. It took them that long to figure out how to explain the mistake they made with Guede.
By the way, they've never explained why Guede was released by the police in the previous weeks, after breaking into more than one building with a knife.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)It happens all too often. People are coerced into confessing to crimes they didn't commit due to duress from harsh interrogations bordering on torture.
mainer
(12,023 posts)Criminology studies document many cases of "confessions" that were later shown to be impossible due to DNA evidence. Hours of interrogation can confuse and numb suspects to the point they start to even believe their own guilt.
Are_grits_groceries
(17,111 posts)It happens.
People admit or say all manner of things proving to be untrue. She would have blamed her own mother if they had wanted to get that out of her.
You may think you are immune to such coercion, but don't bet on it.
If a father can be convinced to sign a statement saying he killed his 4 year old daughter, anybody can be manipulated.
This was a case on DiscoveryID. He was on death row, but a tough lawyer specializing in these kinds of cases decided to help. They managed to find one piece of evidence left with bodily fluids on it. They had to have it processed at a special lab with a different method for any hope of a DNA profile. They managed to do it, and he was not the killer.
Are there questions remaining about Knox and Solecito? Yes. But blaming her for fingering someone that the police brought into the conversation is wrong. If she had volunteered that out of the blue, then maybe. THEY brought it up and hammered on her about him.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)CONFESS!
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)IF Knox's statement was admissible and prosecutors were able to successfully pin the case on the boss and sentence him to life imprisonment, would she have fought for his innocence? Or would she have caught the first flight out of the country, never to look back and wash her hands of the whole affair?
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)and written in Italian), she asked for paper and wrote a second statement in English in which she said that the first statement about Lumumba felt like a dream to her, not like something that had happened, and that they shouldn't rely on it for anything.
I think she would have fought for him. Just as she was the only roommate to voluntarily stay and try to help the police find Meredith's murderer.
kcr
(15,318 posts)I wouldn't want you on my jury, that's for sure.
brush
(53,830 posts)But you can believe she's completely innocent and knows nothing
kcr
(15,318 posts)Focus on dirty unethical cops
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)because he basically admitted he raped and killed her. nolo contendre.
nice attempt at playing the race card.
tell me, brush, if that is your real name, are you writing this from your mum's basement in britain?
brush
(53,830 posts)If Amanda admitted under duress she had something to do with it, don't you think the other guy may have also been under duress also if he admitted to guilt.
Tell me something, you don't remember the Susan Smith and other blame the black guy cases?
I've learned that there's usually more to the story when just the black guy is blamed and others claim total innocense.
The Italians seem to think so too.
Here's a link for your browser as you sit in your mother's basement in Mississippi maybe?
http://newsone.com/193331/top-5-the-black-guy-did-it-excuses-by-white-criminals/
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)as does America's history of racial injustice, her case has fuck all to do with Kercher's murder and the overwhelming physical evidence against Rudy Guede. his DNA was INSIDE HER, his blood was in the room, he had knife wounds on this hands, and his shit was in their toilet.
it's possible for 2 things to be true at once: Guede is the rapist/murderer, and Susan Smith is a race-baiting, lying murderer.
my basement is in Seattle, a few miles from Amanda Knox's. i'll ask nicely: are you typing from America or Britain?
brush
(53,830 posts)Being from Knox's home I see why you might think she's completely innocent but the Italians sure seem to think that there's more to it than Rudy Guede.
Finnmccool
(74 posts)The simple solution is usually the right one.
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)If you are in Britain, you're the English version of a Fox News Viewer here - misinformed, willing to believe the absurd and leave reason behind. A Tabloid Victim, as I know the slander that regularly spews out from those sources against Knox.
I have a bias, obviously. I know the context in which Knox grew up.
What's your bias? Where does the accusation of American Racism come from - why couldn't Guede be the only perpetrator?
brush
(53,830 posts)Like I said in my post, the old "blame the black guy" meme was alive and well with Knox.
She fingered an African night club owner (her boss) who authories then tried to coerce a confession out of but he had a solid alibi.
The bar owner, wrongly named as the killer of Meredith Kercher by Amanda Knox has condemned her as a ‘fantastic actress’.
Patrick Lumumba, 38, was arrested and spent two weeks in prison after Knox told detectives she ‘had covered my ears in the kitchen’ while ‘Patrick killed Meredith’.
However, the claim was false and Italian prosecutors alleged Knox had made it to throw suspicion off herself."
Something is surely remiss about this case. But hey, you believe what you want.
Makes you wonder if she's completely innocent if she lied about the first guy.
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)It was proposed by the police during her interrogation because they had found African hair at the crime scene and Lumumba's earlier text to Knox. She agreed under duress. Knox retracted the statement as soon as she was able, and has never deviated from that retraction.
Turns out the cops were half right - it WAS a black guy, just not the one they wanted it to be.
Do try to keep up.
brush
(53,830 posts)If what you say is correct, she agreed to blame it on the black guy.
I know you can't fathom that she had anything to do with a murder in her house but the cops sure think so.
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)again, UNDER DURESS, she cracked and signed that statement. after a lengthy interrogation, without a lawyer, without a translator. many people in history have done the same in that situation - admitting to crimes they did not commit, accusing others of witchcraft, etc. confessions and accusations extracted under torture are not evidence.
i can fathom that its a possibility - i just do not agree that any of the forensic evidence, or simple logic, leads to the conclusion that she AND Sollecito are guilty. the forensic evidence against Guede was indisputable.
is there any doubt in your mind that they're guilty? is murder consistent with the behavior of a typical young coed on her exchange semester, even drug-addled she-devil temptresses from broken homes in racist, dissolute Seattle? do you doubt that Guede is guilty?
if not, there's simply no point in engaging you.
brush
(53,830 posts)pnwmom
(108,990 posts)or that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty.
A key difference between the Susan Smith case and this one is that there is no doubt that Susan was in the car that day with the sons she killed.
And the key difference between Rudy's situation and Amanda's is that he left physical evidence of his presence, including DNA both inside and on the victim's body.
There wasn't a single speck of evidence that placed Amanda in the blood-covered murder room -- not DNA, or fingerprints, or shoe prints, hair, or fiber -- or a single witness. And yet there were dozens of pieces of evidence linked to Rudy Guede, the real murderer. He also had a recent history of breaking into at least two other buildings in the previous weeks, armed with a knife.
Sometimes the black man is the guilty man. Logic and reason prove that is the case here.
brush
(53,830 posts)Her boss, who she said murdered her roommate. He had an air tight alibi though so that didn't work. Guede came into the picture later.
Makes you wonder if she's completely innocent if she lied about the first guy.
maxsolomon
(33,378 posts)you're either dumb as a post or trolling.
Are_grits_groceries
(17,111 posts)I didn't believe it for a second and neither did a lot of others. The Sheriff and others looked into it, but they already believed something was fishy.
I thought they ought to check quarries with deep water for her car.
Of course there were many who fell for it hook, line and sinker. It wasn't a unanimous chorus though.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)One who had no name, DNA, etc....etc....
Baclava
(12,047 posts)Here are the news headlines for 1486: in the fair city of Perugia, a she-devil hath falsely accused an inn-keeper of murder most vile …
Sorry, let me start again. This isn't the 15th century, when "witches" were being hunted all over Europe, tortured into confessing and burned at the stake. In 2011, no one seriously believes that women go mad with lust and sell their souls to the devil – or do they?
Astonishingly, exactly that accusation has been made in an Italian court this week by a lawyer called Carlo Pacelli. He used the occasion of an appeal by the American student Amanda Knox against her conviction for the murder of a British student to call her an "enchanting witch" and attack her in terms that would be instantly recognisable to a mediaeval witch-finder.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/27/amanda-knox-witch-hunts-italian-court
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I expect the verdict will get upheld in the higher court putting an end to the trial part.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)legal ramifications for this young woman, over all?
Take Italy off your list of vacation spots..this is disgusting. The alleged evidence
was bullshit.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)If Italy asks. The other question is whether the European Court of Appeals will accept the case, and how they would treat it.
No matter what, this is going to cost Amanda and her family millions more in attorneys fees. She had to spend most of her book advance on the costs of six years of trials.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)BTW, since you seem to know about this, what happened to her boyfriend at the time, who IIRC was also accused of being a "co-conspirator"? Has he been in prison this whole time? I'm too lazy to google.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)because he had too much honor to falsely implicate her (the prosecutor wanted him to say that she had left his cottage during the time of the murder.)
He is Italy now, after attending most of this trial. The prosecution has asked for his arrest or at least for his passport. I don't know how the judge ruled on that.
I wish he hadn't stayed in Italy. There are a few countries that don't have extradition treaties with Italy, and his father had the money to send him to one of them. Too bad they decided to trust the Italian legal system.
(Did you hear about the current prosecutor's new motive: out is the sex-game-gone-wrong theory. This time he seriously argued that the murder victim had gotten upset because Rudy (the burglar) had left his unflushed poop in the other roommates' toilet. And so Amanda and Raffaele rose up and killed Meredith.
Raffaele, by the way, had ever even met Guede. But according to the prosecution, he helped kill Amanda and Guede kill Meredith because Meredith was upset about Guede's unflushed poop.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I like Italy, been there a lot, have family and friends there. A beautiful country. Too bad they don't have a function legal system.
kcr
(15,318 posts)Just the opposite. US likely would not because of double jeopardy.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)because it only says that the "requested" country (i.e., the US) cannot already have convicted her.
Again, where are you getting this?
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)"As popular as she is here and as pretty as she is here - because that's what this is all about, if she was not an attractive woman we wouldn't have the group love-in - she will be extradited if it's upheld," Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said.
While Knox is seen in the US as the innocent victim of a miscarriage of justice, Dershowitz said there were no legal grounds for preventing extradition.
SNIP
Knox's supporters argue the Italian system violates the US legal prohibition on double jeopardy: trying someone twice for the same crime.
Legal experts attach little weight to this argument.
"They always forget she was convicted first," said Julian Ku, who teaches transnational law at Hofstra University.
kcr
(15,318 posts)Yep. That's always the source i see claim this will happen.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)kcr
(15,318 posts)I just had to wonder where you were reading if you were seeing all the experts saying US would extradite. I actually think if my memory serves Alan Dershowitz might be the only one I ever saw saying otherwise. When I asked, I even wondered if that's who I would see if you responded. Sure enough it was.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)she's likely to get extradited. I hope they're all wrong.
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/30/world/europe/italy-amanda-knox-retrial/
CNN legal analyst Mark O'Mara said that the United States has to respect the treaty.
"We have to follow the letter of the law," he said Thursday.
http://news.yahoo.com/us-likely-extradite-knox-italy-asks-000547631.html
Knox then has the right to challenge her extradition in a US court.
"The chances of her winning that are not high because there has to be some very strong claim she'd have to make to block her extradition," Ku said in a telephone interview.
While the "public notoriety" of the case could theoretically push the State Department to deny the request, Ku said it would be difficult to argue that the Italians didn't meet US standards of justice.
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/today/2014/01/would-u-s-extradite-amanda-knox-heres-what-has-to-happen/
Justice Department attorneys would evaluate the petition for legal sufficiency before deciding whether to seek an extradition certificate. If they did, Knox’s extradition would be heard before a federal judge.
But such a review is limited in scope, said Mary Fan, a University of Washington Law School professor who specializes in international and domestic criminal law. While Knox’s attorneys likely would argue against the validity of her conviction and the process, such a hearing largely is dictated by whether paperwork and treaty standards have been met.
“It’s not a retrial of the case, and it’s not a retrial of another country’s justice system,” Fan said.
Italy is among at least 109 nations that hold extradition treaties with the United States. Due to “reciprocity” concerns, Fan said, federal officials might be in a tough spot not to carry out such an extradition, if it ever got to that point.
“Someday, the U.S. might seek extradition of someone convicted of a serious crime, such as murder, from Italy,” she said. “So, it’s reciprocity that’s the major consideration. Not just in this case, but in future cases. That’s something that the State Department has to consider.”
kcr
(15,318 posts)pnwmom
(108,990 posts)thought that was enough to prove there is a real risk she will be extradited. Concerns about that are not unfounded, and not limited to one Harvard law professor.
But I think we agree on this -- neither of us think she should be extradited, right?
kcr
(15,318 posts)I'm not saying the concerns are unfounded. I just think telling people most experts say she's going to be extradited is misleading. I don't think any of us really know that much one way or the other.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)It is enough according to the treaty that the Requesting State supply documentation of a person's conviction -- not of the evidence that led to the conviction.
From Article 10:
4. A request for extradition which relates to a person who has been convicted shall, in addition to those items set forth in paragraph 2 of this Article, be accompanied by:
(a) a copy of the judgment of conviction, or, in the case of the United States, if the person has been found guilty but not yet sentenced, a statement by a judicial officer to that effect;
(b) if the penalty has been pronounced, a copy of the sentence and a statement as to the duration of the penalty still to be served; and
(c) documents establishing that the person sought is the person convicted.
kcr
(15,318 posts)she will be extradited.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Such a matter is likely to be taken up by the state department. And it may not even be this administration by the time it gets that far. And many different things can happen at that point. It's all speculation.
But to suggest the US is going to just ignore or not even process the request? I don't buy that at all. We value these treaties, especially considering the war of terrorism. This is was a violent crime. Someone was killed. To wipe our ass with a request is a slap in the face to that country. If at some future time there is a violent criminal there that we want to put on trial, Italy can point back to this and refuse to hand that person over.
The Italians have to submit a case summary that details the evidence and the specifics of the investigation. There has to be reasonable basis for guilt. The fact she's been convicted twice makes Italy's argument strong there. But there may be specific problems with the evidence that might give the US a way out.
kcr
(15,318 posts)Or to suggest we should? Did you mean to reply to me?
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)There are experts in international law that says double jeopardy doesnt necessarily apply here...
The biggest problem with it is that she was convicted in the first trial. Had she been acquitted in that first trial, that would change things immensely. You'd have a pretty solid double jeopardy argument.
The Europeans also do not consider this as 3 separate trials but ultimately a continuation of one big case since no verdict has yet to be affirmed. European Convention on Human Rights allows this interpretation.
kcr
(15,318 posts)My whole point was experts aren't saying she will be extradited. Some seem to have that opinion. But there certainly isn't a consensus in the media.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)The only good news is that she is home and does have the means, somewhat, to address the
coming onslaught. Is it safe to say, she has political cover here at home through US reps? I hope so, she is
going to need them.
Horrific injustice.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)of the WA delegation and I hope others will, too.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)pnwmom
(108,990 posts)if you ever have questions:
www.murderofmeredithkercher.com
It was put up in response to another site with a similar name except beginning with the word "the." The other site is filled with lies from the hate sites.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)davidn3600
(6,342 posts)The next step is the Italian supreme court has to review this trial. That can take 12-15 months. If the verdict is affirmed, then the government can request extradition if they want to. And then that could be a drawn out process. Will she be extradited? It depends on which lawyer you ask. The argument of double jeopardy isn't so clear because the first trial was a conviction. So it will hinge on how our legal system views their legal system. Ultimately it will be the State Department that would make a decision. Any number of things can happen... the two countries could attempt to work out some kind of agreement. Or the state department can argue any possible flaws in the due process...if evidence was tainted or corruption/errors in the police or whatever.
So there are still many question marks....
I think in the end, I doubt we just hand her over. That could upset some people considering her supporters (which include some senators and other officials) would get quite angry. I think there will either be some reasoning we find to not extradite her or we reach some type of agreement with the government that everyone can live with. I doubt we outright break the treaty because America needs these treaties.
Another option however is Italy may decide it's not worth the diplomatic fight and not ask for extradition. In which case they will just let the conviction stand and allow a warrant to be outstanding with Interpol. Amanda wouldnt be able to travel outside US territory or else risk getting arrested. The EU has extradition treaties with just as many countries as America does. She'll essentially have to remain inside the US for the rest of her life. The conviction would also make it so the Kercher family can continue to sue her.
No matter what, this will be a dark cloud hanging over her for quite some time.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)to change his testimony and "admit" that Amanda wasn't with him that night. And who could blame him if he broke down under the threat of twenty-one more years of prison?
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)What is it with this government in Italy..in reading about the problems, it would seem
the Italian government would want for this to go away..yet here she is, and the young
man entrapped with a felony murder conviction on bullshit evidence...incredible.
Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)really gets to me.
They really swallowed, hook line and sinker, what the Italian prosecutor told them, and won't be happy till more young people's lives are ruined. They were not satisfied that the man who admitted killing Meredith, is in prison. That man will be walking the streets again very soon, thanks to the deal he made to falsely accuse Amanda and Raffaele.
Pictures here;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2548823/Amanda-Knox-retrial-verdict-GUILTY.html#
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)leaving his DNA inside and on her body, will be released sometime this year after serving 8 years?
Why are they reserving all their anger for Amanda and Raffaele -- even though Stephanie just said they'll never know who killed her sister?
Unconsciously, I think they're more motivated by their $12 million lawsuit than they'd ever be able to admit, even to themselves. They'd never get a financial settlement from penniless Rudy. It will be much better for them if Amanda and Raffeale were involved in the killing, too.
Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)They want to know what she went through. As a mother, I don't get that at all. It would be upsetting enough to know my child was murdered. I'd want the killer, who admitted to it, put away for life.
To think that Amanda, a University Of Washington student, would form a killing team soon after her arrival in Italy. It doesn't make sense.
The British tabloids had her convicted the day she was arrested. A friend called me from England that day and told me how a Seattle girl cut her room mates throat. He gave me some gruesome details and was convinced Amanda did it because of what he had read. They seem to believe she must have been called 'Foxy Knoxy' because of her sexual exploits. They disregarded the fact it was her nick-name on her soccer team and so she used it on her My Space page.
Why on earth is Stephanie saying they'll never know who killed her sister? The man is in prison!!!
Bonx
(2,065 posts)Joke court. Cartoon justice.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)against them.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)is the most corrupt and entertainment oriented I have ever experienced. Payola is king. Had someone at the right place and time put a reasonable but not too ostentatious amount of money in the hand of the right people, she would have gone Scott free. That's the Italian way. Someone decided to play hero along the way and fffft, that was that. Then it became a matter of saving face and she was just insignificant. Been there, done that.
mainer
(12,023 posts)Guede also had a history of break-ins similar to that seen at the cottage. One week prior to the murder, Guede was caught breaking into a nursery school by the school's owner, Maria Del Prato, when she arrived unexpectedly during off hours with two repairmen. Del Prato along with the repairmen kept Guede at the nursery and called the police.
When police searched Guede's backpack they found a laptop and cell phone that had recently been stolen from a Perugian law office. The break-in at the law office was very similar to the break-in at the cottage as Guede entered through an elevated window broken with a rock in both occasions. In the nursery school break-in, Guede was found in the possession of a large knife said to be stolen from the school’s kitchen. He was also in possession of a woman’s gold watch which tied him to another break-in occurring four days earlier. Guede’s break-in at the nursery no doubt made him a suspect in a previous burglary of the nursery in which cash had been stolen.
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/rudy.html
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I'm in South Korea and have been following the case since it began. I've read her book.
From what I heard in an interview with a lawyer today it could take years to go through the extradition process. As you said in another post, the EU court is another possibility.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)Lots of us have followed this since the case began.
I wonder now if it will ever be possible for her to clear her name.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)The high court will affirm the guilty verdict and then extradition starts.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)cpwm17
(3,829 posts)Amanda Knox is innocent. Most of comments were for guilt and none of the pro-guilt comments showed any signs of intelligence.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)It's a troll's paradise.
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)Most of the rather heated debate in this thread has revolved around the issue of "Double Jeopardy," which is an important tradition in US and Anglo-Saxon courts. The other issue, which may be more important, is the tradition that a defendant must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
I haven't been following this thread that closely; but, I would simply point out: "If you want to return this young lady to a prison in Italy, you should have to prove, in a US court, that she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." I don't see anything on this thread even coming close to that.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)but it obviously isn't.
For me, that reasonable doubt came as soon as I realized that, in a room covered with blood, dozens of pieces of physical evidence were collected the next day and every single piece (including DNA and fingerprints) was linked to a man who was a known burglar who carried a knife. If Amanda and Raffaele were involved in this fight to the death, they should have left at least some physical evidence, too. But they didn't. So they prosecution claimed that they managed to clean up their own (invisible) DNA and (invisible) fingerprints while leaving only Guede's. Right.
Six weeks later, the police videotaped themselves back at the house, pulling a bra clasp from a pile of rubbish on the floor, passing it from dirty glove to dirty glove. Surprise -- it had alleles that were a match for Sollecito. But then the independent court-appointed experts said there was so much contamination on the bra clasp that it could yield alleles for almost any man -- including the judge.
So the bottom line for me is: there was no evidence putting them in the murder room. No physical evidence and no witnesses. I don't care what other smoke and mirrors the prosecution threw at them -- if they weren't in the room, they didn't murder her.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)
Wash. state Desk Jet
(3,426 posts)And the end result will also be political. The conviction was over turned for a reason. And it was reversed for other reasons. But the reason Knox is here and not in Italy is the one reason that counts. Since it hasn't already been said I'll just go ahead and say it, it is too early to speculate over the process of extradition.
And it ain't over till it's over.
Think real hard about just why the first conviction was over turned. You can go on and on about the lack of evidence and on and on and so on. But when to go down those legal avenues you leave out one very important thing in the equation . And that one thing is the politics involved.
Before the Italian judiciary is finished with this mess they created we will get to the bottom of exactly what went down and why it went down the way it went down.
And that as it so happens is just why Amanda Knox is here and not there. Because it is political.
You can site Italian law until the cows come home ,but the fact of the matter is their system is broken and they are those that need help because it is clear they cannot fix their problems by themselves.
And as far as saving face goes, well, thats not up to the Italian judiciary .the politics of it brought it to where it is and the international politics of it will find a suitable fix with applied face saving measures.
It was the prosecutor who lost face early on in the case and from that point on it spun out of control .
It's all political now.
And it will no doubt one day find it's way into the law books which means it isn't there now. And that means the only thing legal experts can do is speculate around what is there .
But the thing of it is things change from one day to the next,
Tell me, is former mayor 911 911 911 911 still on his thing about the lane closings on George Washington Bridge just something of a game Christie's people were playing -will he today get out there and say his pal Christie knew nothing about it ?
He can't because things change and his method of speculation failed him. But he can always say ,at that time it wasn't known. So he can vindicate himself. And thats politics.
But the prosecution in this case over in Italy will never be of a position to vindicate itself in global theater. And thats a fact
We shall see.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)They never have had it, and never will. She's been acquitted, but they still keep hounding her. If I were her family, there is no way in hell I would let her serve even a minute of that sentence. This is a case looking for a guilty party, and the guilty party is already serving it. He'll be out before they try her again and find her innocent, guilty or whatever they find in appellate court.
The Italian justice system is ridiculous. How do you try someone three different times for the same crime? They found her innocent twice, I believe.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)are subsequently overturned, so that was almost normal, by Italian standards. That decision was written by Judge Massei.
Then there was an appeals trial, with Judge Hellman presiding. His report said they were "innocent" because there was "no evidence" they had done the crime. And he said one of the crimes -- faked the break-in-- didn't exist. (There was a real break-in.)
The prosecution appealed that ruling to the high court. The high court threw out the appeals court decision, and ordered a new appeals trial -- the one that just concluded.
Either side can still appeal, so Amanda and Raffaele will be appealing this decision to the high court. Technically, the high court could reject this decision too, and order another appeals trial on some other grounds. But no one really expects that to happen.
Once the high court ratifies a conviction, Amanda and Raffaele will probably appeal to the European Court of Human Rights on the basis that their civil rights were denied. (For example, European law requires that they be allowed to have an attorney during questioning.)
And of course they will be fighting any request to extradite.
So no one really knows how this will work out except there will no doubt be years more of legal bills for the Knox family. What a nightmare.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)It just stuns me that they keep hounding her over and over, when she's been acquitted. There is no way in hell she should be extradited, since it is obvious that she won't get treated fairly in Italy.
