If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   It's a hard Knox life: Amanda Knox to be retried for murder in Italy   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 436
    More: Followup, Amanda Knox, American Amanda Knox, retrials, Italy, Leeds University, Kercher murder, ex-boyfriends, DNA evidence  
•       •       •

7659 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Mar 2013 at 7:01 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



436 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-26 12:47:27 PM

Bungles: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.


The US has multiple rounds of appeal for the defense, that can last decades. How is this system any stranger?

It's pretty simple. You have a trial. You can appeal at the end of that trial. Given there have been two courts disagreeing, the case then, finally, reaches the Supreme Court to judge whether the trail and appeal were fair.

It seems quite a logical system,


The U.S. justice system is designed (though not always in practice) with the mindset of, "Better a hundred guilty people go free than one innocent go to jail."  There's a high burden of proof for criminal prosecution, and the appeals process is to make sure that nothing went wrong that would send an innocent man to prison.  Considering how easy it is for an overzealous prosecutor to screw up someone's life (like, say, in this case), the system is designed where once someone is acquitted, it's game over for the prosecution.

You say it's logical that prosecutors should have the ability to appeal acquittals.  I'd put forward that considering how much power the government can have over a person tossed into the judicial system, I'd say it's horrifying.  Yes, some who are guilty may go free.  However, this also makes it harder for prosecutors who are shown to be wrong to keep innocents in prison.
 
2013-03-26 12:55:21 PM

DArque Bishop: Bungles: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.


The US has multiple rounds of appeal for the defense, that can last decades. How is this system any stranger?

It's pretty simple. You have a trial. You can appeal at the end of that trial. Given there have been two courts disagreeing, the case then, finally, reaches the Supreme Court to judge whether the trail and appeal were fair.

It seems quite a logical system,

The U.S. justice system is designed (though not always in practice) with the mindset of, "Better a hundred guilty people go free than one innocent go to jail."  There's a high burden of proof for criminal prosecution, and the appeals process is to make sure that nothing went wrong that would send an innocent man to prison.  Considering how easy it is for an overzealous prosecutor to screw up someone's life (like, say, in this case), the system is designed where once someone is acquitted, it's game over for the prosecution.

You say it's logical that prosecutors should have the ability to appeal acquittals.  I'd put forward that considering how much power the government can have over a person tossed into the judicial system, I'd say it's horrifying.  Yes, some who are guilty may go free.  However, this also makes it harder for prosecutors who are shown to be wrong to keep innocents in prison.


It's not so much that the "prosecution can appeal" but rather "two courts disagree, a third tries to find out why".

If everything is done correctly, appeals should always fail, because the case should be heard fairly the first time. When they disagree, Italy wants to know why, and put that right.

It's a different system, but it isn't "horrifying".

I'm not sure you can claim the US system is set up to ensure "100 guilty go free rather than one innocent goes to jail". The US has one of the highest rates of cases being overturned after someone has spent considerable amount of time in jail in the Western world. Especially if you're black.
 
2013-03-26 01:04:28 PM

R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.


'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL
 
2013-03-26 01:18:58 PM

Bungles: BgJonson79: FarkinNortherner: I'm deeply puzzled why there's not only a belief the US won't extradite her but that this is a good thing.

The US has a far from unblemished record in locking up and, indeed, executing innocent people, but I suspect most Americans would want a person who faced a murder charge in the US to be extradited from Italy, irrespective of the view of the case held by the Italian populace and/or its media.

She was already tried and acquitted.  We object to sending her back for a second round.

That's not what is happening. Italy has three tiers of justice. This is the third (Trial...Appeal..Supreme Court review of the appeal). This is perfectly normal, and not a "second trial", it's the final stage of the appeal process.


In our cases, only the defendant gets to appeal.  Otherwise, it vastly diminishes the power of the no double jeopardy clause.
 
2013-03-26 01:20:40 PM

robohobo: [rationalmale.files.wordpress.com image 550x454]

Better???


i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-26 01:20:50 PM

ElPresidente: GungFu: miss diminutive: I completely missed this case the first time around, but was there actually any evidence against her or was it simply a case of local authorities needing to pin it on someone and she was simply a suspect by virtue of living in the house?

Yeah, that's how Americans see it.

Everyone else sees somehow who lied, accused an innocent man and has generally shown to be a bit of a coont.

Thank you, spot on.  There's no doubting the Italian justice system is idiotic, but it's in pretty good company there worldwide, and that, or being an American abroad, doesn't automatically make Knox innocent.  That young woman's behaviour has been odd in the extreme from immediately after her arrest onwards, and certainly suspicious enough to warrant her arrest and a trial, which of course will now never be fair or just unless accidentally.  If the trial was about being a coont, she's be found guilty in a few minutes.

As for those Farkers saying EU extradition rights over US citizens is unfair, that's laughable in the extreme - quite the opposite is true.  The US have FAR more power to extradite EU citizens to the US, unfairly so.  Try reading up on Gary McKinnon as just one example and the disgraceful amount of time and effort spent trying to extradite him, or Christohper Tappin, who thought he was exporting car batteries to the Netherlands only to find out they were batteries for 25-year-old missiles in Iran (which might not even still exist), was extradited and told he could either plead guilty and get 33 months in prison, or stand trial and perhaps get 30 years.  But the EU have almost no power in extraditing US citizens to stand trial.

Some poor sod was brutualy murdered, and I'm not convinced she's innocent just because the legal system is guilty of being stupid.


As far as extradition goes, France has the right idea.  They never extradite a French citizen.

The UK needs to repeal that 2003 extradition act, and withdraw from the treaty that lead to it.
 
2013-03-26 01:28:50 PM

BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: FarkinNortherner: I'm deeply puzzled why there's not only a belief the US won't extradite her but that this is a good thing.

The US has a far from unblemished record in locking up and, indeed, executing innocent people, but I suspect most Americans would want a person who faced a murder charge in the US to be extradited from Italy, irrespective of the view of the case held by the Italian populace and/or its media.

She was already tried and acquitted.  We object to sending her back for a second round.

That's not what is happening. Italy has three tiers of justice. This is the third (Trial...Appeal..Supreme Court review of the appeal). This is perfectly normal, and not a "second trial", it's the final stage of the appeal process.

In our cases, only the defendant gets to appeal.  Otherwise, it vastly diminishes the power of the no double jeopardy clause.


No-one is appealing here. It's a higher court review because two lower courts disagreed.

It's not "double jeopardy" because this is the same trial. Knox was not acquitted, she had a ruling over-tuned on appeal. The Supreme Court has now overturned that ruling.

It's a three-stage process in Italy, trial  ----> defense appeal if found guilty ------> Supreme Court review if those two courts disagree, and a retrial demanded if it's because one of those two trials was inadequate.
 
2013-03-26 01:35:20 PM

Bungles: Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia


Can you remind me -- what was Australia's coverage like in the Chamberlain case?  She acted in ways that the public decided was odd, too, didn't she?
 
2013-03-26 01:46:37 PM

FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL


The US should NEVER turn over an American citizen to a foreign government.  Why are we even entertaining such a concept in the first place.
 
2013-03-26 01:52:27 PM
Remember the anti-french backlash when they didn't back the US heading for Iraq post 9/11?

If public outrage ends up going viral, we could all end up eat freedom pies with pepperoni and freedom noodles with red sauce.
 
2013-03-26 01:57:35 PM

Warlordtrooper: FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL

The US should NEVER turn over an American citizen to a foreign government.  Why are we even entertaining such a concept in the first place.


Why not? The US expects governments to turn over people to them. In fact, they also just plain kidnap them.
 
2013-03-26 01:58:28 PM

eggrolls: Remember the anti-french backlash when they didn't back the US heading for Iraq post 9/11?

If public outrage ends up going viral, we could all end up eat freedom pies with pepperoni and freedom noodles with red sauce.


And as I recall.... the French were right.
 
2013-03-26 01:58:31 PM

Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: FarkinNortherner: I'm deeply puzzled why there's not only a belief the US won't extradite her but that this is a good thing.

The US has a far from unblemished record in locking up and, indeed, executing innocent people, but I suspect most Americans would want a person who faced a murder charge in the US to be extradited from Italy, irrespective of the view of the case held by the Italian populace and/or its media.

She was already tried and acquitted.  We object to sending her back for a second round.

That's not what is happening. Italy has three tiers of justice. This is the third (Trial...Appeal..Supreme Court review of the appeal). This is perfectly normal, and not a "second trial", it's the final stage of the appeal process.

In our cases, only the defendant gets to appeal.  Otherwise, it vastly diminishes the power of the no double jeopardy clause.

No-one is appealing here. It's a higher court review because two lower courts disagreed.

It's not "double jeopardy" because this is the same trial. Knox was not acquitted, she had a ruling over-tuned on appeal. The Supreme Court has now overturned that ruling.

It's a three-stage process in Italy, trial  ----> defense appeal if found guilty ------> Supreme Court review if those two courts disagree, and a retrial demanded if it's because one of those two trials was inadequate.


Sorry, I can't see how this is functionally different from double jeopardy.  Clearly I'm not familiar with the Italian legal system.
 
2013-03-26 02:01:31 PM

Bungles: Warlordtrooper: FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL

The US should NEVER turn over an American citizen to a foreign government.  Why are we even entertaining such a concept in the first place.

Why not? The US expects governments to turn over people to them. In fact, they also just plain kidnap them.


What is the purpose of the government if not to protect its citizens against foreign countries?
 
2013-03-26 02:03:52 PM

Warlordtrooper: Bungles: Warlordtrooper: FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL

The US should NEVER turn over an American citizen to a foreign government.  Why are we even entertaining such a concept in the first place.

Why not? The US expects governments to turn over people to them. In fact, they also just plain kidnap them.

What is the purpose of the government if not to protect its citizens against foreign countries?


I think it depends on the circumstances.  Obviously we don't want to be in the position of sheltering murderers or rapists (remember the sailor in Japan convicted of rape).  In this case I think we should deny extradition because it's obvious bullshiat.
 
2013-03-26 02:04:31 PM

Warlordtrooper: Bungles: Warlordtrooper: FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL

The US should NEVER turn over an American citizen to a foreign government.  Why are we even entertaining such a concept in the first place.

Why not? The US expects governments to turn over people to them. In fact, they also just plain kidnap them.

What is the purpose of the government if not to protect its citizens against foreign countries?


It's quid pro quo. The US often wants foreigners extradited to face charges. If they want that, they have to extradite their own nationals in similar situations.
 
2013-03-26 02:06:28 PM

BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: FarkinNortherner: I'm deeply puzzled why there's not only a belief the US won't extradite her but that this is a good thing.

The US has a far from unblemished record in locking up and, indeed, executing innocent people, but I suspect most Americans would want a person who faced a murder charge in the US to be extradited from Italy, irrespective of the view of the case held by the Italian populace and/or its media.

She was already tried and acquitted.  We object to sending her back for a second round.

That's not what is happening. Italy has three tiers of justice. This is the third (Trial...Appeal..Supreme Court review of the appeal). This is perfectly normal, and not a "second trial", it's the final stage of the appeal process.

In our cases, only the defendant gets to appeal.  Otherwise, it vastly diminishes the power of the no double jeopardy clause.

No-one is appealing here. It's a higher court review because two lower courts disagreed.

It's not "double jeopardy" because this is the same trial. Knox was not acquitted, she had a ruling over-tuned on appeal. The Supreme Court has now overturned that ruling.

It's a three-stage process in Italy, trial  ----> defense appeal if found guilty ------> Supreme Court review if those two courts disagree, and a retrial demanded if it's because one of those two trials was inadequate.

Sorry, I can't see how this is functionally different from double jeopardy.  Clearly I'm not familiar with the Italian legal system.


And an Italian might say to you "How can you have a sound system where there is no higher authority to see what went wrong when two lower courts disagree? Why value one court over the other?"
 
2013-03-26 02:16:05 PM

steverockson: I think it depends on the circumstances. Obviously we don't want to be in the position of sheltering murderers or rapists (remember the sailor in Japan convicted of rape). In this case I think we should deny extradition because it's obvious bullshiat.


That's why you have an extradition hearing to decide -within your own jurisdiction- whether the evidence merits extradition. Naturally the burden of proof is lower than the "reasonable doubt" standard (whatever that is) that is required for a conviction, but still, there is some standard -and the case against this girl really doesn't satisfy any standard of evidence at all.
 
2013-03-26 02:16:14 PM
When Kercher's body was discovered, who investigated the murder? Police or Carabinieri? It may not sound like an important question to some, but in Italy there is a real difference. The Police and Carabinieri patrol the same jurisdictions (fewer police in rural areas, still plenty of Carabinieri in the cities), and investigate the same types of crimes. The major difference is that the Polizia di Stato's employees are civilians while the Carabinieri is a branch of the military. There is an intense rivalry between the two organizations, and there's one story told of both responding to a bank robbery and getting into a fight over who got to investigate (one took the evidence, the other took the suspects).

From what I understand, the Polizia are more competent and the Carabinieri are less corrupt. Italy may have to take a page out of Belgium's book and merge the two.

/Carabinieri joke: two Carabinieri walk into an apartment building; their suspect is on the top floor. Carabiniere 1 tells the other "call the elevator." Carabiniere 2 yells at the top of his lungs "ELEVATOR." Carabiniere 1 facepalms and tells Carabiniere 2 "No, with your finger." Carabiniere 2 puts his finger in his mouth and yells "ELEVATOR."
//it's better spoken than written
///told to me by an Italian, in Italian, in Italy

kd8our: Their "courts" are a farking joke.  Didn't they get a tad pissy when an author pointed out that a string of serial killings wasn't Satan Worshippers?  They ended up tossing him in jail because he more of less stepped on the Prosecutor and his ideas.


Mario Spezi is his name.

raerae1980: And Italy, I am very disappointed in you  :(

That's what I feel whenever I hear about Silvio Berlusconi...

/lived in Siena for a few months
//La maggior parte dei senesi odio Berlusconi

Inflatable Rhetoric: Paris1127: generallyso: Paris1127: /is that idiot Giuliano "ZOMG SATANIC RITUALS" Mignini still prosecuting?

Glad to see someone remembers this. The prosecutor is a complete nutjob.

Have you read  The Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi? Mignini's one of several villains in it, and both authors spend time debunking his  wild theories about the (still unsolved) Monster killings and satanic cults. Spezi has an understandable ax to grind, as Mignini put him in jail for several months on trumped-up charges related to the Monster case.

I'm gonna read that again, and another book (I forget the name, a woman author).


Is it Magdalen Nabb's fictionalization of the case (same title)?
 
2013-03-26 02:16:14 PM

Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: FarkinNortherner: I'm deeply puzzled why there's not only a belief the US won't extradite her but that this is a good thing.

The US has a far from unblemished record in locking up and, indeed, executing innocent people, but I suspect most Americans would want a person who faced a murder charge in the US to be extradited from Italy, irrespective of the view of the case held by the Italian populace and/or its media.

She was already tried and acquitted.  We object to sending her back for a second round.

That's not what is happening. Italy has three tiers of justice. This is the third (Trial...Appeal..Supreme Court review of the appeal). This is perfectly normal, and not a "second trial", it's the final stage of the appeal process.

In our cases, only the defendant gets to appeal.  Otherwise, it vastly diminishes the power of the no double jeopardy clause.

No-one is appealing here. It's a higher court review because two lower courts disagreed.

It's not "double jeopardy" because this is the same trial. Knox was not acquitted, she had a ruling over-tuned on appeal. The Supreme Court has now overturned that ruling.

It's a three-stage process in Italy, trial  ----> defense appeal if found guilty ------> Supreme Court review if those two courts disagree, and a retrial demanded if it's because one of those two trials was inadequate.

Sorry, I can't see how this is functionally different from double jeopardy.  Clearly I'm not familiar with the Italian legal system.

And an Italian might say to you "How can you have a sound system where there is no higher authority to see what went wrong when two lower courts disagree? Why value one court over the other?"


Because it's better to let a million guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail.  The gov't gets one chance and they'd better not f*** it up!
 
2013-03-26 02:18:50 PM

Sliding Carp: Bungles: Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia

Can you remind me -- what was Australia's coverage like in the Chamberlain case?  She acted in ways that the public decided was odd, too, didn't she?



I don't think that case is the best example.... the verdict apparently changes every two years.

The Falconio case is more clear cut for hysterical misguided Australian media.


But that's not really the issue here. Australia's coverage was pretty calm and rational, as it was a foreign story on foreign nationals.
 
2013-03-26 02:21:16 PM

BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: FarkinNortherner: I'm deeply puzzled why there's not only a belief the US won't extradite her but that this is a good thing.

The US has a far from unblemished record in locking up and, indeed, executing innocent people, but I suspect most Americans would want a person who faced a murder charge in the US to be extradited from Italy, irrespective of the view of the case held by the Italian populace and/or its media.

She was already tried and acquitted.  We object to sending her back for a second round.

That's not what is happening. Italy has three tiers of justice. This is the third (Trial...Appeal..Supreme Court review of the appeal). This is perfectly normal, and not a "second trial", it's the final stage of the appeal process.

In our cases, only the defendant gets to appeal.  Otherwise, it vastly diminishes the power of the no double jeopardy clause.

No-one is appealing here. It's a higher court review because two lower courts disagreed.

It's not "double jeopardy" because this is the same trial. Knox was not acquitted, she had a ruling over-tuned on appeal. The Supreme Court has now overturned that ruling.

It's a three-stage process in Italy, trial  ----> defense appeal if found guilty ------> Supreme Court review if those two courts disagree, and a retrial demanded if it's because one of those two trials was inadequate.

Sorry, I can't see how this is functionally different from double jeopardy.  Clearly I'm not familiar with the Italian legal system.

And an Italian might say to you "How can you have a sound system where there is no higher authority to see what went wrong when two lower courts disagree? Why value one court over the other?"

Because it's better to let a million guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail.  The gov't gets one chance and they'd better not f*** it up!


But that's clearly not how the American system works in reality, as  the US has one of the highest rates of overturned convictions after many, many years false imprisonment amongst any Western country.
 
2013-03-26 02:26:37 PM

Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: Bungles: BgJonson79: FarkinNortherner: I'm deeply puzzled why there's not only a belief the US won't extradite her but that this is a good thing.

The US has a far from unblemished record in locking up and, indeed, executing innocent people, but I suspect most Americans would want a person who faced a murder charge in the US to be extradited from Italy, irrespective of the view of the case held by the Italian populace and/or its media.

She was already tried and acquitted.  We object to sending her back for a second round.

That's not what is happening. Italy has three tiers of justice. This is the third (Trial...Appeal..Supreme Court review of the appeal). This is perfectly normal, and not a "second trial", it's the final stage of the appeal process.

In our cases, only the defendant gets to appeal.  Otherwise, it vastly diminishes the power of the no double jeopardy clause.

No-one is appealing here. It's a higher court review because two lower courts disagreed.

It's not "double jeopardy" because this is the same trial. Knox was not acquitted, she had a ruling over-tuned on appeal. The Supreme Court has now overturned that ruling.

It's a three-stage process in Italy, trial  ----> defense appeal if found guilty ------> Supreme Court review if those two courts disagree, and a retrial demanded if it's because one of those two trials was inadequate.

Sorry, I can't see how this is functionally different from double jeopardy.  Clearly I'm not familiar with the Italian legal system.

And an Italian might say to you "How can you have a sound system where there is no higher authority to see what went wrong when two lower courts disagree? Why value one court over the other?"

Because it's better to let a million guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail.  The gov't gets one chance and they'd better not f*** it up!

But that's clearly not how the American system works in reality, as  the US has one of t ...


Oh, it's not perfect here.  But only the defendant can appeal.  The gov't can't say it didn't get a fair shot and gets to try again, but the defendant can.

Also, are you referring to federal or state cases in reference to "the American system?"
 
2013-03-26 02:26:59 PM

Warlordtrooper: FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL

The US should NEVER turn over an American citizen to a foreign government.  Why are we even entertaining such a concept in the first place.


Depends on the case, and whether there is an extradition treaty in place between the US and said country.

Main reason being what happens when the US wants to have a foreign national extradited to the US?
 
2013-03-26 02:38:02 PM

Bungles: That's not what is happening. Italy has three tiers of justice. This is the third (Trial...Appeal..Supreme Court review of the appeal). This is perfectly normal, and not a "second trial", it's the final stage of the appeal process.


Didn't the intermediate appellate court grant her a trial de novo?  If she was tried de novo and acquitted, wouldn't that be seen as once in jeopardy under US law?
 
2013-03-26 02:49:44 PM
It's amusing how naive people are in this thread, Yes Amanda Knox will be extradited back to Italy. The DOJ extradites people back to the EU all the time. This case just has a little more press then the others.
 
2013-03-26 02:56:16 PM

fo_sho!: Warlordtrooper: FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL

The US should NEVER turn over an American citizen to a foreign government.  Why are we even entertaining such a concept in the first place.

Depends on the case, and whether there is an extradition treaty in place between the US and said country.

Main reason being what happens when the US wants to have a

foreign national   extradited to the US?

Usually  the death penalty has to be taken off the table and agreed to by the jurisdiction wanting said foreign national.
 
2013-03-26 02:56:41 PM

Phoenix_M: It's amusing how naive people are in this thread, Yes Amanda Knox will be extradited back to Italy. The DOJ extradites people back to the EU all the time. This case just has a little more press then the others.


Not when they've been exonerated they don't. Plus, she's affluent, educated, cute... and white. That will keep any extradition effort from ever getting off the ground.
 
2013-03-26 03:00:19 PM

Phoenix_M: This case just has a little more press then far less supporting evidence than the others.

 
2013-03-26 03:04:32 PM

eggrolls: Phoenix_M: It's amusing how naive people are in this thread, Yes Amanda Knox will be extradited back to Italy. The DOJ extradites people back to the EU all the time. This case just has a little more press then the others.

Not when they've been exonerated they don't. Plus, she's affluent, educated, cute... and white. That will keep any extradition effort from ever getting off the ground.


She wasn't exonerated. You're just making that up.

This is the same trial. This is the judicial review that occurs when an appeal disagrees with the main trial in Italy.

They have overturned the decision of the appeal court, because they believe the judgement to be legally unsound (having not yet seen it translated, I don't know which part they have objected to, the appeal or the main trial, or both).


The "cute educated white" is very important in how this will play out though, I agree.
 
2013-03-26 03:07:55 PM

Bungles: She wasn't exonerated. You're just making that up.

This is the same trial. This is the judicial review that occurs when an appeal disagrees with the main trial in Italy.


In the eyes of American jurisprudence, she was acquitted.
 
2013-03-26 03:09:17 PM
Bungles:
And an Italian might say to you "How can you have a sound system where there is no higher authority to see what went wrong when two lower courts disagree? Why value one court over the other?"

Society's awareness of the heavy personal strain which a criminal trial represents for the individual defendant is manifested in the willingness to limit the Government to a single criminal proceeding to vindicate its very vital interest in enforcement of criminal laws. , 400 U.S. 470, 479 (1971)


And that is as it should be.
 
2013-03-26 03:09:40 PM

sudo give me more cowbell: FarkinNortherner: The US has a far from unblemished record in locking up and, indeed, executing innocent people, but I suspect most Americans would want a person who faced a murder charge in the US to be extradited from Italy, irrespective of the view of the case held by the Italian populace and/or its media.

The US justice system isn't perfect, granted -but the difference is that it's abundantly obvious that there is no evidence against her.

The possible explanations for the evening in question are as follows:

Theory 1: Some guy with a well-documented criminal history broke into the apartment where they were all staying and committed a horrible crime leaving his DNA and fingerprints all over the place and then skipping town before getting caught a few months later in Germany. Knox and her boyfriend came home the next day after a night of partying and thought something was a bit weird when her roommate wouldn't open the door and there was blood lying around the apartment so they called the police.

Theory 2: Knox and her boyfriend were performing a satanic sex-orgy ritual (no, seriously, that's actually what the prosecution alleges, with absolutely no evidence from their background to support this) and somehow cooperated with the guy who broke in and raped/murdered her roommate (who she was good friends with.) Somehow they were able to do this without leaving a single trace of DNA or fingerprint in the room, and when the random break-in rapist skipped down, they just decided to stick around and call police on themselves.

How. the. Fark. are these two theories being presented beside each other as if they have equal plausibility?

There' such a thing as proven guilty
there's "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" ->this is the point where you can go to jail.
There's "probably guilty but we can't prove it" -> at this point you go free
There's "50/50" -> at this point you go free and people should assume you really are innocent
there's "probably innocent"

.... ...


Strange how none of the America bashing dickbags, defending backward draconian legal systems in Europe wanted to respond to this.
 
2013-03-26 03:15:58 PM

eggrolls: Phoenix_M: It's amusing how naive people are in this thread, Yes Amanda Knox will be extradited back to Italy. The DOJ extradites people back to the EU all the time. This case just has a little more press then the others.

Not when they've been exonerated they don't. Plus, she's affluent, educated, cute... and white. That will keep any extradition effort from ever getting off the ground.


She hasn't been exonerated yet and she'll be back in Italy by this time next year.  If not she'll spend the rest of her life looking over her shoulder and on the interpol wanted list. She gets pulled over for a traffic ticket in Wenatchee  bamm she's back in jail awaiting extradition.
 
2013-03-26 03:19:25 PM

This text is now purple: Bungles: She wasn't exonerated. You're just making that up.

This is the same trial. This is the judicial review that occurs when an appeal disagrees with the main trial in Italy.

In the eyes of American jurisprudence, she was acquitted.



But she wasn't tried in the US.

That's saying that someone convicted and sentence to death in the US, in the eyes of Swedish jurisprudence, was given a life sentence.
 
2013-03-26 03:19:34 PM

FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL


TFA says she has in fact been acquitted. In the USA, that means the state is not longer able to prosecute unless some serious new evidence is found, and the old evidence is usually no longer admissible. That does not happen very often.
 
2013-03-26 03:21:29 PM

Phoenix_M: She hasn't been exonerated yet


Acquittal.

Not guilty.
 
2013-03-26 03:21:47 PM
spiderpaz:

Strange how none of the America bashing dickbags, defending backward draconian legal systems in Europe wanted to respond to this.

Nobody in this thread has "America-bashed", and you suggesting that's the case suggests you really aren't basing your opinion on anything other that YA! AMERICA! nationalism.
 
2013-03-26 03:25:10 PM

R.A.Danny: FarkinNortherner: R.A.Danny: Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.

'Distasteful' is neither here nor there. If she hasn't been acquitted under Italian law, which appears to be the case* he US either upholds its extradition treaty or it doesn't.

*IANAIL

TFA says she has in fact been acquitted. In the USA, that means the state is not longer able to prosecute unless some serious new evidence is found, and the old evidence is usually no longer admissible. That does not happen very often.


She hasn't been acquitted. That has been overturned.

The fact that this review was coming, and that the case hadn't ended, was made perfectly clear at the appeal. There was much discussion over whether she would be prudent to remain until the trail was actually over.

You're trying to pretend this was an American-style "aquittal". It wasn't, and that was perfectly clear at the time, although may have been drowned out in the US for the cheering.

It was aquittal pending Supreme Court review. That has now occurred. It's the same trial.
 
2013-03-26 03:27:49 PM

Bungles: She hasn't been acquitted. That has been overturned.


As I was saying, you cannot overturn an acquittal in the US, or most other first world countries.
 
2013-03-26 03:29:12 PM

Bungles: You're trying to pretend this was an American-style "aquittal". It wasn't, and that was perfectly clear at the time


You're trying to pretend this isn't reprehensible. You are a horrible person.
 
2013-03-26 03:36:54 PM

R.A.Danny: Bungles: You're trying to pretend this was an American-style "aquittal". It wasn't, and that was perfectly clear at the time

You're trying to pretend this isn't reprehensible. You are a horrible person.



It isn't reprehensible. This hasn't just randomly occurred. That was on the cards from the moment the appeal began.

If the two court disagree, then the Supreme Court makes a ruling about whether the trial was fair.

I'd say you're the horrible person for not actually wanting justice to be served.


.

R.A.Danny: Bungles: She hasn't been acquitted. That has been overturned.

As I was saying, you cannot overturn an acquittal in the US, or most other first world countries.



She wasn't acquitted. She was acquitted pending Supreme Court review, which was made obvious at the time, at least on Australian media.
 
2013-03-26 03:37:45 PM
It will be interesting to see what the British papers will say.
 
2013-03-26 03:39:40 PM

shonday: Thunderpipes: StreetlightInTheGhetto: crab66: She might have been a bit of a skank. But that's not a crime the last time I checked.

Thunderpipes: US does it too.

Look at Zimmerman. Mainstream media even alters police phone calls to make him look guilty. Our President came out and sided with Traypack. No evidence anywhere to support that, does not stop liberals. Foreign countries are even worse. The coverage of Traypack is absolutely terrible.

Don't pretend this is anything but politcal shenanigans.

Yeah, and he will get his day in court.  A court which afaik his defense attorneys can strike down jurors who have bias vis a vis that media coverage.

I'm not saying we're perfect - we've certainly released more than our fair share of "convicted murderers" who were "totally innocent but kind of sketch so let's pin the crime on them and take the easy way out" - but to compare our justice system to Italy is freaking ridiculous.  As is this comparison.

/Traypack, that's what you're calling the deceased kid now?
//just call him by  his goddamn name

We are terrible. DA had nothing, did not press charges. Obama sends in the DOJ to get a special prosecutor to arrest and charge him? Imagine if the races were reversed?

Politics determine justice in this country, and in others. Not facts, not truth. Traypack is his name, or should I use no_limit_N****? He was a thug wanna be.

Hey, FYI, you're farking pathetic. Keep voting Republican, asshole.


I am right, and deep down below your liberal guilt, you know it. Liberals are racists, just the way it is.
 
2013-03-26 03:41:12 PM

Bungles: It isn't reprehensible


Yes is it. We are talking about a country that makes Somalia look like a beacon to justice. The corruption that is running Italy is absolutely amazing. Naples is being buried under garbage because of a mafia run union battle, and the streets are lined with shiat.
The water is poisonous, the pollution being pumped out of the factories would make the former Soviet Union look like Greenpeace, and... Need I go on? How can you defend this shiathole of a country?

/half Italian.
 
2013-03-26 03:41:33 PM
Ah, this thread again. Much like ethics_gradient, I also had the illuminating experience of being mistaken for someone else / messed with for kicks by cops (Eastern Europe, in this case). After three hours of being in a tiny room with four men carrying guns (this all started very early in the morning, as in 12 AM) I was a crying mess who had contradicted myself God knows how many times and who was less interested in convincing them of my innocence (since they'd made it clear they weren't interested in that story, and were insisting I had stolen something from someplace, never was clear from where) and more interested in finding the magic combination of words which would make them leave me alone. And the moral of that is ... confessions without supporting evidence are worthless. Spend a few hours screaming at, berating, and physically threatening someone and unless they're extremely unusual they'll say whatever you want -- or at least, contradict themselves often enough for you to catch them that way. If I had been with those guys for twelve hours, I would have been ready to confess to kidnapping the Lindbergh baby if they had made it clear that's what they wanted. (Incidentally, at the time I was also a white, decently-educated 20-year-old American girl. By the standards of some people, I guess that means I was actually guilty.

On the review, it was made pretty clear that Sollecito's knife was NOT a murder weapon, that they did not try to clean up the murder scene, that in fact they had fark-all to do with it unless somehow they learned to levitate and commit crimes without leaving a speck of DNA behind. With that gone, we were left with an unfortunately common and extremely plausible scenario; a burglar is surprised in the course of a burglary, panics, and murders the unfortunate intruder. The fact that Knox bought underwear, did stretches/cartwheels, and didn't clean the toilet properly has fark-all to do with her guilt or innocence. It's hard to believe Italy really wants to double down on this insanity, though God knows in the US we have enough prosecutors who refuse to let go of cases that have clearly been botched beyond all recognition.

Incidentally, I don't believe this was quite the all-consuming news item in the US that it was in the UK. I never even heard of it until the guilty verdict in late 2009.
 
2013-03-26 03:45:43 PM

R.A.Danny: Bungles: It isn't reprehensible

Yes is it. We are talking about a country that makes Somalia look like a beacon to justice. The corruption that is running Italy is absolutely amazing. Naples is being buried under garbage because of a mafia run union battle, and the streets are lined with shiat.
The water is poisonous, the pollution being pumped out of the factories would make the former Soviet Union look like Greenpeace, and... Need I go on? How can you defend this shiathole of a country?

/half Italian.


Italy being corrupt has nothing to do with whether or not Knox was involved with the murder of her housemate.
 
2013-03-26 03:47:38 PM

Bungles: Italy being corrupt has nothing to do with whether or not Knox was involved with the murder of her housemate.


It has everything to do with the prosecution.
 
2013-03-26 03:48:44 PM

Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: It isn't reprehensible

Yes is it. We are talking about a country that makes Somalia look like a beacon to justice. The corruption that is running Italy is absolutely amazing. Naples is being buried under garbage because of a mafia run union battle, and the streets are lined with shiat.
The water is poisonous, the pollution being pumped out of the factories would make the former Soviet Union look like Greenpeace, and... Need I go on? How can you defend this shiathole of a country?

/half Italian.

Italy being corrupt has nothing to do with whether or not Knox was involved with the murder of her housemate.


Actually both are true.  Italy IS corrupt AND Knox was not involved with the murder of her housemate.
 
2013-03-26 03:53:00 PM

steverockson: Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: It isn't reprehensible

Yes is it. We are talking about a country that makes Somalia look like a beacon to justice. The corruption that is running Italy is absolutely amazing. Naples is being buried under garbage because of a mafia run union battle, and the streets are lined with shiat.
The water is poisonous, the pollution being pumped out of the factories would make the former Soviet Union look like Greenpeace, and... Need I go on? How can you defend this shiathole of a country?

/half Italian.

Italy being corrupt has nothing to do with whether or not Knox was involved with the murder of her housemate.

Actually both are true.  Italy IS corrupt AND Knox was not involved with the murder of her housemate.


I'd prefer a proper trial, and not just your word for it, thanks.

The US media has fed you a very slanted view of the case.
 
Displayed 50 of 436 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report