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  
•       •       •

7666 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
 
2013-03-26 06:15:41 AM  
Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over. Ws are Ls waiting to happen and Ls are Ws ready to bloom and a decision is only final if you're unlucky enough to land in front a supreme court.

Sigh.

Anyway, I hope she bugs out to a country where Italy can't extradite her from and ends this case once and for all. It's too late for Justice.
 
2013-03-26 06:22:11 AM  

doglover: Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over. Ws are Ls waiting to happen and Ls are Ws ready to bloom and a decision is only final if you're unlucky enough to land in front a supreme court.

Sigh.

Anyway, I hope she bugs out to a country where Italy can't extradite her from and ends this case once and for all. It's too late for Justice.


TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States, but she may be tried in absentia and would presumably be arrested upon return to Italy should she be found guilty. I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.
 
2013-03-26 06:25:30 AM  

manwithplanx: TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States


Ever hear of diplomacy?

You want your trade agreement, Mr Ambassador? *sips chianti* You give us the Knox girl and you get your agreement. And may your first child be a masculine child.
 
2013-03-26 06:31:18 AM  
Oh cavolo, non questa merda di nuovo...

/is that idiot Giuliano "ZOMG SATANIC RITUALS" Mignini still prosecuting?
 
2013-03-26 06:31:30 AM  
its amazing the damage a stupid/corrupt/asshole district attorney can cause....
 
2013-03-26 06:34:53 AM  

Weaver95: its amazing the damage a stupid/corrupt/asshole district attorney can cause....


talesuntangled.files.wordpress.com

It's based on a true story. Although in the real story, the man doesn't have a happy ending.
 
2013-03-26 07:02:35 AM  
They gonna come to Seattle and get her?
 
2013-03-26 07:02:38 AM  

doglover: manwithplanx: TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States

Ever hear of diplomacy?

You want your trade agreement, Mr Ambassador? *sips chianti* You give us the Knox girl and you get your agreement. And may your first child be a masculine child.


I don't forsee that happening. It would be politically undesirable. I think they'll try the case in absentia. The trial issue political theater for Italy.
 
2013-03-26 07:07:12 AM  
The Italian judicial system is an embarassing joke of corruption, ineptitude, and face saving 'old boys' network.
 
2013-03-26 07:07:16 AM  
I don't think the US would ever agree, especially since (fark lawyers chime in?) it would be illegal to retry her within our legal system.
 
2013-03-26 07:07:30 AM  

doglover: Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over. Ws are Ls waiting to happen and Ls are Ws ready to bloom and a decision is only final if you're unlucky enough to land in front a supreme court.

Sigh.

Anyway, I hope she bugs out to a country where Italy can't extradite her from and ends this case once and for all. It's too late for Justice.


Er, kinda like where she is now? She'll be tried in absentia.
And if guilty, she fight to stay in the US for years.
 
2013-03-26 07:09:06 AM  
The whole case stinks to high heaven. This is a very Italian response to a major f*** up.
 
2013-03-26 07:09:09 AM  
She lives in Seattle but, if convicted, Italy could seek her extradition.

Good luck with that.
 
2013-03-26 07:09:55 AM  
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?
 
2013-03-26 07:11:52 AM  
Am I mistaken in thinking this is a load of garbage from the start?
 
2013-03-26 07:12:16 AM  

ace in your face: I don't think the US would ever agree, especially since (fark lawyers chime in?) it would be illegal to retry her within our legal system.


media.screened.com
 
2013-03-26 07:12:29 AM  
While I don't think a re-trial should be allowed, there remain so many questions about what really happened to her room-mate over there.  I don't recall that ever being clarified.  Anybody really know?
 
2013-03-26 07:13:22 AM  

ace in your face: I don't think the US would ever agree, especially since (fark lawyers chime in?) it would be illegal to retry her within our legal system.


Probably the key point here. US can refuse, especially if the country's court system is too harsh and different.

Besides, the EU is never real happy to extradite people back to us. Screw em.
 
2013-03-26 07:13:25 AM  
So Italy farked up the prosecution, now they say they've farked up the acquittal so they want to retry her?

cdn.fd.uproxx.com
 
2013-03-26 07:13:28 AM  
Love the logic here by the DA - "The DNA didn't match, so lets re-try her and see if we have enough to convict without it."  You know, it might be a good idea to find out who's DNA does match what they found, you know, because they might be the real killer.

/Bet it was OJ
 
2013-03-26 07:13:59 AM  
Cue Nancy Grace in 3...2...
 
2013-03-26 07:14:22 AM  

Weaver95: its amazing the damage a stupid/corrupt/asshole district attorney can cause....


Lets not put all the blame on one person, there entire legal system is farked up. How the hell is it even possible to overturn an acquittal?
 
2013-03-26 07:14:26 AM  

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.
 
2013-03-26 07:15:10 AM  
Good luck with that, Italy.
 
2013-03-26 07:15:53 AM  
This just in... Italian justice isn't.
 
2013-03-26 07:16:07 AM  

TommyDeuce: Love the logic here by the DA - "The DNA didn't match, so lets re-try her and see if we have enough to convict without it."  You know, it might be a good idea to find out who's DNA does match what they found, you know, because they might be the real killer.

/Bet it was OJ


If the knife does not fit ...
 
2013-03-26 07:19:17 AM  
The good thing about this is that she'll most likely end up having to do porn to pay her legal bills.

blogs.seattleweekly.com

Oh yeah, that's it.
 
2013-03-26 07:19:34 AM  
manwithplanx: I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.

Yes I think we do, which is something I personally find appaling and frightening; that an incompetant system like Italy can reach out and grab people from here in the UK. (Not that the UK is perfect by any means, but the cynical stupidity of some of the other EU countries beats us by a long shot.)
Why did our politicians allow this? I reckon it's actually the same root cause as the Euro crisis, a refusal to admit to the glaring reality that different EU countries have very different standards of competance in policing, judiciary, government and finance. Let's face it, some countries are better at some things than others.

Had Knox and Sollecito been tried in a British court of law I'm sure the judge would have ruled case dismissed within less than a day and they would have walked free without a stain on their characters.
 
j4x
2013-03-26 07:21:45 AM  

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.


Thanks for illustrating how you know nothing about the case. Any more idiotic opinions you want to chime in with?
 
2013-03-26 07:22:14 AM  

manwithplanx: doglover: Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over. Ws are Ls waiting to happen and Ls are Ws ready to bloom and a decision is only final if you're unlucky enough to land in front a supreme court.

Sigh.

Anyway, I hope she bugs out to a country where Italy can't extradite her from and ends this case once and for all. It's too late for Justice.

TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States, but she may be tried in absentia and would presumably be arrested upon return to Italy should she be found guilty. I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.


Even if Itally said, TOTALLY INNOCENT I don't think I would ever set foot in Italy again were I her.

I'd be a little burned out on the whole international travel I think.
 
2013-03-26 07:22:16 AM  

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.


She's innocent. That's all that matters.
 
2013-03-26 07:23:11 AM  

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?


No, they got the guy. He was basically a stranger, broke into the house, raped/killed the girl, left his DNA and fingerprints everywhere.

The first theory was Knox did it, evidence came to light that she didn't (fingerprints and DNA), and they made up stuff to keep her involved. (furry satanic sex orgy..no seriously)
 
2013-03-26 07:27:31 AM  
Italy is a rather shiatty country.  I really don't know why the Euro hasn't given them the boot.  Besides the whole money issue.   The country is corrupt and last I checked couldn't even handle basic services like trash in the southern part of the country.  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.  Also the same country that put scientists in jail for failing to predict an earthquake down to the day? Yes, they actually convicted some scientists over a damn earth quake.  If you can't/don't want to understand modern science then I am one of those that thinks you have no right to any of it's benefits.
You aren't Saudi Arabia and you aren't in the farking middle ages anymore Italy!

I don't care if the chick did it. Fact is Italy has a farked up legal system.  Duh, considering the whole mafia thing, but not a place to get caught up in and no excuse in this modern era.  I really hope the US doesn't extradite her if they push forward.  The more I hear about Italy from fellow travelers and news the less I want to travel there.

/I know the US legal system can be a joke, but nothing compared to Italy.
//After the whole earthquake thing I just can't take them seriously.  I think the Euro does need to have standards as far as courts go, but that would require real government power and we can't have that.
///The country doesn't have a great historical record of dealing with critical thinking skills it would seem.
 
2013-03-26 07:28:31 AM  
You know what's REALLY bizarre???

--I have asked several British people POINT BLANK to explain to me why they're so convinced that Amanda Knox is guilty, and NOT ONE has ever answered me.

It's insane.
 
2013-03-26 07:28:49 AM  

doglover: Weaver95: its amazing the damage a stupid/corrupt/asshole district attorney can cause....

[talesuntangled.files.wordpress.com image 510x680]

It's based on a true story. Although in the real story, the man doesn't have a happy ending.


Its been a while, but IIRC, he could have a happy ending, he just chooses not too.  In the movie he forgives his would-be wife they and their son go live "happily ever after" fabulously rich.

In the book though he never forgives her and the son is forced to go fight in the foreign legion or something (which...odds are he won't survive), and he's much more ruthless in his revenge for everyone.  I actually prefer the book.  The movie is ridiculously black and white in its portrayals of all the characters.
 
2013-03-26 07:29:03 AM  

incrdbil: The Italian judicial system is an embarassing joke of corruption, ineptitude, and face saving 'old boys' network.


We all know those old men just want her over there as their sex slave, so lets just cut to the chase and have her agree to 6 months sex slave duty servicing the court.
 
2013-03-26 07:31:38 AM  

doczoidberg: You know what's REALLY bizarre???

--I have asked several British people POINT BLANK to explain to me why they're so convinced that Amanda Knox is guilty, and NOT ONE has ever answered me.

It's insane.


Media propaganda. The tabloids in the UK flogged the fark out of this story for months. For a while there I was using it as a litmus test to judge individuals critical thinking abilities. Sadly - most people are quite happy to be led by the nose, a fact that probably shouldn't surprise anyone.
 
2013-03-26 07:32:47 AM  
I guess they don't have double Jeopardy laws in Italy.

Well, fark them.  I would hide her somewhere.
 
2013-03-26 07:33:16 AM  
GungFu: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.

I'm British and I don't believe your version for a minute, it stinks like sh*te.
Anyone who has been picked up by a Mediterranean country's "police" and screamed at for several hours solid knows you're gonna end up saying what they want you to say. I was ready to "admit" to being a 6' German after only 2 hours (felt like much longer) so please spare me that "accused an innocent man" crap. She said what the police wanted, you would have done the same.
A charitable view is that you're naive in the ways of the world.
 
2013-03-26 07:33:18 AM  

pedobearapproved: 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?

No, they got the guy. He was basically a stranger, broke into the house, raped/killed the girl, left his DNA and fingerprints everywhere.

The first theory was Knox did it, evidence came to light that she didn't (fingerprints and DNA), and they made up stuff to keep her involved. (furry satanic sex orgy..no seriously)


Out of curiosity: was the first theory that Knox did it based on anything aside from: "Gee, they lived together, she probably killer her then right?  I mean, roommates kill eachother all the time, it seems perfectly reasonable"?

I get that primary suspects are often those closest, Husbands/wives, girlfriends/boyfriends, etc.  But generally you don't go to actual prosecution without SOME kind of evidence.  Just because murders are "often" perpetrated by those close to the victim doesn't mean you just prosecute every dick or jane who fits the profile...
 
2013-03-26 07:33:30 AM  
Because the rest of the world is just a Disneyland of quaint buildings and strange customs; in short, it's the American playground.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-26 07:33:31 AM  
If they just keep trying her, they will eventually get the result they want.

I can't see her being extradited though.
 
2013-03-26 07:33:34 AM  

manwithplanx: TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States, but she may be tried in absentia and would presumably be arrested upon return to Italy should she be found guilty.


Lot's of conflicting stories out there, but the New York Times article posted this morning raises the possibility of extradition.
 
2013-03-26 07:34:25 AM  

GungFu: 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.


which of those things is mudering her roommate? Also which do you believe, a convited theif breaks into a house, gets a fright, rapes and kills the girl that startled him and would recognise him.

Or her roommate has sex an orgy with her and kills her by cutting her, or in a satanic ritual, or because of her chores...while a stranger was in the house raping her.

Also it's funny that Rudy Guede acknowledges he was there during the murder, but didn't identify Knox or her boyfriend as the killer. That doesn't seem like a problem to you?
 
2013-03-26 07:35:14 AM  
rationalmale.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-26 07:37:06 AM  

Cold_Sassy: I guess they don't have double Jeopardy laws in Italy.

Well, fark them.  I would hide her somewhere.


I doubt she'll have to hide anywhere... The US probably isn't going to agree to any extradition requests.

If she's found guilty in absentia, she may not be able to travel to the EU anymore, but there's no way she'll have to hide or leave the US, I'm guessing.
 
2013-03-26 07:40:05 AM  

ethics-gradient: I was ready to "admit" to being a 6' German after only 2 hours (felt like much longer)


This sounds like an interesting tale...
 
2013-03-26 07:40:32 AM  

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


As far as I can tell, being a bit of a coont isn't a crime under Italian law.
 
2013-03-26 07:40:40 AM  
Someone else who was tried in the media and was also acquitted:

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-03-26 07:41:41 AM  

Wicked Chinchilla: pedobearapproved: 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?

No, they got the guy. He was basically a stranger, broke into the house, raped/killed the girl, left his DNA and fingerprints everywhere.

The first theory was Knox did it, evidence came to light that she didn't (fingerprints and DNA), and they made up stuff to keep her involved. (furry satanic sex orgy..no seriously)

Out of curiosity: was the first theory that Knox did it based on anything aside from: "Gee, they lived together, she probably killer her then right?  I mean, roommates kill eachother all the time, it seems perfectly reasonable"?

I get that primary suspects are often those closest, Husbands/wives, girlfriends/boyfriends, etc.  But generally you don't go to actual prosecution without SOME kind of evidence.  Just because murders are "often" perpetrated by those close to the victim doesn't mean you just prosecute every dick or jane who fits the profile...


It seems like pride. While they should have been taking a close look at Knox at the start of the case, the second they have DNA from someone on, and inside the dead girl, and well as bloody handprints and that guy tells them some random Italian guy did it (not Knox and her boyfriend), you might need to drop those charges. Meanwhile the murderer is going to get out in 2016 because he said he was sorry.
 
2013-03-26 07:42:27 AM  

Wicked Chinchilla: Its been a while, but IIRC, he could have a happy ending, he just chooses not too. In the movie he forgives his would-be wife they and their son go live "happily ever after" fabulously rich.


This was the original story..

A recent book about it is here
 
2013-03-26 07:42:41 AM  
Wicked Chinchilla:Out of curiosity: was the first theory that Knox did it based on anything aside from: "Gee, they lived together, she probably killer her then right?  I mean, roommates kill eachother all the time, it seems perfectly reasonable"?

She acted inappropriately in the police station when the cops kept them waiting to be interviewed for hours; practicing handstands, necking and giggling with her boyfriend.  (Not all at the same time obviousely).
Oh and she'd had sex with boys and smoked marijuana. Shocking I know, British and Italian students are souls of propriety.
 
2013-03-26 07:44:21 AM  
I'm guessing Italy doesn't have the whole "double jeopardy" thing in their legal system then.
 
2013-03-26 07:44:25 AM  

kd8our: ///The country doesn't have a great historical record of dealing with critical thinking skills it would seem.


Too much red wine consumption.
 
2013-03-26 07:44:51 AM  
 

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?


A reasonable re-cap.


http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/an-innocent-abroad/

You just can't stress this enough, when questioned by the police, STFU.
 
2013-03-26 07:45:12 AM  

Cold_Sassy: I guess they don't have double Jeopardy laws in Italy.

Well, fark them.  I would hide her somewhere.


They probably didn't phrase the acquittal in the form of a question.
 
2013-03-26 07:45:36 AM  

ethics-gradient: manwithplanx: I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.

Yes I think we do, which is something I personally find appaling and frightening; that an incompetant system like Italy can reach out and grab people from here in the UK. (Not that the UK is perfect by any means, but the cynical stupidity of some of the other EU countries beats us by a long shot.)
Why did our politicians allow this? I reckon it's actually the same root cause as the Euro crisis, a refusal to admit to the glaring reality that different EU countries have very different standards of competance in policing, judiciary, government and finance. Let's face it, some countries are better at some things than others.

Had Knox and Sollecito been tried in a British court of law I'm sure the judge would have ruled case dismissed within less than a day and they would have walked free without a stain on their characters.


I didn't think the UK was a member of the EU.
 
2013-03-26 07:45:59 AM  
It's fascinating of the Italian's proclivity for believing in a "brutal sex game gone wrong". I'd laugh but we Americans believe that in every shadow lurks a child molester. Interesting cultural comparison.
 
2013-03-26 07:47:06 AM  

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.
 
2013-03-26 07:47:39 AM  

manwithplanx: doglover: Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over. Ws are Ls waiting to happen and Ls are Ws ready to bloom and a decision is only final if you're unlucky enough to land in front a supreme court.

Sigh.

Anyway, I hope she bugs out to a country where Italy can't extradite her from and ends this case once and for all. It's too late for Justice.

TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States, but she may be tried in absentia and would presumably be arrested upon return to Italy should she be found guilty. I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.


I suspect she would be handed over, not just because of the smoothed extradition process in the EU, but because the general view outside USA is that there was a massive miscarriage oif justice here, and Knox is  not innocent.
 
2013-03-26 07:48:16 AM  

doglover: Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over.


And this is the reason for the Double Jeopardy clause in the Constitution. The Man gets once crack at you, and if he farks up, you walk.
 
2013-03-26 07:51:36 AM  

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


Since you obviously have such a strong opinion about the case, would you mind taking a moment to lay out the actual evidence that she may indeed be guilty of murder?
 
2013-03-26 07:52:31 AM  
She might have been a bit of a skank. But that's not a crime the last time I checked.


Even if she is a murderer. She deserves her freedom based solely on the ineptitude of the Italian judicial system.
 
2013-03-26 07:52:49 AM  

Cold_Sassy: I guess they don't have double Jeopardy laws in Italy.

Well, fark them.  I would hide her somewhere.


I think they do, but an acquittal can be overturned if they can make a case for major flaws (IIRC).

I'd tell them to go fark themselves in the Vatican a bottle of their finest wine.
 
2013-03-26 07:52:51 AM  

keylock71: Cold_Sassy: I guess they don't have double Jeopardy laws in Italy.

Well, fark them.  I would hide her somewhere.

I doubt she'll have to hide anywhere... The US probably isn't going to agree to any extradition requests.

If she's found guilty in absentia, she may not be able to travel to the EU anymore, but there's no way she'll have to hide or leave the US, I'm guessing.


Well, you would think so, but you never can tell.  I err on the side of caution, myself.
 
2013-03-26 07:53:58 AM  
My country's criminal justice systems are rapidly eliminating the double jeopardy doctrine, so I'm getting a kick...

Though, it seems strange that a European republic with strong ties to classical history would allow for a conviction in the accused's absence.
 
2013-03-26 07:54:42 AM  

CheatCommando: doglover: Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over.

And this is the reason for the Double Jeopardy clause in the Constitution. The Man gets once crack at you, and if he farks up, you walk.



He's not going to.

They NEVER do.
 
2013-03-26 07:55:00 AM  
Senator Maria Cantwell was one of those that criticized the evidence treatment Amanda Knox received during the first trial. I highly doubt Knox will be extradited for Round 2.
 
2013-03-26 07:57:03 AM  

xanadian: Cold_Sassy: I guess they don't have double Jeopardy laws in Italy.

Well, fark them.  I would hide her somewhere.

They probably didn't phrase the acquittal in the form of a question.


OK, I gave you a "funny" for that, because I thought of that myself.

/btw I love Canada even though I don't live there.
 
2013-03-26 07:57:18 AM  

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.


The common thread here - no citation of a motive, a witness, even placing Knox at the time of the crime scene, a murder weapon, or any other physical evidence. However she was "acting odd" at least, according to british tabloids, hence you're not convinced she's innocent.

One would almost say, that without the biased circumstantial reporting, there would be absolutely nothing to cause one to think she is anything BUT innocent. Indeed, the moment that they put hands on Rudy Guede, who's semen was inside Meridith, who's bloody handprint was at the crime scene and who confessed to being at the crime scene, a reasonable person would have expected the case to be closed.

But no, Amanda Knox did a handstand (or so they say) while being held at the police station for better part of a day. SO VERY VERY SUSPECT.

Frankly, you sound like a retarded 9/11 truther.
 
2013-03-26 07:58:16 AM  
Just another stress crack, leading towards a failing civilization.
 
2013-03-26 07:58:20 AM  

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.


i.telegraph.co.uk

Isn't this man, Rudy Guede, already in jail for raping and murdering Kercher?
 
2013-03-26 07:58:33 AM  

Bungles: manwithplanx: doglover: Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over. Ws are Ls waiting to happen and Ls are Ws ready to bloom and a decision is only final if you're unlucky enough to land in front a supreme court.

Sigh.

Anyway, I hope she bugs out to a country where Italy can't extradite her from and ends this case once and for all. It's too late for Justice.

TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States, but she may be tried in absentia and would presumably be arrested upon return to Italy should she be found guilty. I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.

I suspect she would be handed over, not just because of the smoothed extradition process in the EU, but because the general view outside USA is that there was a massive miscarriage oif justice here, and Knox is  not innocent.


Care to make it interesting? I'll bet a year of total fark that if convicted again she never EVER gets extradited.
 
2013-03-26 07:59:10 AM  
Meanwhile, India had to promise withdrawing the death penalty option to get Italy to return a pair of wanted Italian marines back from 'voting'. Both are to stand trial for shooting a pair of Indian fishermen in what they claim were international waters.
 
2013-03-26 07:59:14 AM  

doglover: manwithplanx: TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States

Ever hear of diplomacy?

You want your trade agreement, Mr Ambassador? *sips chianti* You give us the Knox girl and you get your agreement. And may your first child be a masculine child.


I sure have.

You want to rethink that stand, Mr Ambassador? *sips Kentucky bourbon* You ever been to Aviano? You remember how utterly dependent the local economy is on having a major USAF base there? I'm not saying we'll pull out, but Cyprus would just LOVE for us to drop all our money on them instead.

Now, stop pestering Ms Knox.
 
2013-03-26 07:59:18 AM  

manwithplanx: 'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.


I doubt she'd ever travel outside of the USA again, especially to Europe, even if she wasn't convicted in this new trial. I know I wouldn't be risking Italy trying to pull some shiat the minute they knew I was out of the country.
 
2013-03-26 08:00:16 AM  
I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.
 
2013-03-26 08:00:35 AM  

Arthur Jumbles: 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.

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 460x288]

Isn't this man, Rudy Guede, already in jail for raping and murdering Kercher?


Yes, and he's going to be out in a couple of years because the corrupt and incompetant prosecution gave him a sweetheart deal so that they could pursue their satanic sex orgy theory with the other two.
 
2013-03-26 08:00:48 AM  

Arthur Jumbles: 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.

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 460x288]

Isn't this man, Rudy Guede, already in jail for raping and murdering Kercher?


Well he should definitely spend some time behind bars for forever ruining the beret with his giant fivehead.
 
2013-03-26 08:01:11 AM  

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


Glad to see someone remembers this. The prosecutor is a complete nutjob.
 
2013-03-26 08:02:14 AM  

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.


Being a coont isn't a crime in Italy, right? It's certainly not what she's being legally charged with.
 
2013-03-26 08:02:15 AM  

Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.


I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.
 
2013-03-26 08:02:30 AM  

ace in your face: Bungles: manwithplanx: doglover: Typical of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over. Ws are Ls waiting to happen and Ls are Ws ready to bloom and a decision is only final if you're unlucky enough to land in front a supreme court.

Sigh.

Anyway, I hope she bugs out to a country where Italy can't extradite her from and ends this case once and for all. It's too late for Justice.

TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States, but she may be tried in absentia and would presumably be arrested upon return to Italy should she be found guilty. I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.

I suspect she would be handed over, not just because of the smoothed extradition process in the EU, but because the general view outside USA is that there was a massive miscarriage oif justice here, and Knox is  not innocent.

Care to make it interesting? I'll bet a year of total fark that if convicted again she never EVER gets extradited.



Oh, I'm sure she'd never be from the US, just that if she travelled within the EU, there would be a very strong chance she's be extradited internally within the EU.
 
2013-03-26 08:03:05 AM  
Damnit. I quoted the wrong person last time.

What I meant was THIS:


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

Since you obviously have such a strong opinion about the case, would you mind taking a moment to lay out the actual evidence that she may indeed be guilty of murder?



--He won't explain why he thinks she's guilty. None of them will.
 
2013-03-26 08:06:16 AM  

doczoidberg: Damnit. I quoted the wrong person last time.

What I meant was THIS:


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

Since you obviously have such a strong opinion about the case, would you mind taking a moment to lay out the actual evidence that she may indeed be guilty of murder?


--He won't explain why he thinks she's guilty. None of them will.


She's a woman.  And in Italy, that makes her guilty of something.
 
2013-03-26 08:06:49 AM  
They will find her guilty and then the US will pay Italy to STFU.
 
2013-03-26 08:07:14 AM  

TwistedFark: Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.

I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.



That's just not true, I was in Melbourne for a huge chunk of this trial. The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


It's not entirely different from certain current views of the Pistorius case..
 
2013-03-26 08:07:37 AM  

doczoidberg: He won't explain why he thinks she's guilty. None of them will.


I've noticed none in this thread have even tried.
 
2013-03-26 08:07:46 AM  

maddogdelta: Wicked Chinchilla: Its been a while, but IIRC, he could have a happy ending, he just chooses not too. In the movie he forgives his would-be wife they and their son go live "happily ever after" fabulously rich.

This was the original story..

A recent book about it is here


Have you ever read the count of Monte Cristo? Having your father imprisoned for two years and then dying poor may be an inspirational starting place, but it hardly makes it a true story.

That's like Tom Clancy knowing a guy in the CIA who once went to Columbia and therefore claiming all his books are based on a true story.
 
2013-03-26 08:10:33 AM  

ElPresidente: 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)


He openly discussed removal of military markings and had previously routed items to Iran, via the Netherlands, using the same company name as that given as the destination for the batteries. There are many concerns with the extradition treaty (although the US hasn't refused an extradition to the UK since the treaty agreement, the UK has refused 10 to the US), but taking Tappin as a cause celebre may be misguided.
 
2013-03-26 08:10:38 AM  

Bungles: TwistedFark: Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.

I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.


That's just not true, I was in Melbourne for a huge chunk of this trial. The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


It's not entirely different from certain current views of the Pistorius case..


I haven't heard anybody here claim Pistorius is innocent. I think you're just making things up now.
 
2013-03-26 08:10:50 AM  
Sorry Italy, she's out of reach of your crappy justice system now.

No double jeopardy for Americans.
 
2013-03-26 08:11:51 AM  
Its such a bizarre case.  Anyone who paid close attention to Amanda's statements at the start of all this felt fairly certain that she was guilty.  She just said some retardedly sketchy things when the investigation began... my "gift" has always been to read people and understand their intentions and motives based on their speech patterns and facial expressions, and every time I saw her that was the overwhelming feeling I got.

With that said... the prosecutor really went off the farking deep end, and went wild with strange stories of satanic sex rituals etc, and really just over stepped himself.  It was basically the euro version of the Casey Anthony trial... they probably had a decent case, if they had just stuck to the damn facts and leveled appropriate charges, but the prosecutors got high on the media frenzy and went full retard with speculation.
 
2013-03-26 08:13:37 AM  

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: doczoidberg: He won't explain why he thinks she's guilty. None of them will.

I've noticed none in this thread have even tried.


I'd like to hear them explain the Satanic sex orgy.
 
2013-03-26 08:14:08 AM  
upload.wikimedia.org

R.I.P.  USS Knox
 
2013-03-26 08:15:34 AM  

SnarfVader: Bungles: TwistedFark: Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.

I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.


That's just not true, I was in Melbourne for a huge chunk of this trial. The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


It's not entirely different from certain current views of the Pistorius case..

I haven't heard anybody here claim Pistorius is innocent. I think you're just making things up now.


Ummmmm.... I didn't suggest anyone has.
 
2013-03-26 08:15:42 AM  

miss diminutive: ethics-gradient: I was ready to "admit" to being a 6' German after only 2 hours (felt like much longer)This sounds like an interesting tale...


Long story short. I was registered to live in Berlin and went to spain on holiday with travellers cheques issued in German Marks (Yes it was a while back). I was cashing a pair in the mountain town of Orgiva when the bank teller looked at a piece of A4 beside , went all weird on me and pushed me out the door into the arms of a pair of Guardia Civil! One of whom had an asault rifle. Eyeing his 7.62mm machine gun capable of shooting through walls I accepted their offer of tea and biscuits at the barracks.
After being screamed, bellowed and yelled at about being German over the course of hours all this ex patriate Brit could think was "Wow, they really have a thing for Germans here." The fact that I had a German residence stamp in my British passport and had unwisely admitted to speaking German was highly suspicious and such was the pressure they were putting me under that a few hours more I would have admitted it just to make it all stop. Honestly I was almost in tears.
After some time the young conscript with the long black rifle took pity on me and showed me a photocopy of a German passport. The German cheque fraudster had exactly the same face as me! Mein doppelganger, echte. But I'm 5'7".
Italian cops are more of the same, I only bumped into those morons once or twice but they also just repeat bullshiat at you over and over again. And that's just if you make the mistake of stopping to find a bakery when in the company of men with long hair.
 
2013-03-26 08:15:47 AM  

TwistedFark: The common thread here - no citation of a motive, a witness, even placing Knox at the time of the crime scene, a murder weapon, or any other physical evidence. However she was "acting odd" at least, according to british tabloids, hence you're not convinced she's innocent.


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com

Hai Guyz, what's going on in dis thread?
 
2013-03-26 08:17:21 AM  
YES!!!
Fark this murdering biatch.  Maybe they can figure a way to retry Casey Anthony while they're at it.
Can't believe all the dupes here.
 
2013-03-26 08:17:55 AM  

Alonjar: Its such a bizarre case.  Anyone who paid close attention to Amanda's statements at the start of all this felt fairly certain that she was guilty.  She just said some retardedly sketchy things when the investigation began... my "gift" has always been to read people and understand their intentions and motives based on their speech patterns and facial expressions, and every time I saw her that was the overwhelming feeling I got.

With that said... the prosecutor really went off the farking deep end, and went wild with strange stories of satanic sex rituals etc, and really just over stepped himself.  It was basically the euro version of the Casey Anthony trial... they probably had a decent case, if they had just stuck to the damn facts and leveled appropriate charges, but the prosecutors got high on the media frenzy and went full retard with speculation.


This is precisely the general view outside the US (aside from the CSI "reading people"...) that I have been trying to explain.
 
2013-03-26 08:18:23 AM  

Cold_Sassy: I guess they don't have double Jeopardy laws in Italy.

Well, fark them.  I would hide her somewhere.


While our justice system isn't perfect, DJ is one of its remaining admirable characteristics.
 
2013-03-26 08:18:53 AM  

kd8our: Italy is a rather shiatty country. I really don't know why the Euro hasn't given them the boot.


You didn't see what you did there, did you?
 
2013-03-26 08:19:28 AM  
Very distressing. Dammit.
 
2013-03-26 08:20:34 AM  
I don't think Italy has any money left to hold court. Let that entire country rot and die, all the important bits were already moved to Britain and France.
 
2013-03-26 08:21:56 AM  
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.
 
2013-03-26 08:23:29 AM  

doubled99: YES!!!
Fark this murdering biatch.  Maybe they can figure a way to retry Casey Anthony while they're at it.
Can't believe all the dupes here.


Please expound on what evidence there is that Ms. Knox killed anyone.
 
2013-03-26 08:24:05 AM  
news.bbcimg.co.uk

Damn.

She went butch, too.
 
2013-03-26 08:25:06 AM  
TTIWWOP
 
2013-03-26 08:25:48 AM  

kd8our: I really don't know why the Euro hasn't given them the boot.


fryseewhatyoudidthere.jpg
 
2013-03-26 08:25:52 AM  

Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: TwistedFark: Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.

I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.


That's just not true, I was in Melbourne for a huge chunk of this trial. The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


It's not entirely different from certain current views of the Pistorius case..

I haven't heard anybody here claim Pistorius is innocent. I think you're just making things up now.

Ummmmm.... I didn't suggest anyone has.


Then the Pistorius case is not an apt comparison to the Knox case.
 
2013-03-26 08:27:33 AM  

SnarfVader: Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: TwistedFark: Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.

I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.


That's just not true, I was in Melbourne for a huge chunk of this trial. The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


It's not entirely different from certain current views of the Pistorius case..

I haven't heard anybody here claim Pistorius is innocent. I think you're just making things up now.

Ummmmm.... I didn't suggest anyone has.

Then the Pistorius case is not an apt comparison to the Knox case.



I'm not quite sure you've grasped the comparison I was making.
 
2013-03-26 08:30:53 AM  
www.feistees.com
I'd risk breaking the rule about "crazy", she sounds like a little freak.
 
2013-03-26 08:31:54 AM  

TwistedFark: For a while there I was using it as a litmus test to judge individuals critical thinking abilities. Sadly - most people are quite happy to be led by the nose, a fact that probably shouldn't surprise anyone.


scm-l3.technorati.com
 
2013-03-26 08:32:52 AM  

JMacPA: maddogdelta: Wicked Chinchilla: Its been a while, but IIRC, he could have a happy ending, he just chooses not too. In the movie he forgives his would-be wife they and their son go live "happily ever after" fabulously rich.

This was the original story..

A recent book about it is here

Have you ever read the count of Monte Cristo? Having your father imprisoned for two years and then dying poor may be an inspirational starting place, but it hardly makes it a true story.

That's like Tom Clancy knowing a guy in the CIA who once went to Columbia and therefore claiming all his books are based on a true story.


I did not make any claims as to the story's veracity.  I merely pointed out the biography of the person that most scholars believe was the influence for the novel "The Count of Monte Christo".  Hence, the wording I chose "The original STORY"

If you want to browbeat me with your GED in Historical Liturachure, fine. But frankly, pick a fight with someone who gives a shiat, mmmmmmkay?
 
2013-03-26 08:32:58 AM  

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?


According to the article they don't have a weapon, don't have a motive and haven't been able to come up with a scenario that makes sense and fits the evidence(which has been mishandled). It sounds suspiciously like the local authorities have nothing and were trying to pin the whole thing on the foreign girl.
 
2013-03-26 08:33:56 AM  
Fark this murdering biatch.  Maybe they can figure a way to retry Casey Anthony while they're at it.
Can't believe all the dupes here.

Please expound on what evidence there is that Ms. Knox killed anyone.


Yeah. Like this is the forum for presenting evidence. I'll wait until you've read all the court transcripts and testimony.
 
2013-03-26 08:35:17 AM  

Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: TwistedFark: Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.

I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.


That's just not true, I was in Melbourne for a huge chunk of this trial. The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


It's not entirely different from certain current views of the Pistorius case..

I haven't heard anybody here claim Pistorius is innocent. I think you're just making things up now.

Ummmmm.... I didn't suggest anyone has.

Then the Pistorius case is not an apt comparison to the Knox case.


I'm not quite sure you've grasped the comparison I was making.


Alright. Can you clarify what type of comparison you are making between the two cases, please? I thought perhaps you were trying to say the American media views Pistorius as innocent and the system in South Africa as corrupt.
 
2013-03-26 08:35:36 AM  
What's funny about this is that Knox has a book coming out soon, so at least she's getting some extra publicity which should help sales.
 
2013-03-26 08:37:34 AM  

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.


Somewhere out there, behind a locked door in a room without windows, somebody is contemplating how they can use Amanda Knox as a bargaining chip for Julian Assange.

/adjusts tinfoil
 
2013-03-26 08:39:16 AM  
Who in the hell will ever date this chick?  There's probably dudes that would fark her, but there's no way they'd ever fall asleep beside her.  She's basically on the same date-ability level as Joran van der Sloot and Casey Anthony.  Imagine that dating game line-up.  "All right contestant A, if you were an ice cube, where would you like to travel?"  "Well, Chuck, first I'd fashion a garrote from a tweed cord and a paintbrush handle.  Then, when that's good an tight, I'd put a Winnie The Pooh sticker over her mouth to muffle the rape sounds.  Then, as I was having a third orgasm, I'd use the filet knife I stole from Jimmy Buffet's Margaritaville to slice her throat from ear to ear, OJ style, my personal hero."  "Where's the ice cube in all of this?"  "Oh, I almost forgot, I'd pound the ice cube into her eye socket with my fist to get her good and horny."  "Great answer.  Contestant B?"
 
2013-03-26 08:39:50 AM  

doubled99: Fark this murdering biatch.  Maybe they can figure a way to retry Casey Anthony while they're at it.
Can't believe all the dupes here.

Please expound on what evidence there is that Ms. Knox killed anyone.

Yeah. Like this is the forum for presenting evidence. I'll wait until you've read all the court transcripts and testimony.


What?  We know the basic facts of the case.  They had a trial.  Please let us know which facts point to Ms. Knox being the perpetrator. (Keep in mind that a guy's semen was found in the victim and his bloody handprint was found at the scene).
 
2013-03-26 08:40:58 AM  

Thunderpipes: Besides, the EU is never real happy to extradite people back to us. Screw em.


This was the first thing that popped into my mind. Several European countries have declined to extradite Roman Polanski. Screm em.
 
2013-03-26 08:41:09 AM  
Last time I checked, acting strange and being a retard wasn't a crime, nor did it make you guilty of a crime. YOU try being convicted of murder and facing life at her age.

Bunch of a$$hats here--acting strange != guilty.
 
2013-03-26 08:42:19 AM  

SnarfVader: Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: TwistedFark: Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.

I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.


That's just not true, I was in Melbourne for a huge chunk of this trial. The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


It's not entirely different from certain current views of the Pistorius case..

I haven't heard anybody here claim Pistorius is innocent. I think you're just making things up now.

Ummmmm.... I didn't suggest anyone has.

Then the Pistorius case is not an apt comparison to the Knox case.


I'm not quite sure you've grasped the comparison I was making.

Alright. Can you clarify what type of comparison you are making between the two cases, please? I thought perhaps you were trying to say the American media views Pistorius as innocent and the system in South Africa as corrupt.


I mean that something widely viewed as a mess of a judicial system (SA local courts and Italian local courts) that were pushed into collapse by a massive media interest (like the circus around the bail trial and the whole of the Knox trial) where essentially lowish level district officials are suddenly dancing for an international crowd (and basking amateurishly in the limelight), but that at the core of the cases, neither are innocent, but probably not premeditated.

You could even argue that the vast majority of people who consider either innocent are also those in their home countries, whereas the international community sees things quite differently.
 
2013-03-26 08:42:43 AM  

Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.


This suggests that you believe that coverage anywhere else is less biased and there is no geopolitical interest in 'sticking it to those asshole Americans'.

I have experienced the same as some in this thread. Europeans are so sure that she is guilty but none of them can point to any evidence or established fact. I see the public getting caught up in media frenzy is not exclusive to the American public.
 
2013-03-26 08:42:46 AM  

ElPresidente: 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.


Just because we have issues with the US over the misuse of an extradition treaty by over zealous federal authorities and attention whore DAs does not mean that some poor American student and her ex should be sacrificed to soothe your rage.
The reputation for incompetance and corruption on the part the Italian authorities, the piss poor lack of explanation of means, motive or opportunity for Knox and Sollecito to assault Kercher plus Guedes habit of beaking into places armed with a knife and the plentiful forensic evidence all point to Guede. It's just patheticly naive to believe anything else.

I live near Cambridge and know well that students can act like arses sometimes.
Sometimes life is racist and unfortunately it was the black guy addicted to hard drugs as much as you'd like it to be the middle class white girl.
 
2013-03-26 08:44:20 AM  

doglover: Anyway, I hope she bugs out to a country where Italy can't extradite her from and ends this case once and for all. It's too late for Justice.


It's Obama so you never know, but I'd hope the president would have the balls to say no to extraditing her.
 
2013-03-26 08:45:26 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: What's funny about this is that Knox has a book coming out soon, so at least she's getting some extra publicity which should help sales.


Scenario that comes to mind is pretty much Italian Mafia: courts find out she is about to make some money off the book and decide to retry the case for one, the extra publicity for sales; two, they want a cut of the profits and if they don't get it they will reconvict her.

/I wouldn't be surprised if she burned her passport at the first family BBQ after getting home
 
2013-03-26 08:46:26 AM  
she's a pretty white american and they're just dumb italians

/evidence, we dont need no steenkin' evidence
 
2013-03-26 08:49:57 AM  

Bungles: jority of people who consider either innocent are also those in their home countries, whereas the international community sees things quite differently.


WHY???????
 
2013-03-26 08:51:30 AM  
Don't go back to Italy. The stinky bastards can fark off.
 
2013-03-26 08:53:17 AM  
Ridiculas! I thought I wanted to visit Italy some day but nevermind. I don't want the nearest murder pinned on me.
 
2013-03-26 08:55:13 AM  

fastfxr: Last time I checked, acting strange and being a retard wasn't a crime, nor did it make you guilty of a crime. YOU try being convicted of murder and facing life at her age.

Bunch of a$$hats here--acting strange != guilty.


4.bp.blogspot.com

Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.
 
2013-03-26 08:59:55 AM  

doczoidberg: Bungles: jority of people who consider either innocent are also those in their home countries, whereas the international community sees things quite differently.

WHY???????


Why do people tend to lean towards the innocence of their countrymen when charged abroad? It's just sort of a natural thing to do.
 
2013-03-26 09:04:41 AM  
Fark this murdering biatch.  Maybe they can figure a way to retry Casey Anthony while they're at it.
Can't believe all the dupes here.

Please expound on what evidence there is that Ms. Knox killed anyone.

Yeah. Like this is the forum for presenting evidence. I'll wait until you've read all the court transcripts and testimony.

What?  We know the basic facts of the case.  They had a trial.  Please let us know which facts point to Ms. Knox being the perpetrator. (Keep in mind that a guy's semen was found in the victim and his bloody handprint was found at the scene).



They had a trial and everything? Oh. well I guess that settles that, then.
Wonder why people are still upset about the Anthony or Simpson trials
 
2013-03-26 09:05:11 AM  

GungFu: TwistedFark: The common thread here - no citation of a motive, a witness, even placing Knox at the time of the crime scene, a murder weapon, or any other physical evidence. However she was "acting odd" at least, according to british tabloids, hence you're not convinced she's innocent.

[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 256x197]

Hai Guyz, what's going on in dis thread?


Look behind him, Mark Hamil did get work after the trilogy...hes apparently a bailiff.
 
2013-03-26 09:06:30 AM  

doubled99: Yeah. Like this is the forum for presenting evidence. I'll wait until you've read all the court transcripts and testimony.


So you've got nothing?

content6.flixster.com

Explain it to us like we're four years old.
 
2013-03-26 09:07:34 AM  

doubled99: Fark this murdering biatch.  Maybe they can figure a way to retry Casey Anthony while they're at it.
Can't believe all the dupes here.

Please expound on what evidence there is that Ms. Knox killed anyone.

Yeah. Like this is the forum for presenting evidence. I'll wait until you've read all the court transcripts and testimony.

What?  We know the basic facts of the case.  They had a trial.  Please let us know which facts point to Ms. Knox being the perpetrator. (Keep in mind that a guy's semen was found in the victim and his bloody handprint was found at the scene).


They had a trial and everything? Oh. well I guess that settles that, then.
Wonder why people are still upset about the Anthony or Simpson trials


So you got nothing?
 
2013-03-26 09:08:27 AM  

doubled99: Fark this murdering biatch.  Maybe they can figure a way to retry Casey Anthony while they're at it.
Can't believe all the dupes here.

Please expound on what evidence there is that Ms. Knox killed anyone.

Yeah. Like this is the forum for presenting evidence. I'll wait until you've read all the court transcripts and testimony.

What?  We know the basic facts of the case.  They had a trial.  Please let us know which facts point to Ms. Knox being the perpetrator. (Keep in mind that a guy's semen was found in the victim and his bloody handprint was found at the scene).


They had a trial and everything? Oh. well I guess that settles that, then.
Wonder why people are still upset about the Anthony or Simpson trials


Still waiting on what has you so convinced that she's guilty.
 
2013-03-26 09:09:32 AM  

GungFu: fastfxr: Last time I checked, acting strange and being a retard wasn't a crime, nor did it make you guilty of a crime. YOU try being convicted of murder and facing life at her age.

Bunch of a$$hats here--acting strange != guilty.

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 468x568]

Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher

at 3 to 5 in the morning after eight hours of the fourth day of interrogation with no lawyer present.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

FTFY
 
2013-03-26 09:10:42 AM  
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.
 
2013-03-26 09:12:17 AM  
No murder weapon was found and they could arrive at no motive and the DNA was flawed, so the prosecutors say the acquittal of Knox was illogical???  Sounds to me like the acquittal was going to happen.  I would love for our officials to review the case and tell Italy "No" on the extradition.  Yes, while they can't tell Italy that they have to obey U.S. law with the bit of Double Jeopardy in a murder case that happened on Italian soil, they can still say "Unless you have any more evidence against Knox we aren't going to give up a U.S. citizen so you can continue re-trying the case until you get a conviction."
 
2013-03-26 09:13:07 AM  

lack of warmth: I wouldn't be surprised if she burned her passport at the first family BBQ after getting home


Does Italy have their version of Dog the Bounty Hunter?
 
2013-03-26 09:13:55 AM  

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.


Not if we had already attempted a prosecution on this mystery Italian, and the evidence was spotty at best. I think protection from a second prosecution for the same crime is a fundamental pillar of our legal system in the States, and the guilt/innocence of the person doesn't matter. Maybe the prosecution shouldn't suck so badly next time?

The Italians won't be seeing her until the mystery Italian you speak of becomes a real person.
 
2013-03-26 09:14:01 AM  
 GungFu:Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.
As I said before, Knox is a coont.


As I said before you're naive if you think you wouldn't have said the same thing in her position. The police wanted her to say something and they get what they want if they have you. That goes, double, triple in a country like Italy.
Would you have lasted as long as her before cracking? Maybe you would have used your extensive interrogation training to resist, eh? Or busted free using your SAS combat skills and tracked down the real killer with mad detective skills then proven your case in court as the credits rolled?
Or maybe you'd have been like the rest of us ordinary mortals, crying an interrogation room in confusion as thuggish peasants in suits scream spittle in your face from six inches away for a day solid?
 
2013-03-26 09:14:03 AM  

Great Janitor: No murder weapon was found and they could arrive at no motive and the DNA was flawed, so the prosecutors say the acquittal of Knox was illogical???  Sounds to me like the acquittal was going to happen.  I would love for our officials to review the case and tell Italy "No" on the extradition.  Yes, while they can't tell Italy that they have to obey U.S. law with the bit of Double Jeopardy in a murder case that happened on Italian soil, they can still say "Unless you have any more evidence against Knox we aren't going to give up a U.S. citizen so you can continue re-trying the case until you get a conviction."


Not to mention that they caught the guy that actually did it.
 
2013-03-26 09:15:11 AM  
Only little rich girls get away with murder.
 
2013-03-26 09:16:13 AM  

GungFu: fastfxr: Last time I checked, acting strange and being a retard wasn't a crime, nor did it make you guilty of a crime. YOU try being convicted of murder and facing life at her age.

Bunch of a$$hats here--acting strange != guilty.



Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.


So its her fault that merely suggesting someone who she thought might have killed her was jailed? Sounds like another gigantic failure in behalf of the Italian legal system.
 
2013-03-26 09:16:21 AM  

Insatiable Jesus: Only little rich girls get away with murder.


What does that have to do with Amanda Knox?
 
2013-03-26 09:16:24 AM  
Skeezy Italian Police story bro time!

Years ago, while in Rome; I and an Italian police officer witness an old man attempt to fondel a lady. Apon discovering that; both I and the victim were Americans, and the old man was Italian; the Italian police officer proceeded to state that the lady should watch where she stood next time and left, without lifting a finger.
 
2013-03-26 09:16:47 AM  

Cheeseface: 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.

Not if we had already attempted a prosecution on this mystery Italian, and the evidence was spotty at best. I think protection from a second prosecution for the same crime is a fundamental pillar of our legal system in the States, and the guilt/innocence of the person doesn't matter. Maybe the prosecution shouldn't suck so badly next time?

The Italians won't be seeing her until the mystery Italian you speak of becomes a real person.


Not to mention the Mystery Italian would be given a lawyer could he not afford one and all that testimony without one  would be inadmissable. Even OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony were afforded such a right.
 
2013-03-26 09:17:18 AM  
She's a skank.  She's not a nice person.  But I don't think the prosecution has much on her beyond that.
 
2013-03-26 09:17:43 AM  
maddogdelta:
I did not make any claims as to the story's veracity.  I merely pointed out the biography of the person that most scholars believe was the influence for the novel "The Count of Monte Christo".  Hence, the wording I chose "The original STORY"

If you want to browbeat me with your GED in Historical Liturachure, fine. But frankly, pick a fight with someone who gives a shiat, mmmmmmkay?


You posted two links!  Obviously I should have assumed from this that you had no interest in the subject?

Disagreeing with you or your sources is browbeating? I just happened to find a Monte-Cristo discussion in the middle of an American Justice vs the World pissing match fascinating.  Oh well.
 
2013-03-26 09:18:05 AM  

steverockson: doubled99: YES!!!
Fark this murdering biatch.  Maybe they can figure a way to retry Casey Anthony while they're at it.
Can't believe all the dupes here.

Please expound on what evidence there is that Ms. Knox killed anyone.


Stolen from Reddit post.

Physical Evidence

coroner concluded there were multiple assailantsKercher suffered knife wounds to both sides of her neck, most likely from different knivesKercher suffered mixture of brutal stabbings and minor torture woundsThere was no evidence of anyone other than AK/RS/RG in the cottageForensic Evidence

Kercher DNA and Knox DNA on knife found at Sollecito's flat (Sollecito confirmed blood by saying he cut Kercher's finger)Knox bloody footprints, one in Knox's bedroom, two in the hallKnox and Kercher mixed DNA traces in Romanelli's bedroom and hallwoman's footprint on bedsheet in Kercher's roomSollecito bloody footprint on bathroom matSollecito DNA on Kercher's bra claspKnox DNA on Kercher's braPartial match to Knox's DNA on Kercher's bra claspTestimony Evidence

Knox confessed she was at the scene and heard Kercher being killed, she later retracted her confessionno alibi for Knox between 20:30 and 01:00 (Sollecito testified he was asleep and she may have gone out)Knox and Sollecito changed their stories several times as new evidence emergedSollecito claimed he used his computer at home but no access between 21:10 and 01:00Knox claimed they had dinner at 23:00, disproved by Sollecito's phone call with his father about plumbing leaks 20:30Knox claimed she had shower at cottage despite the broken front window, open front door and blood in the bathroomKnox and Sollecito claimed to be asleep until 10:30 but Sollecito computer accessed at 05:30, mobile phone used at 06:00 and 09:30Knox and Sollecito knew details about the murder scene but were not in line of sight when the door was openedsignificant inconsistencies in Knox and Sollecito testimonies, both tried to blame it on memory lossWitness Evidence

Fabio Gioffredi (sees AK/RS/RG together several days before murder so they knew each other)Antonio Curatolo (sees AK/RS at 21:30 and 23:00 basketball court, chatting animatedly, watching gate of cottage)Hekuran Kokomani (sees AK/RS in car by cottage, hits RS, AK wields knife BUT Albanian drug dealer and his car parked on their drive?)Mara Capezzali (hears a woman's scream and two people running from cottage 23:00-23:30)Antonella Monacchia (hears man and woman arguing in Italian and a loud scream some time after 22:00)Maria Dramis (hears footsteps on metal staircase at 23:00)Giampaolo Lambrotti (mechanic who fixed broken-down car 22:30-23:30, saw small dark-coloured car parked outside the cottage)Marco Quintavalle (sees AK in grocery store 07:45 morning after murder)Alessandra Formica and boyfriend (Guede bumps into them when he is leaving cottage 22:30)Mrs Lana (receives bomb threat 22:00, finds Kercher phones the following morning, coincidence?)CCTV of woman in white skirt approaching cottage at 20:43 (corrected to 20:51), Kercher was with Purton until 20:55CCTV of Guede approaching cottage at 20:10 (corrected to 20:18) and again at 20:40 (corrected to 20:48)Modified Murder Scene Evidence

Kercher's body moved after death (shoulder and bra strap imprint in dried blood), Guede seen leaving scene quicklyfake break-in (broken glass on both sides of window sill, glass on top of clothes/PC, closed shutters, impossible to climb in without cutting hands on glass, no systemmatic search for valuable items, no valuable items taken, trail of tiny glass particles from Filomena's room out of house)Knox reading lamp found in Kercher's room on the floor behind the door indicates clean-upNo Knox fingerprints/DNA in her own room indicates clean-upNo heelprint on floor next to bathroom mat with partial footprint and no footprints from the bathroom indicates clean-upKnox and Sollecito are the only people with a motive to rearrange the crime sceneCharacter Evidence

Knox and Sollecito did not break open Kercher's door for several hours depite concerns for her safetyKnox falsely accused Lumumba of the murder to save herselfKnox breakdown when she was shown the knifes in the drawer at the cottageKnox irrational behaviour when arrested and lack of remorse for the victimKnox wrote a story about drugging and raping a young girl and published it on her websiteKnox promised Sollecito she would never take drugs again after the murderSollecito used hard drugsSollecito formerly disciplined by university for watching bestiality pornSollecito collected guro hentai and knivesSollecito diary entry when Guede arrested, saying he was concerned about an 'unknown'Sollecito carried pocket knife which matched murder weapon size, boasted to father "stupid police didn't find it"Other Evidence

Brutal attack followed by someone trying to help the victim indicates several people at cottageKnox and Sollecito phones both switched off all evening, unusual for themKnox had a similar amount of cash on her person to the money stolen from Kercher's bedroomKnox had a minor cut/scratch on her neck the following morning
 
2013-03-26 09:18:16 AM  

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
 
2013-03-26 09:20:54 AM  

JohnAnnArbor: She's a skank.  She's not a nice person.  But I don't think the prosecution has much on her beyond that.


Do you know her? i share a few aquaintences with her and they dont say those things.

/have never met her
 
2013-03-26 09:23:01 AM  

ace in your face: JohnAnnArbor: She's a skank.  She's not a nice person.  But I don't think the prosecution has much on her beyond that.

Do you know her? i share a few aquaintences with her and they dont say those things.

/have never met her


She was supposed to be studying overseas.  Instead, she was drugging up and screwing people she barely knew.  That's skanky.
 
2013-03-26 09:23:07 AM  
Oh Christ fark. If you're going to give a new fancy WYSIWYG posting area make it work.

Physical Evidence
- coroner concluded there were multiple assailants
- Kercher suffered knife wounds to both sides of her neck, most likely from different knives
- Kercher suffered mixture of brutal stabbings and minor torture wounds
- There was no evidence of anyone other than AK/RS/RG in the cottage

Forensic Evidence
- Kercher DNA and Knox DNA on knife found at Sollecito's flat (Sollecito confirmed blood by saying he cut Kercher's finger)
- Knox bloody footprints, one in Knox's bedroom, two in the hall
- Knox and Kercher mixed DNA traces in Romanelli's bedroom and hall
- woman's footprint on bedsheet in Kercher's room
- Sollecito bloody footprint on bathroom mat
- Sollecito DNA on Kercher's bra clasp
- Knox DNA on Kercher's bra
- Partial match to Knox's DNA on Kercher's bra clasp
Testimony Evidence
- Knox confessed she was at the scene and heard Kercher being killed, she later retracted her confession
- no alibi for Knox between 20:30 and 01:00 (Sollecito testified he was asleep and she may have gone out)
- Knox and Sollecito changed their stories several times as new evidence emerged
- Sollecito claimed he used his computer at home but no access between 21:10 and 01:00
- Knox claimed they had dinner at 23:00, disproved by Sollecito's phone call with his father about plumbing leaks 20:30
- Knox claimed she had shower at cottage despite the broken front window, open front door and blood in the bathroom
- Knox and Sollecito claimed to be asleep until 10:30 but Sollecito computer accessed at 05:30, mobile phone used at 06:00 and 09:30
- Knox and Sollecito knew details about the murder scene but were not in line of sight when the door was opened
- Significant inconsistencies in Knox and Sollecito testimonies, both tried to blame it on memory loss
Witness Evidence
- Fabio Gioffredi (sees AK/RS/RG together several days before murder so they knew each other)
- Antonio Curatolo (sees AK/RS at 21:30 and 23:00 basketball court, chatting animatedly, watching gate of cottage)
- Hekuran Kokomani (sees AK/RS in car by cottage, hits RS, AK wields knife BUT Albanian drug dealer and his car parked on their drive?)
- Mara Capezzali (hears a woman's scream and two people running from cottage 23:00-23:30)
- Antonella Monacchia (hears man and woman arguing in Italian and a loud scream some time after 22:00)
- Maria Dramis (hears footsteps on metal staircase at 23:00)
- Giampaolo Lambrotti (mechanic who fixed broken-down car 22:30-23:30, saw small dark-coloured car parked outside the cottage)
- Marco Quintavalle (sees AK in grocery store 07:45 morning after murder)
- Alessandra Formica and boyfriend (Guede bumps into them when he is leaving cottage 22:30)
- Mrs Lana (receives bomb threat 22:00, finds Kercher phones the following morning, coincidence?)
- CCTV of woman in white skirt approaching cottage at 20:43 (corrected to 20:51), Kercher was with Purton until 20:55
- CCTV of Guede approaching cottage at 20:10 (corrected to 20:18) and again at 20:40 (corrected to 20:48)
Modified Murder Scene Evidence
- Kercher's body moved after death (shoulder and bra strap imprint in dried blood), Guede seen leaving scene quickly
- fake break-in (broken glass on both sides of window sill, glass on top of clothes/PC, closed shutters, impossible to climb in without cutting hands on glass, no systemmatic search for valuable items, no valuable items taken, trail of tiny glass particles from Filomena's room out of house)
-Knox reading lamp found in Kercher's room on the floor behind the door indicates clean-up
- No Knox fingerprints/DNA in her own room indicates clean-up
- No heelprint on floor next to bathroom mat with partial footprint and no footprints from the bathroom indicates clean-up
- Knox and Sollecito are the only people with a motive to rearrange the crime scene
Character Evidence
- Knox and Sollecito did not break open Kercher's door for several hours depite concerns for her safety
- Knox falsely accused Lumumba of the murder to save herself
- Knox breakdown when she was shown the knifes in the drawer at the cottage
- Knox irrational behaviour when arrested and lack of remorse for the victim
- Knox wrote a story about drugging and raping a young girl and published it on her website
- Knox promised Sollecito she would never take drugs again after the murder
- Sollecito used hard drugs
- Sollecito formerly disciplined by university for watching bestiality porn
- Sollecito collected guro hentai and knives
- Sollecito diary entry when Guede arrested, saying he was concerned about an 'unknown'
- Sollecito carried pocket knife which matched murder weapon size, boasted to father "stupid police didn't find it"
Other Evidence
- Brutal attack followed by someone trying to help the victim indicates several people at cottage
- Knox and Sollecito phones both switched off all evening, unusual for them
- Knox had a similar amount of cash on her person to the money stolen from Kercher's bedroom
- Knox had a minor cut/scratch on her neck the following morning
 
2013-03-26 09:24:18 AM  

GungFu: Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.


Wow.  I didn't know that foreign students had authority to arrest people.  If the accusation was baseless as you said, then what farking investigator believed it.  That's the investigator's fault, not hers.  The investigator is the coont, as shown by farking up the entire investigation.
 
2013-03-26 09:24:22 AM  

ace in your face: GungFu: fastfxr: Last time I checked, acting strange and being a retard wasn't a crime, nor did it make you guilty of a crime. YOU try being convicted of murder and facing life at her age.

Bunch of a$$hats here--acting strange != guilty.

Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.

So its her fault that merely suggesting someone who she thought might have killed her was jailed? Sounds like another gigantic failure in behalf of the Italian legal system.


Merely Suggesting someone? Brilliant!
She accused him of being the killer, dummy!
 
2013-03-26 09:25:10 AM  

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.
 
2013-03-26 09:26:32 AM  
www.dvrbs.com

i'm in
 
2013-03-26 09:28:30 AM  

Bruce Campbell: GungFu: Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.

Wow.  I didn't know that foreign students had authority to arrest people.  If the accusation was baseless as you said, then what farking investigator believed it.  That's the investigator's fault, not hers.  The investigator is the coont, as shown by farking up the entire investigation.



Wow, what a retarded judicial system you have in your head.

I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.
 
2013-03-26 09:30:20 AM  

GungFu: Bruce Campbell: GungFu: Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.

Wow.  I didn't know that foreign students had authority to arrest people.  If the accusation was baseless as you said, then what farking investigator believed it.  That's the investigator's fault, not hers.  The investigator is the coont, as shown by farking up the entire investigation.


Wow, what a retarded judicial system you have in your head.

I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.


So you don't care that she was interrogated for hours/days with no lawyer present and coerced to give a statement?
 
2013-03-26 09:30:42 AM  
GungFu:She accused him of being the killer, dummy!
You are the dummy here if you don't take into account the f*ck knows how many hours she'd been under interrogation without a lawyer. You're a fool.
 
2013-03-26 09:31:54 AM  

GungFu: Bruce Campbell: GungFu: Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.

Wow.  I didn't know that foreign students had authority to arrest people.  If the accusation was baseless as you said, then what farking investigator believed it.  That's the investigator's fault, not hers.  The investigator is the coont, as shown by farking up the entire investigation.


Wow, what a retarded judicial system you have in your head.

I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.


How about this. I interrogate you in an Italian Police station for four days straight and you not say anything false even when I'm screaming out you for not giving me the information that I want.
 
2013-03-26 09:33:08 AM  

darkscout: Stolen from Reddit post.


I can't link directly to the comment, but here's the Reddit post in question.

And here's your counterargument.

GungFu: I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.


Because you're going to be thinking properly while being detained by the cops for days without the presence of a lawyer?
 
2013-03-26 09:33:41 AM  
GungFu:She accused him of being the killer, dummy!
You are the dummy here if you don't take into account the f*ck knows how many hours she'd been under interrogation without a lawyer. You're a fool if you believe the crap the tabloids peddle.
 
2013-03-26 09:34:44 AM  

GungFu: ace in your face: GungFu: fastfxr: Last time I checked, acting strange and being a retard wasn't a crime, nor did it make you guilty of a crime. YOU try being convicted of murder and facing life at her age.

Bunch of a$$hats here--acting strange != guilty.

Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.

So its her fault that merely suggesting someone who she thought might have killed her was jailed? Sounds like another gigantic failure in behalf of the Italian legal system.

Merely Suggesting someone? Brilliant!
She accused him of being the killer, dummy!


So you think if I call up the police and tell them "omg Gung Fu comitted murder", when infact i may think you did it, its my fault that the police throw you in jail fir 2 weeks? No. Its the police fault that he was held in jail. He should have been merely called in for questioning but the corrupt Italian system let him languish in jail.
 
2013-03-26 09:34:59 AM  

GungFu: fastfxr: Last time I checked, acting strange and being a retard wasn't a crime, nor did it make you guilty of a crime. YOU try being convicted of murder and facing life at her age.

Bunch of a$$hats here--acting strange != guilty.

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 468x568]

Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.


Well, she did spend like 3 years in jail for a crime she probably didn't commit.  Does that make you feel any better?
 
2013-03-26 09:35:07 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: The good thing about this is that she'll most likely end up having to do porn to pay her legal bills.

[blogs.seattleweekly.com image 300x300]

Oh yeah, that's it.


I hear shes killer in the sack.
 
2013-03-26 09:35:22 AM  

darkscout: Oh Christ fark. If you're going to give a new fancy WYSIWYG posting area make it work.

Physical Evidence
- coroner concluded there were multiple assailants
- Kercher suffered knife wounds to both sides of her neck, most likely from different knives
- Kercher suffered mixture of brutal stabbings and minor torture wounds
- There was no evidence of anyone other than AK/RS/RG in the cottage

Forensic Evidence
- Kercher DNA and Knox DNA on knife found at Sollecito's flat (Sollecito confirmed blood by saying he cut Kercher's finger)
- Knox bloody footprints, one in Knox's bedroom, two in the hall
- Knox and Kercher mixed DNA traces in Romanelli's bedroom and hall
- woman's footprint on bedsheet in Kercher's room
- Sollecito bloody footprint on bathroom mat
- Sollecito DNA on Kercher's bra clasp
- Knox DNA on Kercher's bra
- Partial match to Knox's DNA on Kercher's bra clasp
Testimony Evidence
- Knox confessed she was at the scene and heard Kercher being killed, she later retracted her confession
- no alibi for Knox between 20:30 and 01:00 (Sollecito testified he was asleep and she may have gone out)
- Knox and Sollecito changed their stories several times as new evidence emerged
- Sollecito claimed he used his computer at home but no access between 21:10 and 01:00
- Knox claimed they had dinner at 23:00, disproved by Sollecito's phone call with his father about plumbing leaks 20:30
- Knox claimed she had shower at cottage despite the broken front window, open front door and blood in the bathroom
- Knox and Sollecito claimed to be asleep until 10:30 but Sollecito computer accessed at 05:30, mobile phone used at 06:00 and 09:30
- Knox and Sollecito knew details about the murder scene but were not in line of sight when the door was opened
- Significant inconsistencies in Knox and Sollecito testimonies, both tried to blame it on memory loss
Witness Evidence
- Fabio Gioffredi (sees AK/RS/RG together several days before murder so they knew each other)
- Antonio Curatolo (sees ...


The problem here is that there is no evidence of any connection whatsoever between Knox and Guerde.
 
2013-03-26 09:37:45 AM  

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.
 
2013-03-26 09:38:26 AM  

GungFu: Bruce Campbell: GungFu: Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.

Wow.  I didn't know that foreign students had authority to arrest people.  If the accusation was baseless as you said, then what farking investigator believed it.  That's the investigator's fault, not hers.  The investigator is the coont, as shown by farking up the entire investigation.


Wow, what a retarded judicial system you have in your head.

I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.


Retard thinking. Is that being 100% sure she's guilty with no evidence of it? Shut the fark up already.
 
2013-03-26 09:38:47 AM  

Bungles: doczoidberg: Bungles: jority of people who consider either innocent are also those in their home countries, whereas the international community sees things quite differently.

WHY???????

Why do people tend to lean towards the innocence of their countrymen when charged abroad? It's just sort of a natural thing to do.


I have this wierd quirk of believing a person is innocent until PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt of their quilt in a court whose foundation is absolute truth and facts. Yes, there are absolutes and yes, there is truth so don't start on that "muddying the water" tactic. Save that for politics.
 
2013-03-26 09:41:13 AM  

ethics-gradient: GungFu:She accused him of being the killer, dummy!
You are the dummy here if you don't take into account the f*ck knows how many hours she'd been under interrogation without a lawyer. You're a fool.


steverockson: GungFu: Bruce Campbell: GungFu: Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.

Wow.  I didn't know that foreign students had authority to arrest people.  If the accusation was baseless as you said, then what farking investigator believed it.  That's the investigator's fault, not hers.  The investigator is the coont, as shown by farking up the entire investigation.


Wow, what a retarded judicial system you have in your head.

I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.

So you don't care that she was interrogated for hours/days with no lawyer present and coerced to give a statement?



So you don't care she named an innocent man and say, not Guede, a person she knew and who was later convicted of Kircher's murder, as a possible suspect?

And you don't care that the poor girl was interrogated for days and was hit in the head have all been denied by the Italian police? But of course, they are lying about that, aren't they? Of course they are!
 
2013-03-26 09:41:20 AM  
All you have to do is look at her face, and you KNOW she's guilty.
It's really that simple to anyone with perception and good judgement.
 
2013-03-26 09:41:48 AM  

GungFu: I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.


I'm retarded for expecting investigators to determine the veracity of an accusation, especially one given while under duress, more rapidly and intelligently than taking two farking weeks.  Good to know.

Prick.
 
2013-03-26 09:41:58 AM  

AxemRed: Several European countries have declined to extradite Roman Polanski.


That's correct. France doesn't extradite its own nationals. Switzerland treated the farcical DOJ request with the contempt it deserved. However, Italy does have a bipartite agreement with the US. Treating Europe (Switzerland isn't even an EU country) as a cultural and legal monolith is almost always misguided.
 
2013-03-26 09:44:33 AM  

shonday: GungFu: Bruce Campbell: GungFu: Oh Hai, Yanks! My name is Patrick Lumumba.
Your Innocent Pretty White American Girl Abroad, Amanda Knox, accused me of killing Meredith Kircher.
I spent two weeks in jail because of her baseless accusation.

As I said before, Knox is a coont.

Wow.  I didn't know that foreign students had authority to arrest people.  If the accusation was baseless as you said, then what farking investigator believed it.  That's the investigator's fault, not hers.  The investigator is the coont, as shown by farking up the entire investigation.


Wow, what a retarded judicial system you have in your head.

I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.

Retard thinking. Is that being 100% sure she's guilty with no evidence of it? Shut the fark up already.



No.

What retard assumes that she is 100% guilty? I didn't mention anything in regards to whether she is guilty of the murder or not. You just made that up. Retard. Reading carefully before writing. Idiot.
 
2013-03-26 09:44:49 AM  

tkwasny: Bungles: doczoidberg: Bungles: jority of people who consider either innocent are also those in their home countries, whereas the international community sees things quite differently.

WHY???????

Why do people tend to lean towards the innocence of their countrymen when charged abroad? It's just sort of a natural thing to do.

I have this wierd quirk of believing a person is innocent until PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt of their quilt in a court whose foundation is absolute truth and facts. Yes, there are absolutes and yes, there is truth so don't start on that "muddying the water" tactic. Save that for politics.


The "muddying of the waters" has already happened....as I was saying before, just compare the coverage inside the US and outside.

After the first trail, when she was found guilty, people oddly didn't consider he guilty.... just "presumed innocent until proven guilty...then still presume innocent".
 
2013-03-26 09:45:46 AM  

Bungles: The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


The UK pushed the media angle far more than the US. The US covered it, but it was never a central story.
 
2013-03-26 09:45:57 AM  

Bruce Campbell: GungFu: I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.

I'm retarded for expecting investigators to determine the veracity of an accusation, especially one given while under duress, more rapidly and intelligently than taking two farking weeks.  Good to know.

Prick.



Trying to backtrack. Prick.
 
2013-03-26 09:47:18 AM  
...like the angry Gavel of God
 
2013-03-26 09:48:51 AM  

This text is now purple: Bungles: The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).

The UK pushed the media angle far more than the US. The US covered it, but it was never a central story.



I mean that was pretty much the common view outside the US (in the UK, Australia, and Germany at least, they're the only three countries I was in for any length during the trial and directly witnessed.)
 
2013-03-26 09:50:08 AM  
I was refreshing my memory on this case.  The prosecutors working theory was that Knox and Sollecito committed the murder with Lumumba.  When they found the DNA and fingerprints of Guede all over the room where Kercher was murdered they just substituted Guede for Lumumba. Voila!

/Nice police work there chief.
 
2013-03-26 09:50:16 AM  

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.


I doubt you'd see much agitation for the extradition of an Italian citizen already tried and acquitted of murder, who then subsequently returned to Italy.

Because under American jurisprudence, that man is innocent.

But you might talk the US into trading Knox for Polanski.
 
2013-03-26 09:53:24 AM  

GungFu: And you don't care that the poor girl was interrogated for days and was hit in the head have all been denied by the Italian police? But of course, they are lying about that, aren't they? Of course they are!


Regardless of the (dubious at best, IMHO) integrity of the Italian police, the claim regarding Lumumba was made in the presence of her lawyer.
 
2013-03-26 09:59:43 AM  
She is lucky this happened in Italy and eventually got away.I'm sure courts over there are about as legit as ours.
 
2013-03-26 10:00:04 AM  
Heh... This thread is a train wreck.

She was acquitted on appeal. Unless the prosecutors have some new evidence, I see no reason why she should be tried again. Italy must have some farked up laws if a person, who was acquitted can be retried until the prosecutors get the verdict they want.

If the courts in Italy want to try her in absentia, that's their business, but the US has no obligation to surrender a US citizen, who was, and this is the important part, acquitted on appeal.

I don't know whether she actually took part in the murder or not, so I have no strong opinion one way or the other, but the Italian courts let her go. I see no reason what-so-ever why the US should allow her to be extradited to be tried again.
 
2013-03-26 10:04:33 AM  

doczoidberg: They NEVER do


If OJ had kept his nose clean, he would have walked. Casey Anthony walked. The fact of the matter is that the government gets one crack at you in our system, and if they fail, and if you don't fark up later, you are free.

On the other hand, from further reading it appears that in the Knox case we have an initial conviction overturned on appeal that the high court is throwing back for retrial. That's actually  not double jeopardy.
 
2013-03-26 10:06:17 AM  

This text is now purple: I doubt you'd see much agitation for the extradition of an Italian citizen already tried and acquitted of murder, who then subsequently returned to Italy.


There seems to be some question as to whether she was actually acquitted under Italian law, but I take your point.
 
2013-03-26 10:06:39 AM  

doglover: of a legal system. The truth doesn't matter, speed doesn't matter, common sense doesn't matter: as long as the lawyers have money to burn the battle isn't over.


This is less of a problem with the legal system generally as with prosecutors whose career prospects depend on putting people in jail, not justice, and who also can't ever admit to convicting (or usually even prosecuting) an innocent person.  Even for the ones who want to be honest, cognitive dissonance sets in and you end up with arguments that DNA testing of old convictions shouldn't be allowed because it might call into question old convictions.
 
2013-03-26 10:07:54 AM  
It think the investigators in the Knox case and the West Memphis PD must have gone to the same evidence gathering seminar.
 
2013-03-26 10:09:09 AM  

CheatCommando: doczoidberg: They NEVER do

If OJ had kept his nose clean, he would have walked. Casey Anthony walked. The fact of the matter is that the government gets one crack at you in our system, and if they fail, and if you don't fark up later, you are free.

On the other hand, from further reading it appears that in the Knox case we have an initial conviction overturned on appeal that the high court is throwing back for retrial. That's actually  not double jeopardy.



Like OJ, she's writing a book. Let's see if that pans out the same way.

(and I look forward to her donating a proportion of her $4million fee to the poor  Kercher family......)
 
2013-03-26 10:20:43 AM  
The Italian judicial system is a piece of shiat. Same for France.

The American system is not perfect, but I'd rather be wrongly charged of a crime here than in Italy or France.

I'd rather not be wrongly charged of a crime anywhere... just sayin.

Also, I found this pic of a workstation in an Italian forensics lab...

 oi47.tinypic.com
 
2013-03-26 10:22:16 AM  

RevMark: The Italian judicial system is a piece of shiat. Same for France.

The American system is not perfect, but I'd rather be wrongly charged of a crime here than in Italy or France.

I'd rather not be wrongly charged of a crime anywhere... just sayin.

Also, I found this pic of a workstation in an Italian forensics lab...

 [oi47.tinypic.com image 320x241]



What's your issue with the French legal system?
 
2013-03-26 10:23:07 AM  

GungFu: Trying to backtrack. Prick.


There was no backtrack there, moron.
 
2013-03-26 10:26:50 AM  

ethics-gradient: GungFu: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.

I'm British and I don't believe your version for a minute, it stinks like sh*te.
Anyone who has been picked up by a Mediterranean country's "police" and screamed at for several hours solid knows you're gonna end up saying what they want you to say. I was ready to "admit" to being a 6' German after only 2 hours (felt like much longer) so please spare me that "accused an innocent man" crap. She said what the police wanted, you would have done the same.
A charitable view is that you're naive in the ways of the world.


Zeb Hesselgresser: You just can't stress this enough, when questioned by the police,

 STFU

These two statements remind me of the "Don't Talk to Police" video.  Specifically, it reminds me of the second half, where the police officer points out that in other countries (and I'm sure Italy is one he means) they start out interrogations using fists instead of words.  I would not put much stock in anything Amanda Knox said to authorities, especially if she didn't have an attorney (or as has been said, even a professional translator) present...
 
2013-03-26 10:28:12 AM  

Thunderpipes: ace in your face: I don't think the US would ever agree, especially since (fark lawyers chime in?) it would be illegal to retry her within our legal system.

Probably the key point here. US can refuse, especially if the country's court system is too harsh and different.

Besides, the EU is never real happy to extradite people back to us. Screw em.


We'll trade her for Roman Polanski
 
2013-03-26 10:33:56 AM  

DArque Bishop: ethics-gradient: GungFu: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.

I'm British and I don't believe your version for a minute, it stinks like sh*te.
Anyone who has been picked up by a Mediterranean country's "police" and screamed at for several hours solid knows you're gonna end up saying what they want you to say. I was ready to "admit" to being a 6' German after only 2 hours (felt like much longer) so please spare me that "accused an innocent man" crap. She said what the police wanted, you would have done the same.
A charitable view is that you're naive in the ways of the world.

Zeb Hesselgresser: You just can't stress this enough, when questioned by the police, STFU

These two statements remind me of the "Don't Talk to Police" video.  Specifically, it reminds me of the second half, where the police officer points out that in other countries (and I'm sure Italy is one he means) they start out interrogations using fists instead of words.  I would not put much stock in anything Amanda Knox said to authorities, especially if she didn't have an attorney (or as has been said, even a professional translator) present...


When we moved to Germany with the US military we were briefed on the fact that both German and French (we are near thr french border) are quick to beat the crap out of anyone they think is even associated with a crime. A good friend of mine was beaten when the polizei showed up outside a club where my friend was one of dozens who were watching 2 people get into a street fight. We were also warned that the German and French are quick to harass americans and especially military, and especially people of color. My cousins are Italian (piedmontese) and they said that police are similar there. I have no doubt they slapped her around.
 
2013-03-26 10:35:35 AM  

spiderpaz: Thunderpipes: ace in your face: I don't think the US would ever agree, especially since (fark lawyers chime in?) it would be illegal to retry her within our legal system.

Probably the key point here. US can refuse, especially if the country's court system is too harsh and different.

Besides, the EU is never real happy to extradite people back to us. Screw em.

We'll trade her for Roman Polanski


Roman Polanski was found guilty. Amanda Knox was acquitted.
 
2013-03-26 10:39:41 AM  

Bungles: The "muddying of the waters" has already happened....as I was saying before, just compare the coverage inside the US and outside.

After the first trail, when she was found guilty, people oddly didn't consider he guilty.... just "presumed innocent until proven guilty...then still presume innocent".



Were you paying attention to the farce they called a trial?  I think that most of all, this case shows how anti-American sentiment in Europe (they love to use the US as a patsy to let themselves off the hook whenever possible) has grown to the point where it is today: a situation where they are so unhinged and irrational that they leap at the chance to draw wild conclusions like the one in this case, so long as it could potentially hurt an American.

The theory the prosecution has been pushing is a joke.
 
2013-03-26 10:40:56 AM  

ace in your face: spiderpaz: Thunderpipes: ace in your face: I don't think the US would ever agree, especially since (fark lawyers chime in?) it would be illegal to retry her within our legal system.

Probably the key point here. US can refuse, especially if the country's court system is too harsh and different.

Besides, the EU is never real happy to extradite people back to us. Screw em.

We'll trade her for Roman Polanski

Roman Polanski was found guilty. Amanda Knox was acquitted.


I was just pointing out the EU's history of being ChoMo protecting twats when it comes to US extradition requests, so I hope we get to return the favor soon.
 
2013-03-26 10:43:26 AM  

spiderpaz: Bungles: The "muddying of the waters" has already happened....as I was saying before, just compare the coverage inside the US and outside.

After the first trail, when she was found guilty, people oddly didn't consider he guilty.... just "presumed innocent until proven guilty...then still presume innocent".


Were you paying attention to the farce they called a trial?  I think that most of all, this case shows how anti-American sentiment in Europe (they love to use the US as a patsy to let themselves off the hook whenever possible) has grown to the point where it is today: a situation where they are so unhinged and irrational that they leap at the chance to draw wild conclusions like the one in this case, so long as it could potentially hurt an American.

The theory the prosecution has been pushing is a joke.



You've sort of proved my point.
 
2013-03-26 10:55:27 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Someone else who was tried in the media and was also acquitted:

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 422x512]


Of course she will never be tried again for the same crime. Apparently Italy can just get do-over after do-over until they get the verdict they want.
 
2013-03-26 11:01:35 AM  

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.
 
2013-03-26 11:06:37 AM  
*Fark lawyers are always entertaining
 
2013-03-26 11:12:19 AM  

Paris1127: Oh cavolo, non questa merda di nuovo...

/is that idiot Giuliano "ZOMG SATANIC RITUALS" Mignini still prosecuting?


Mignini should be in prison, or an insane asylum.
 
2013-03-26 11:18:01 AM  
I have no idea if she's guilty or not, and I grant that the Italians have botched the job.

But it is irritating in the extreme when you have all these bloviating, white-knight Farkers who are so smug and sure that she's innocent that they taunt anyone who questions them with "No one ever gives any evidence.  They got nothin'!"  And they do this over and over again.  Then someone posts a list of the evidence that the prosecution considered significant, and those white knights just farking disappear.

/Except genius steverockson, who mentions "no link to Rudy Guede" right farking below eyewitness testimony of said link.
 
2013-03-26 11:19:08 AM  

viscountalpha: Am I mistaken in thinking this is a load of garbage from the start?


That's exactly what it is.  Mignini is a clown with an inexplicable imagination.  He sees cults and orgies wherever he looks.
 
2013-03-26 11:20:22 AM  

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).
 
2013-03-26 11:20:30 AM  
According to the story she is not required to show up, so what's the point?
 
2013-03-26 11:23:34 AM  

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

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


Yep, he is.   Highly recommend reading Douglas Preston's Monster of Florence.

 

Paris1127: 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.


D'Oh, I see that's already covered.   Really can't recommed the book enough.

And Italy, I am very disappointed in you  :(
 
2013-03-26 11:24:42 AM  

Msphere: But it is irritating in the extreme when you have all these bloviating, white-knight Farkers who are so smug and sure that she's innocent...


The court itself said she was innocent, that's what an acquittal means. I know this isn't the American Judicial system, but if it were that's it, she's not guilty.  And before you say "O.J.", yes he also is not guilty, of the murder anyway.  But apparently in Italy Double Jeopardy doesn't exist.
 
2013-03-26 11:25:07 AM  
According to the extradition treaty with Italy:
ARTICLE VI
Non Bis in Idem
"Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested."

Does this mean that extradition from the US is prohibited on double jeopardy grounds only if the person has been "convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed" in the US?  Or does it mean that "Extradition shall not be granted... by the Requested Party" if the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned for the same acts in either the US or Italy?
 
2013-03-26 11:26:23 AM  

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"

....

and then way the hell down the line, there's "Almost definitely innocent, but we could concoct some utterly absurd scenario in which you might be guilty." -> that's where Amanda Knox and Sollecito are, and their lives are being ruined because of it. So yeah, fark the Italian "justice" system.

Unfortunately, While Knox can sit it out comfortably in Seattle, Sollecito is an Italian citizen. Sucks to be him.
 
2013-03-26 11:28:38 AM  

olddinosaur: According to the story she is not required to show up, so what's the point?


The point is her Italian-citizen ex-boyfriend is also being charged, so while she can sit it out in the US, he's pretty much farked.
 
2013-03-26 11:35:06 AM  

Msphere: I have no idea if she's guilty or not, and I grant that the Italians have botched the job.

But it is irritating in the extreme when you have all these bloviating, white-knight Farkers who are so smug and sure that she's innocent that they taunt anyone who questions them with "No one ever gives any evidence.  They got nothin'!"  And they do this over and over again.  Then someone posts a list of the evidence that the prosecution considered significant, and those white knights just farking disappear.

/Except genius steverockson, who mentions "no link to Rudy Guede" right farking below eyewitness testimony of said link.


People should probably stop posting "evidence" like "she sleeps with dudes" "she did cartwheels" "the boyfriend likes manga". Then they might be taken seriously.
 
2013-03-26 11:37:09 AM  

manimal2878: ethics-gradient: manwithplanx: I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.

Yes I think we do, which is something I personally find appaling and frightening; that an incompetant system like Italy can reach out and grab people from here in the UK. (Not that the UK is perfect by any means, but the cynical stupidity of some of the other EU countries beats us by a long shot.)
Why did our politicians allow this? I reckon it's actually the same root cause as the Euro crisis, a refusal to admit to the glaring reality that different EU countries have very different standards of competance in policing, judiciary, government and finance. Let's face it, some countries are better at some things than others.

Had Knox and Sollecito been tried in a British court of law I'm sure the judge would have ruled case dismissed within less than a day and they would have walked free without a stain on their characters.

I didn't think the UK was a member of the EU.


What? The UK is a member of the EU, but not a member of the single currency Eurozone.
 
2013-03-26 11:38:09 AM  
I am no extradition lawyer but wouldn't Italy have to present some sort of case to why the US should send her back?
 
2013-03-26 11:39:42 AM  

Msphere: I have no idea if she's guilty or not, and I grant that the Italians have botched the job.

But it is irritating in the extreme when you have all these bloviating, white-knight Farkers who are so smug and sure that she's innocent that they taunt anyone who questions them with "No one ever gives any evidence.  They got nothin'!"  And they do this over and over again.  Then someone posts a list of the evidence that the prosecution considered significant, and those white knights just farking disappear.

/Except genius steverockson, who mentions "no link to Rudy Guede" right farking below eyewitness testimony of said link.


I may not be a genius but I can read what the appeals judges wrote about it:
The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".
 
2013-03-26 11:41:19 AM  

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.
 
2013-03-26 11:44:55 AM  
It really doesn't matter if she is innocent or not.People go to jail all time for things they didn't do.And at the same time people get off for crimes they did commit.It is just about how you play the game.
 
2013-03-26 11:45:13 AM  
Mignini probably blew the il Mostro case for all time and he sees satanists under every doorstop.  The case is bullshiat and this retrial is bullshiat.
 
2013-03-26 11:46:51 AM  

ukexpat: manimal2878: ethics-gradient: manwithplanx: I'm curious as to whether the rest of the EU would have to hand her over should she go to any member country.

Yes I think we do, which is something I personally find appaling and frightening; that an incompetant system like Italy can reach out and grab people from here in the UK. (Not that the UK is perfect by any means, but the cynical stupidity of some of the other EU countries beats us by a long shot.)
Why did our politicians allow this? I reckon it's actually the same root cause as the Euro crisis, a refusal to admit to the glaring reality that different EU countries have very different standards of competance in policing, judiciary, government and finance. Let's face it, some countries are better at some things than others.

Had Knox and Sollecito been tried in a British court of law I'm sure the judge would have ruled case dismissed within less than a day and they would have walked free without a stain on their characters.

I didn't think the UK was a member of the EU.

What? The UK is a member of the EU, but not a member of the single currency Eurozone.


I know that the UK was part of the EU but it's annoying that you have to go through customs inspections because they are not part of the Schengen Agreement. At least you go through customs before you board the trains, at least in Paris.
 
2013-03-26 11:47:00 AM  

miss diminutive: Arthur Jumbles: 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.

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 460x288]

Isn't this man, Rudy Guede, already in jail for raping and murdering Kercher?

Well he should definitely spend some time behind bars for forever ruining the beret with his giant fivehead.


Well done.
 
2013-03-26 11:50:39 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: The good thing about this is that she'll most likely end up having to do porn to pay her legal bills.

[blogs.seattleweekly.com image 300x300]

Oh yeah, that's it.


Well, she already engaged in a satanic sex orgy that went wildly wrong, or something that could only be improved if someone could work in "heavy metal music" and "satanic ritual abuse".
 
2013-03-26 11:52:07 AM  
Again, the idiotic prosecutor was working from a theory that Knox and Sollecito killed Kercher with Lumumba (whom they knew well and WERE and associated with).  When they matched the DNA to Guede the idiotic prosecutors just substituted Guede for Lumumba in their scenario. Problem Solved! (except for the fact that Knox and Sollecito were in no way connected to Guede).
 
2013-03-26 11:52:49 AM  

joeflood: Popcorn Johnny: The good thing about this is that she'll most likely end up having to do porn to pay her legal bills.

[blogs.seattleweekly.com image 300x300]

Oh yeah, that's it.

Well, she already engaged in a satanic sex orgy that went wildly wrong, or something that could only be improved if someone could work in "heavy metal music" and "satanic ritual abuse".



Are we talking about Amanda Knox or the West Memphis 3?  I get confused...
 
2013-03-26 11:53:50 AM  

joeflood: Popcorn Johnny: The good thing about this is that she'll most likely end up having to do porn to pay her legal bills.

[blogs.seattleweekly.com image 300x300]

Oh yeah, that's it.

Well, she already engaged in a satanic sex orgy that went wildly wrong, or something that could only be improved if someone could work in "heavy metal music" and "satanic ritual abuse".


Are we talking about Amanda Knox or the West Memphis 3?  I get confused...
 
2013-03-26 11:58:23 AM  

spentmiles: Who in the hell will ever date this chick?  There's probably dudes that would fark her, but there's no way they'd ever fall asleep beside her.


I would have no qualms sleeping next to her. Never in a case like this have I been more confident of someone's innocence.  I've yet to see a single piece of evidence linking her to the crime. The best anyone has come up with is she acted strange or their "gift" told them.

People react to grief differently, especially when usual support structures are absent.  And it wasn't like her best friend was killed, it was her roommate she only had known for a little.  The fact is they found the real killer, and there is no shred of evidence or any reasonable theory that could even put the three in the same room.

Should I ever meet Amanda, the first thing I would do is shake her hand and tell her how awful I think what she had been put through was.  If your idiots would stay away, I'd gladly take this clearly innocent girl.
 
2013-03-26 12:00:43 PM  
StreetlightInTheGhetto:
/Traypack, that's what you're calling the deceased kid now?
//just call him by  his goddamn name\


Seriously? Not sayin' I necessarily disagree with your sentiment, but is this really the place to get all butthurt about name calling?

Or is it only OK to do that for people/figures/politicians you don't like? Ever look in the Politics tab? Seems like Fark pretty could pretty much own the intellectual property rights on every spiteful name that could possibly be associated with anyone outside of fark's mainstream ideology.

Hypocrisy. You're doing it right!
 
2013-03-26 12:01:11 PM  

steverockson: Again, the idiotic prosecutor was working from a theory that Knox and Sollecito killed Kercher with Lumumba (whom they knew well and WERE and associated with).  When they matched the DNA to Guede the idiotic prosecutors just substituted Guede for Lumumba in their scenario. Problem Solved! (except for the fact that Knox and Sollecito were in no way connected to Guede).


There was no, zero, evidence or reason to believe that Knox or Sollecito was involved.

All the rest is Mignini's imagination and Italy's incompetence.
 
2013-03-26 12:09:52 PM  

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.
 
2013-03-26 12:11:46 PM  

Thunderpipes: Traypack is his name, or should I use no_limit_N****? He was a thug wanna be.


You know, after how easily I made you look like a farking idiot, running from the thread the last time I encountered you, it shouldn't surprise me that this kind of backward thinking is part and parcel of your mindset. The disgusting racism (or is now culture bigotry?) comes off you in waves. The stink of hatred for all who think or believe differently than you is palpable. Your views are no longer considered due for consideration in my book. You are a disgusting human being and not worthy of being responded to. I like playing with trolls and spirited debate is fine, but this...this just disgusts me. You are a farking cocksucker. Unless you call me out directly (which you won't because you already know I'm smarter than you) I will never respond to you again, and furthermore, FARK degrades itself by permitting your presence in this already racist shiathole.
 
2013-03-26 12:13:08 PM  
So. Taking the Knox, Sollecito and Kercher case as the good example it is what might we learn from it on a larger scale?

I believe this case is emblematic of the self serving, cynical, lazy ignorance of many conspiracy theorists that is rife in modern society but seems to hold more ground than it should in Italy. Their thinking is so often: "Life is complicated, the Yankees are naive and do not understand that behind everything is a deep dark conspiracy. Involving sex. Therefore it was not a case of a local murdering Kercher. Because that makes us uncomfortable."
Yes life is sometimes so, but when it comes to the actions of murderers and rapists the simplest answer is usually true, albeit often hidden under a veil of illogic and bullshiat. The naivity and ignorance is, as is so often the case, on the side of the conspiracists. Fundamentally this is ineducated people trying to appear educated.

The fundamental flaw in the EU is that it pretends that a country where this kind of thinking has infected even people holding such an eminent position as a local prosecutor is on the same level as a well run sober north European country. Not just in legal matters but many others the EU is not sustainable in the long term until Europe's diversity is admitted to and factored in.

We have not done much better here in the UK as many have swallowed the bullshiat line fed by the tabloid press about this, and many other things. Why?
Until this case I had honestly supposed that many tabloiud hacks wer cynically spouting lies. However seeing that Kercher's father, a tabloid reporter himself, actually believed the pathetic rubbish that the Italians came up with which allowed the man who murdered and raped his daughter to get off lightly, it looks like some of them actually believe this crap.
The bottom line is that I am less concerned about the new press control law coming out her in the UK because I think that much of "our" media is so irresponsible, ignorant and gullible that it should not be trusted whith so much power.

Overall the Kercher case is a particularly clear case of the power of the mob.
 
2013-03-26 12:13:48 PM  
I don't know whether she's innocent or guilty; only she knows. She's been acquitted; it should be left at that and not turned into another ridiculous circus.
 
2013-03-26 12:18:40 PM  

Msphere: I have no idea if she's guilty or not, and I grant that the Italians have botched the job.

But it is irritating in the extreme when you have all these bloviating, white-knight Farkers who are so smug and sure that she's innocent that they taunt anyone who questions them with "No one ever gives any evidence.  They got nothin'!"  And they do this over and over again.  Then someone posts a list of the evidence that the prosecution considered significant, and those white knights just farking disappear.

/Except genius steverockson, who mentions "no link to Rudy Guede" right farking below eyewitness testimony of said link.


If you're talking about that list a few posts up, that really makes no sense at all. Needs more context, but yeah, I see your point.
 
2013-03-26 12:20:07 PM  

ACunningPlan: I don't know whether she's innocent or guilty; only she knows. She's been acquitted; it should be left at that and not turned into another ridiculous circus.


This is part of the same process. The Supreme Court reviews appeal cases. It's not another circus. It's the same circus.
 
2013-03-26 12:20:43 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.


Our point exactly. The prosecution doesn't get to appeal here like it does in Italy. Most Americans find this very distasteful.
 
2013-03-26 12:22:34 PM  

Madbassist1: Msphere: I have no idea if she's guilty or not, and I grant that the Italians have botched the job.

But it is irritating in the extreme when you have all these bloviating, white-knight Farkers who are so smug and sure that she's innocent that they taunt anyone who questions them with "No one ever gives any evidence.  They got nothin'!"  And they do this over and over again.  Then someone posts a list of the evidence that the prosecution considered significant, and those white knights just farking disappear.

/Except genius steverockson, who mentions "no link to Rudy Guede" right farking below eyewitness testimony of said link.

If you're talking about that list a few posts up, that really makes no sense at all. Needs more context, but yeah, I see your point.


I didn't disappear.  I posted a quote from the judges on the appeals panel, here it is again:
The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".
 
2013-03-26 12:24:49 PM  

R.A.Danny: 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.

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,
 
2013-03-26 12:26:51 PM  

Bungles: R.A.Danny: 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.

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,


It still haven't figure out why you think she's guilty.  Knox has not connection to the guy that actually killed Kercher.
 
2013-03-26 12:31:34 PM  

poot42: While I don't think a re-trial should be allowed, there remain so many questions about what really happened to her room-mate over there.  I don't recall that ever being clarified.  Anybody really know?


It's pretty clear she was murdered by an intruder.  Probably a surprised-the-burglar-who-panics case.

For some insane reason the prosecutor decided to go after her and her boyfriend also despite no real evidence indicating they had anything to do with it.  (The only "evidence" is sloppy police work.)

CheatCommando: On the other hand, from further reading it appears that in the Knox case we have an initial conviction overturned on appeal that the high court is throwing back for retrial. That's actually not double jeopardy.


Agreed.  It's not double jeopardy.

chrylis: This is less of a problem with the legal system generally as with prosecutors whose career prospects depend on putting people in jail, not justice, and who also can't ever admit to convicting (or usually even prosecuting) an innocent person. Even for the ones who want to be honest, cognitive dissonance sets in and you end up with arguments that DNA testing of old convictions shouldn't be allowed because it might call into question old convictions.


A prosecutor or politician that argues that should be executed.

DArque Bishop: These two statements remind me of the "Don't Talk to Police" video. Specifically, it reminds me of the second half, where the police officer points out that in other countries (and I'm sure Italy is one he means) they start out interrogations using fists instead of words. I would not put much stock in anything Amanda Knox said to authorities, especially if she didn't have an attorney (or as has been said, even a professional translator) present...


Yeah, when you don't speak a language at the native level you shouldn't try to communicate really important matters in it, especially where errors can't reasonably be corrected.

I'm married to a woman who didn't grow up with a word of English.  Over the years there have been some pretty big misunderstandings--normally corrected very quickly but that's because it's a loving relationship, not an adversarial one.  Even now I wouldn't want her in a courtroom without a translator.

Msphere: I have no idea if she's guilty or not, and I grant that the Italians have botched the job.

But it is irritating in the extreme when you have all these bloviating, white-knight Farkers who are so smug and sure that she's innocent that they taunt anyone who questions them with "No one ever gives any evidence.  They got nothin'!"  And they do this over and over again.  Then someone posts a list of the evidence that the prosecution considered significant, and those white knights just farking disappear.

/Except genius steverockson, who mentions "no link to Rudy Guede" right farking below eyewitness testimony of said link.


Except most of that list is the police botching the job.  Most of the rest was statements under duress and confusion and should be thrown.  That basically leaves some DNA--and they were living in the same house, some DNA spread is to be expected.
 
2013-03-26 12:31:50 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: R.A.Danny: 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.

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,

It still haven't figure out why you think she's guilty.  Knox has not connection to the guy that actually killed Kercher.



I don't necessarily think she's guilty. I think there was a botched trial, an appeal compromised by an international media descending on a tiny court, and a whole load of unanswered questions.

I strongly suspect she's lying over key issues, as outlined in the evidence list previously posted, but I don't know what happened. That doesn't mean she's guilty, it just means, for reasons unknown, she's lying.

I think the Kerchers deserve a proper trail to dig out the truth, given they are the ones who are suffering here.
 
2013-03-26 12:34:26 PM  

Bungles: ACunningPlan: I don't know whether she's innocent or guilty; only she knows. She's been acquitted; it should be left at that and not turned into another ridiculous circus.

This is part of the same process. The Supreme Court reviews appeal cases. It's not another circus. It's the same circus.


Thanks for that:)  Out of interest, what happens if TSC finds her guilty - not on the extradition front - do the defence then get to appeal that decision?
 
2013-03-26 12:38:35 PM  

ACunningPlan: Bungles: ACunningPlan: I don't know whether she's innocent or guilty; only she knows. She's been acquitted; it should be left at that and not turned into another ridiculous circus.

This is part of the same process. The Supreme Court reviews appeal cases. It's not another circus. It's the same circus.

Thanks for that:)  Out of interest, what happens if TSC finds her guilty - not on the extradition front - do the defence then get to appeal that decision?


That I cannot tell you. I'd presume from the overview on the BBC, that this process could theoretically be repeated until the main court and the appeal court agree (which, when you think about, is sensible..... but a  mindbogglingly long process. If everything is done correctly the two courts *should* agree)
 
2013-03-26 12:40:12 PM  
Why would the US ever turn over an American citizen.
 
2013-03-26 12:41:58 PM  

GungFu: Bruce Campbell: GungFu: I'm under custody for a potential murder, and I say, it wasn't me, it was this other guy (who's innocent) and basically, it's not my fault for accusing him and if he gets detained in prison for two weeks while the cops investigate whether I was telling teh truth or not.

Fark me, you are retarded. No wonder people think she's entirely innocent. Retard thinking does that, I suppose.

I'm retarded for expecting investigators to determine the veracity of an accusation, especially one given while under duress, more rapidly and intelligently than taking two farking weeks.  Good to know.

Prick.


Trying to backtrack. Prick.


The italian justice system's not gonna FARK you.
 
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.
 
2013-03-26 03:55:54 PM  

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


She had one. She is now free. You do not get to acquit and put an asterisk next to it unless you are a corrupt piece of crap. 

The US media has fed you a very slanted view of the case

But the hype in Italy was dead on balls accurate?
 
2013-03-26 03:55:59 PM  
How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.
 
2013-03-26 03:57:02 PM  

Bungles: 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.


It has nothing to do with American nationalism and everything to do with the fact that this girl is receiving extraordinary scrutiny that cannot be explained by any other reason than that the scrutinizers have a bone to pick with Americans in general.  There is no other explanation for continuing to insist "she must be guilty" even though any rational person would see that there is not nearly enough evidence to suggest she is guilty unless you have such an aforementioned predisposition to assume an American must have done it.  And the way the Italian media covered it DID seem like America bashing to any non-America basher (funny how perspective works).  Also: way to not respond to the sentence in bold by the way, I see what you did there.
 
2013-03-26 04:02:53 PM  

doglover: manwithplanx: TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States

Ever hear of diplomacy?

You want your trade agreement, Mr Ambassador? *sips chianti* You give us the Knox girl and you get your agreement. And may your first child be a masculine child.


Normally the U.S. would honor the extradition treaty, but I don't think they would in this case.  Won't really hurt relations as both sides win.  Italy gets to placate their America hating constituency that is convinced she got away with murder by at least making a show of it and the U.S. gets to give the appearance of caring for its citizens by refusing to extradite her.  Win-win.
 
2013-03-26 04:06:58 PM  

RenownedCurator: 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 re ...


True.  Still, it's a lesson: don't be a drug-addled skank when you're supposed to be studying overseas.  Anything bad that happens tends to be blamed on the nearest foreigner.  (There are variants depending on nation.  For instance, travel guides suggest not driving in South Korea because, as a foreigner, you WILL be blamed for any accident even if it's 100% not your fault.)
 
2013-03-26 04:08:00 PM  

Bungles: 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.


Don't take my word for it, here's what the appeals judges stated in their opinion:
The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".
Without a connection between Knox, Sollecito and Guede the case completely falls apart.
That's enough to prove to me that they're innocent and that Guede acted alone.
 
2013-03-26 04:11:43 PM  

Pumpernickel bread: You want your trade agreement, Mr Ambassador? *sips chianti* You give us the Knox girl and you get your agreement. And may your first child be a masculine child.

Normally the U.S. would honor the extradition treaty, but I don't think they would in this case. Won't really hurt relations as both sides win. Italy gets to placate their America hating constituency that is convinced she got away with murder by at least making a show of it and the U.S. gets to give the appearance of caring for its citizens by refusing to extradite her. Win-win.


That's the way I see this going too.  To most Italians it doesn't matter if she's guilty or not, as long as they "win".   This way everybody gets what they want ... except Solecito, poor bastard.
 
2013-03-26 04:20:41 PM  
Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?
 
2013-03-26 04:21:07 PM  
You'd be better off with the mafia than the Italian criminal courts.
 
2013-03-26 04:24:32 PM  

steverockson: Don't take my word for it, here's what the appeals judges stated in their opinion:
The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".
Without a connection between Knox, Sollecito and Guede the case completely falls apart.
That's enough to prove to me that they're innocent and that Guede acted alone.


Isn't it interesting that Guede (who left his DNA among a bunch of other condemning evidence that he murdered this girl) has received compassion from the Italian media and actually had his sentence reduced by 14 years and could be out soon, while the other 2 (who aren't placed at the scene by even a scrap of evidence) are almost universally hated and condemned by most of Europe.  Hmm, no - it couldn't have ANYTHING to do with Knox's citizenship ... it's totally just Americans that have it skewed, right.
 
2013-03-26 04:27:31 PM  

spiderpaz: steverockson: Don't take my word for it, here's what the appeals judges stated in their opinion:
The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".
Without a connection between Knox, Sollecito and Guede the case completely falls apart.
That's enough to prove to me that they're innocent and that Guede acted alone.

Isn't it interesting that Guede (who left his DNA among a bunch of other condemning evidence that he murdered this girl) has received compassion from the Italian media and actually had his sentence reduced by 14 years and could be out soon, while the other 2 (who aren't placed at the scene by even a scrap of evidence) are almost universally hated and condemned by most of Europe.  Hmm, no - it couldn't have ANYTHING to do with Knox's citizenship ... it's totally just Americans that have it skewed, right.


It's farking nuts.  Italy must be one farked up country.
 
2013-03-26 04:31:52 PM  
JohnAnnArbor -- I think the bigger takeaway is "If a crime is committed to / by someone you know, get out of town before the local authorities conveniently pin it all on The Foreigner." Drugs and skankiness were secondary in her case, they were just convenient after-the-fact props used by the police to show how evil she was. I'm sure they could have come up with something else if necessary.

The Kercher family has been a nightmare, but the fact that they're willing to pursue Knox and Sollecito to the ends of the earth without saying a word about Guede and the fact that he'll be walking the streets again in a few years ... something's gone seriously wrong there.
 
2013-03-26 04:32:33 PM  
EDIT: I meant to say the Kerchers have been THROUGH a nightmare. Dammit.
 
2013-03-26 04:43:23 PM  

Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.



That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.
 
2013-03-26 04:48:49 PM  
when you think of how many american travesties of justice have occurred in the same time period that this has been going on........ some get reported and forgotten.... it seems none get as much attention as this case

hmmmm

it wouldnt be anything to do with the fact that she's a pretty young white girl, would it?
 
2013-03-26 04:51:46 PM  

furterfan: when you think of how many american travesties of justice have occurred in the same time period that this has been going on........ some get reported and forgotten.... it seems none get as much attention as this case

hmmmm

it wouldnt be anything to do with the fact that she's a pretty young white girl, would it?



Don't you dare! Of course there'd be just as many Farkers here defending her to the death if she was a fat ugly black boy! Of course there would!
 
2013-03-26 04:52:11 PM  

Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.


It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.
 
2013-03-26 04:57:03 PM  

Bungles: 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 US doesn't recognize overturned acquittals.
 
2013-03-26 05:01:09 PM  

Bungles: There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.


That's not the purpose of a trial.

That's the purpose of discovery and investigation. If you're in a trial, and the prosecution has gaping holes, you have an acquittal.
 
2013-03-26 05:01:57 PM  

Bungles: Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.


Incidentally, Knox should sue the crap out of them for libel.
 
2013-03-26 05:03:05 PM  

furterfan: it wouldnt be anything to do with the fact that she's a pretty young white girl, would it?


I like pretty young Latinas and pretty young girls of African descent too.
 
2013-03-26 05:09:05 PM  

ethics-gradient: So. Taking the Knox, Sollecito and Kercher case as the good example it is what might we learn from it on a larger scale?

I believe this case is emblematic of the self serving, cynical, lazy ignorance of many conspiracy theorists that is rife in modern society but seems to hold more ground than it should in Italy. Their thinking is so often: "Life is complicated, the Yankees are naive and do not understand that behind everything is a deep dark conspiracy. Involving sex. Therefore it was not a case of a local murdering Kercher. Because that makes us uncomfortable."
Yes life is sometimes so, but when it comes to the actions of murderers and rapists the simplest answer is usually true, albeit often hidden under a veil of illogic and bullshiat. The naivity and ignorance is, as is so often the case, on the side of the conspiracists. Fundamentally this is ineducated people trying to appear educated.

The fundamental flaw in the EU is that it pretends that a country where this kind of thinking has infected even people holding such an eminent position as a local prosecutor is on the same level as a well run sober north European country. Not just in legal matters but many others the EU is not sustainable in the long term until Europe's diversity is admitted to and factored in.

We have not done much better here in the UK as many have swallowed the bullshiat line fed by the tabloid press about this, and many other things. Why?
Until this case I had honestly supposed that many tabloiud hacks wer cynically spouting lies. However seeing that Kercher's father, a tabloid reporter himself, actually believed the pathetic rubbish that the Italians came up with which allowed the man who murdered and raped his daughter to get off lightly, it looks like some of them actually believe this crap.
The bottom line is that I am less concerned about the new press control law coming out her in the UK because I think that much of "our" media is so irresponsible, ignorant and gullible that it sho ...


Favorited for being one of the few voices of reason in this thread.

I care not about Ms. Knox's nationality, ethnicity, or whether or not she is "cute" or educated. Based on the evidence I have heard, I believe Amanda and her boyfriend were railroaded by a corrupt prosecutor with a history of misconduct. Her "confession" came after over 50 hours of interrogation without the benefit of a lawyer, or even an English translator. The only DNA evidence found in and on the victim belonged to one man-Rudy Guede, and he never named the two kids as "accessories to the crime" until he was offered a deal by the prosecution that cut his prison time in half. The prosecution's only "eyewitness" that placed the pair near the scene of the crime that night was a homeless junkie, who had coincidentally testified for the prosecution in 3 other murder trials and was later found not to be credible.

The entire case against Knox and Sollecito stinks to high heaven. I doubt the US will allow extradition, based on the acquittal and the so-called "evidence", but I also hope the Italian authorities don't decide to prosecute Mr. Sollecito again just to cover their own bungling asses. And to those who think something like this couldn't happen here, I imagine the people who have spent decades in prison for crimes they didn't commit would disagree.

It sucks for the family of the victim, and for the other guy who was wrongly accused, but I hope they realize some day how badly this case was farked up by the prosecutors, and that they can heal and get on with their lives.
 
2013-03-26 05:14:23 PM  

doubled99: All you have to do is look at her face, and you KNOW she's guilty.
It's really that simple to anyone with perception and good judgement.


That is the stupidest thing uttered in all of this.

"Burn the witch! I just KNOW she's guilty! NO! NO proof needed. I have a feeling!"
 
2013-03-26 05:14:42 PM  

This text is now purple: Bungles: Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

Incidentally, Knox should sue the crap out of them for libel.


I'm not sure how she'd win, given there's an open court case against her.
 
2013-03-26 05:15:04 PM  

Bungles: furterfan: when you think of how many american travesties of justice have occurred in the same time period that this has been going on........ some get reported and forgotten.... it seems none get as much attention as this case

hmmmm

it wouldnt be anything to do with the fact that she's a pretty young white girl, would it?


Don't you dare! Of course there'd be just as many Farkers here defending her to the death if she was a fat ugly black boy! Of course there would!


If the only motive they could come up with is the fat ugly black kid had a satanic sex orgy without leaving any DNA while the legless attractive white guy shot her through the door. We would.
 
2013-03-26 05:16:37 PM  

This text is now purple: Bungles: 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 US doesn't recognize overturned acquittals.



It's not an overturned acquittal.

She was never acquitted. She was acquitted  pending Supreme Court review. The case has been ongoing since then. This was all perfectly clear in the trial, if you actually followed it.

What you imagine the law to be isn't really important here.
 
2013-03-26 05:23:59 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.


If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?
 
2013-03-26 05:24:58 PM  

Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?


No, why would you use that analogy?  The two cases are not similar at all.
 
2013-03-26 05:28:21 PM  

R.A.Danny: Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?


The extradition treaty with Italy states:  "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested."  I'm not sure whether that provision applies or not.  It could mean that extradition is barred only if she was acquitted by the "Requested Party" (i.e., the US).

Whether that provision applies or not, she can still plead the 5th Amendment Double Jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") to resist extradition.  Because she was already once in jeopardy for that offense, she can claim that it would be unconstitutional to extradite her for the purpose of putting her in jeopardy again for the same offense.
 
2013-03-26 05:29:09 PM  

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


She didn't give the guy's name to the prosecutors, only after it was suggested to her after several days of interrogation and abuse (or, I'm sorry, slapping her on the head to 'help her remember' was the interrogator's official line) did they coerce her into agreeing with their then-false theory that this guy did it...

If being a bit of a coont is proof of murder in Italy, you're Ted farking Bundy.
 
2013-03-26 05:29:18 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?

No, why would you use that analogy?  The two cases are not similar at all.


Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.
 
2013-03-26 05:32:50 PM  

Bungles: If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?

No, why would you use that analogy? The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.


Like making it about Amanda's sex life, or a confession that was beat out of her?  Something like that?
 
2013-03-26 05:33:12 PM  

SkinnyHead: R.A.Danny: Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?

The extradition treaty with Italy states:  "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested."  I'm not sure whether that provision applies or not.  It could mean that extradition is barred only if she was acquitted by the "Requested Party" (i.e., the US).

Whether that provision applies or not, she can still plead the 5th Amendment Double Jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") to resist extradition.  Because she was already once in jeopardy for that offense, she can claim that it would be unconstitutional to extradite her for the purpose of putting her in jeopardy again for the same offense.



I'm not sure that applies, since she wasn't acquitted - she was "acquitted pending review". I'm dredging about for the specific Italian term. It's best not to use the term "acquitted" as it makes people think it's the same as the US uses the term.

That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox..... and *then* the Italian government attempted a retrial. As far as the law is concerned, this is the same case, just with a complex layered system of appeals and checks and balances.
 
2013-03-26 05:34:39 PM  

Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?

No, why would you use that analogy?  The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.


Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher.  Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved.  Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?".  This is beyond implausible.
 
2013-03-26 05:36:32 PM  

spiderpaz: Bungles: If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?

No, why would you use that analogy? The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Like making it about Amanda's sex life, or a confession that was beat out of her?  Something like that?


The case wasn't solely about her sex life, and the "beating" claim was part of her defense, so I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say.

You said very specifically that the verdict should be based on proving a connection between two people, rather than proving her responsible in some way for Kercher's death. That is exactly the same trick as "if the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit". You're trying to change the question.
 
2013-03-26 05:37:39 PM  

Bungles: That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox...


They let her out of prison and out of the country. Sounds like they ruled in her "favour".
 
2013-03-26 05:39:11 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?

No, why would you use that analogy?  The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher.  Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved.  Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?".  This is beyond implausible.



No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.
 
2013-03-26 05:41:44 PM  

Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?

No, why would you use that analogy?  The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher.  Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved.  Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?".  This is beyond implausible.


No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.


It IS the crux of the case.  It's the ENTIRE case.  The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher.  Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.
 
2013-03-26 05:42:06 PM  

R.A.Danny: Bungles: That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox...

They let her out of prison and out of the country. Sounds like they ruled in her "favour".



They did, pending review. The review has just happened.

Whether she should remain in Italy since the verdict until today was discussed at length when the appeal finished, and the general consensus was she would flee and never return (as anyone probably would have done in the circumstances, guilty or innocent). There was no legal requirement for her to remain during this period, although she of course gave assurances to the court she would, as is protocol.
 
2013-03-26 05:43:39 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?

No, why would you use that analogy?  The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher.  Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved.  Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?".  This is beyond implausible.


No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

It IS the crux of the case.  It's the ENTIRE case.  The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher.  Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.


Proving that they met when high a few hours earlier doesn't prove that they subsequently raped and murdered Kercher.
 
2013-03-26 05:46:01 PM  

steverockson: It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.


They were having a "sex game", whatever the hell that is, which was stabby. For Satan. Then it all went wrong somehow.
Also, Amanda Knox had previously had pre-marital sex with several different boys, which makes her a she-witch slut-devil.

QED
 
2013-03-26 05:46:38 PM  
Oh, almost forgot the reefer madness.
 
2013-03-26 05:48:51 PM  

Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

It's pretty simple actually.  No connection to Guede = Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit, eh?

No, why would you use that analogy?  The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher.  Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved.  Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?".  This is beyond implausible.


No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

It IS the crux of the case.  It's the ENTIRE case.  The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher.  Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

Proving ...


I'm not saying it does, but proving that they WEREN'T connected in any way proves that they weren't involved.  And the appeal judges said it in their opinion:
The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".

So what the prosecutor's are expecting people to believe is that Knox and Sollecito collaberated with a person they didn't know in a brutal rape and murder?  That just doesn't happen.
 
2013-03-26 05:49:50 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: steverockson: It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

They were having a "sex game", whatever the hell that is, which was stabby. For Satan. Then it all went wrong somehow.
Also, Amanda Knox had previously had pre-marital sex with several different boys, which makes her a she-witch slut-devil.

QED


Yeah, that's exactly the kind of argument the prosecutor made.  It reminds me of the prosecutor in the WM3 case.
 
2013-03-26 05:56:34 PM  
300+ posts and more than a few say she's guilty and claim anyone that says otherwise is white knighting. Well, put your money where your mouth is. Tell us what evidence there is that she did it. Tell us her motive. Tell us anything other than she acted like a brat and has an evil smirk, that would convince anyone that she, her new boyfriend, and some dude the barely knew, and not Rudy Guede did it alone.

If you can't do that you're just trolling, and it's becoming pathetic.
 
2013-03-26 06:08:39 PM  

steverockson: tallguywithglasseson: steverockson: It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

They were having a "sex game", whatever the hell that is, which was stabby. For Satan. Then it all went wrong somehow.
Also, Amanda Knox had previously had pre-marital sex with several different boys, which makes her a she-witch slut-devil.

QED

Yeah, that's exactly the kind of argument the prosecutor made.  It reminds me of the prosecutor in the WM3 case.


Exactly. There are definite parallels to that case and the Knox case, such as the "satanic ritual" theories the way the "confessions" were obtained, and the contamination of the crime scenes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_Three#Investigation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Meredith_Kercher#Summary_of_p ro secution_and_defence_arguments
 
2013-03-26 06:14:22 PM  

Bungles: No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.


So your theory is that Knox and her boyfriend killed her, then Guede broke in later and had sex with the corpse?

Tell us Sherlock if they aren't connected to Guede whose DNA was INSIDE the dead girl, and whose bloody handprint was beside the body, what's the connection?
 
2013-03-26 06:18:56 PM  
 
2013-03-26 06:21:53 PM  

Bungles: SkinnyHead: R.A.Danny: Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?

The extradition treaty with Italy states:  "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested."  I'm not sure whether that provision applies or not.  It could mean that extradition is barred only if she was acquitted by the "Requested Party" (i.e., the US).

Whether that provision applies or not, she can still plead the 5th Amendment Double Jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") to resist extradition.  Because she was already once in jeopardy for that offense, she can claim that it would be unconstitutional to extradite her for the purpose of putting her in jeopardy again for the same offense.


I'm not sure that applies, since she wasn't acquitted - she was "acquitted pending review". I'm dredging about for the specific Italian term. It's best not to use the term "acquitted" as it makes people think it's the same as the US uses the term.

That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox..... and *then* the Italian government attempted a retrial. As far as the law is concerned, this is the same case, just with a complex layered system of appeals and checks and balances.


The question under the Double Jeopardy clause is whether she was in jeopardy when she was tried de novo and whether the not guilty verdict terminated her jeopardy.  You might be right that under Italian law, the not guilty verdict is not final and is only considered as "acquitted pending review."  But a US court hearing an extradition claim will apply US constitutional law to decide the double jeopardy issue, and under US constitutional law, the concept of "acquittal pending review" violates double jeopardy.  The Double Jeopardy clause prohibits a higher court from reviewing an acquittal.
 
2013-03-26 06:23:21 PM  
If Italy didn't have history within, I'd say it deserves to be nuked. What a shiatty, horrible country. It makes me LIKE the United States and her people.
 
2013-03-26 06:30:34 PM  

SkinnyHead: Bungles: SkinnyHead: R.A.Danny: Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?

The extradition treaty with Italy states:  "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested."  I'm not sure whether that provision applies or not.  It could mean that extradition is barred only if she was acquitted by the "Requested Party" (i.e., the US).

Whether that provision applies or not, she can still plead the 5th Amendment Double Jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") to resist extradition.  Because she was already once in jeopardy for that offense, she can claim that it would be unconstitutional to extradite her for the purpose of putting her in jeopardy again for the same offense.


I'm not sure that applies, since she wasn't acquitted - she was "acquitted pending review". I'm dredging about for the specific Italian term. It's best not to use the term "acquitted" as it makes people think it's the same as the US uses the term.

That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox..... and *then* the Italian government attempted a retrial. As far as the law is concerned, this is the same case, just with a complex layered system of appeals and checks and balances.

The question under the Double Jeopardy clause is whether she was in jeopardy when she was tried de novo and whether the not guilty verdict terminated her jeopardy.  You might be right that under Italian law, the not guilty verdict is not final and is only considered as "acquitted pending review."  But a US court hearing an extradition claim will apply US constitutional law to decide the doub ...


But the point it she wasn't acquitted. She would have been acquitted today, had things have turned out differently.

I would think that legally, under US law, they would have considered the case on-going until today, should she have had the aquittal approved.
 
2013-03-26 06:37:17 PM  

pedobearapproved: Bungles: No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

So your theory is that Knox and her boyfriend killed her, then Guede broke in later and had sex with the corpse?

Tell us Sherlock if they aren't connected to Guede whose DNA was INSIDE the dead girl, and whose bloody handprint was beside the body, what's the connection?



I don't have "a theory".

Are you suggesting that Kercher's parents are insane, and are happy with today's decision because they've had some sort of psychotic break and can't fathom a world where Knox wasn't involved? Or perhaps they, who know more about this case than anyone bar the victim and the perpetrator/s having sat through every minute of testimony, realise that the current version of events doesn't stack up?

Are you saying it's outrageous that two people could have hooked up with a stranger, returned home, tried to expand that threesome to a foursome, and that situation couldn't have turned horrific?

Perhaps they had nothing to do with the murder, but were involved with the proceeding events, and are lying because they realise that doesn't look good and means they have no alibi?
 
2013-03-26 06:39:52 PM  

Phoenix_M: 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.


She's out, and she's home in the States. Italy can bloviate all they want, they ain't getting her back.
 
2013-03-26 06:43:17 PM  

eggrolls: Phoenix_M: 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.

She's out, and she's home in the States. Italy can bloviate all they want, they ain't getting her back.


For someone who clearly liked international travel, never being able to leave the country again at such a young age is an major punishment.
 
2013-03-26 06:46:51 PM  

Bungles: For someone who clearly liked international travel


I think that statement is written in the correct tense.
 
2013-03-26 06:59:20 PM  

Bungles: pedobearapproved: Bungles: No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

So your theory is that Knox and her boyfriend killed her, then Guede broke in later and had sex with the corpse?

Tell us Sherlock if they aren't connected to Guede whose DNA was INSIDE the dead girl, and whose bloody handprint was beside the body, what's the connection?


I don't have "a theory".

Are you suggesting that Kercher's parents are insane, and are happy with today's decision because they've had some sort of psychotic break and can't fathom a world where Knox wasn't involved? Or perhaps they, who know more about this case than anyone bar the victim and the perpetrator/s having sat through every minute of testimony, realise that the current version of events doesn't stack up?

Are you saying it's outrageous that two people could have hooked up with a stranger, returned home, tried to expand that threesome to a foursome, and that situation couldn't have turned horrific?

Perhaps they had nothing to do with the murder, but were involved with the proceeding events, and are lying because they realise that doesn't look good and means they have no alibi?


Yes, completely outrageous and idiotic.
 
2013-03-26 07:05:58 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: pedobearapproved: Bungles: No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

So your theory is that Knox and her boyfriend killed her, then Guede broke in later and had sex with the corpse?

Tell us Sherlock if they aren't connected to Guede whose DNA was INSIDE the dead girl, and whose bloody handprint was beside the body, what's the connection?


I don't have "a theory".

Are you suggesting that Kercher's parents are insane, and are happy with today's decision because they've had some sort of psychotic break and can't fathom a world where Knox wasn't involved? Or perhaps they, who know more about this case than anyone bar the victim and the perpetrator/s having sat through every minute of testimony, realise that the current version of events doesn't stack up?

Are you saying it's outrageous that two people could have hooked up with a stranger, returned home, tried to expand that threesome to a foursome, and that situation couldn't have turned horrific?

Perhaps they had nothing to do with the murder, but were involved with the proceeding events, and are lying because they realise that doesn't look good and means they have no alibi?

Yes, completely outrageous and idiotic.


You're saying that no time in the history of Man have people hooked up with dangerous strangers?
 
2013-03-26 07:20:27 PM  

Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: pedobearapproved: Bungles: No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

So your theory is that Knox and her boyfriend killed her, then Guede broke in later and had sex with the corpse?

Tell us Sherlock if they aren't connected to Guede whose DNA was INSIDE the dead girl, and whose bloody handprint was beside the body, what's the connection?


I don't have "a theory".

Are you suggesting that Kercher's parents are insane, and are happy with today's decision because they've had some sort of psychotic break and can't fathom a world where Knox wasn't involved? Or perhaps they, who know more about this case than anyone bar the victim and the perpetrator/s having sat through every minute of testimony, realise that the current version of events doesn't stack up?

Are you saying it's outrageous that two people could have hooked up with a stranger, returned home, tried to expand that threesome to a foursome, and that situation couldn't have turned horrific?

Perhaps they had nothing to do with the murder, but were involved with the proceeding events, and are lying because they realise that doesn't look good and means they have no alibi?

Yes, completely outrageous and idiotic.

You're saying that no time in the history of Man have people hooked up with dangerous strangers?


The idea that a girl and her boyfriend "hooked up with a dangerous stranger" and took him home and helped him brutally rape and murder her roommate, then went back the next day and called the cops on themselves is ridiculous.
 
2013-03-26 07:21:34 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: pedobearapproved: Bungles: No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

So your theory is that Knox and her boyfriend killed her, then Guede broke in later and had sex with the corpse?

Tell us Sherlock if they aren't connected to Guede whose DNA was INSIDE the dead girl, and whose bloody handprint was beside the body, what's the connection?


I don't have "a theory".

Are you suggesting that Kercher's parents are insane, and are happy with today's decision because they've had some sort of psychotic break and can't fathom a world where Knox wasn't involved? Or perhaps they, who know more about this case than anyone bar the victim and the perpetrator/s having sat through every minute of testimony, realise that the current version of events doesn't stack up?

Are you saying it's outrageous that two people could have hooked up with a stranger, returned home, tried to expand that threesome to a foursome, and that situation couldn't have turned horrific?

Perhaps they had nothing to do with the murder, but were involved with the proceeding events, and are lying because they realise that doesn't look good and means they have no alibi?

Yes, completely outrageous and idiotic.

You're saying that no time in the history of Man have people hooked up with dangerous strangers?

The idea that a girl and her boyfriend "hooked up with a dangerous stranger" and took him home and helped him brutally rape and murder her roommate, then went back the next day and called the cops on themselves is ridiculous.



I didn't say they helped him.
 
2013-03-26 07:25:27 PM  

Bungles: I don't have "a theory".

Are you suggesting that Kercher's parents are insane, and are happy with today's decision because they've had some sort of psychotic break and can't fathom a world where Knox wasn't involved? Or perhaps they, who know more about this case than anyone bar the victim and the perpetrator/s having sat through every minute of testimony, realise that the current version of events doesn't stack up?

Are you saying it's outrageous that two people could have hooked up with a stranger, returned home, tried to expand that threesome to a foursome, and that situation couldn't have turned horrific?

Perhaps they had nothing to do with the murder, but were involved with the proceeding events, and are lying because they realise that doesn't look good and means they have no alibi?


You are right that you don't have a theory because nothing you said makes sense. There is a reason we don't let the family try cases. And while they might feel in their heart with all sincerity that Knox was involved there is ZERO evidence of it, convincing or otherwise.

Why didn't Rudy Guede instantly say "hey, it was the other two people in the house. I was having sex with Kercher and went to the bathroom, those people came in killed her, I discovered her body when I went back to the bedroom and they threatened me, so I got out of town!" Instead he said "it was some random racist Italian dude," that he didn't recognize.  Also if it was a three-some going to 4-some gone wrong, why hasn't Guede EVER said that at some point. He admitted he was there during the time of the murder, why wouldn't he have said something that made himself look less guilty...oh because it didn't happen!

The only scenario that matches the evidence is that Guede broke in to steal (which he had been doing around town prior to the murder). This time he got caught when Kercher came home, he raped and murdered her then fled town.
 

newsimg.bbc.co.uk
 
2013-03-26 07:29:44 PM  

pedobearapproved: Bungles: I don't have "a theory".

Are you suggesting that Kercher's parents are insane, and are happy with today's decision because they've had some sort of psychotic break and can't fathom a world where Knox wasn't involved? Or perhaps they, who know more about this case than anyone bar the victim and the perpetrator/s having sat through every minute of testimony, realise that the current version of events doesn't stack up?

Are you saying it's outrageous that two people could have hooked up with a stranger, returned home, tried to expand that threesome to a foursome, and that situation couldn't have turned horrific?

Perhaps they had nothing to do with the murder, but were involved with the proceeding events, and are lying because they realise that doesn't look good and means they have no alibi?

You are right that you don't have a theory because nothing you said makes sense. There is a reason we don't let the family try cases. And while they might feel in their heart with all sincerity that Knox was involved there is ZERO evidence of it, convincing or otherwise.

Why didn't Rudy Guede instantly say "hey, it was the other two people in the house. I was having sex with Kercher and went to the bathroom, those people came in killed her, I discovered her body when I went back to the bedroom and they threatened me, so I got out of town!" Instead he said "it was some random racist Italian dude," that he didn't recognize.  Also if it was a three-some going to 4-some gone wrong, why hasn't Guede EVER said that at some point. He admitted he was there during the time of the murder, why wouldn't he have said something that made himself look less guilty...oh because it didn't happen!

The only scenario that matches the evidence is that Guede broke in to steal (which he had been doing around town prior to the murder). This time he got caught when Kercher came home, he raped and murdered her then fled town.
 

[newsimg.bbc.co.uk image 466x600]


Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.
 
2013-03-26 07:47:37 PM  

Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.


Which is precisely why we are all thinking that the intellectual jurisprudence  of the Italian supreme court  is about as good as that of day-old dogshiat.

Propose some evidence that is even remotely incriminating against her. You can't. There just isn't any, and this whole thing is a sick farking circus that's ruining the lives of two innocent people.
 
2013-03-26 07:56:05 PM  

sudo give me more cowbell: Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.

Which is precisely why we are all thinking that the intellectual jurisprudence  of the Italian supreme court  is about as good as that of day-old dogshiat.

Propose some evidence that is even remotely incriminating against her. You can't. There just isn't any, and this whole thing is a sick farking circus that's ruining the lives of two innocent people.


They aren't innocent by definition.
 
2013-03-26 08:00:35 PM  
Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.

Except you have no clue why the supreme court said there has to be a re-trial, for all we know it's stupidly procedural. The only thing we do know if they supreme court didn't rule on the guilt or innocence of Knox, however the last court did, and they found her not guilty, where they said the association between Guede, Knox and Sollecito was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable."

so judge judy, it's not about if she's guilty or not for you, it's about what? never admitting you're wrong? Trying to go through life with a complete lack of common sense?
 
2013-03-26 08:02:36 PM  

Bungles: sudo give me more cowbell: Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.

Which is precisely why we are all thinking that the intellectual jurisprudence  of the Italian supreme court  is about as good as that of day-old dogshiat.

Propose some evidence that is even remotely incriminating against her. You can't. There just isn't any, and this whole thing is a sick farking circus that's ruining the lives of two innocent people.

They aren't innocent by definition.


Yes they are. In Italy just like the US it's innocent until proven guilty. They were last proven not guilty. A new trial would start over with the same assumption on innocence.
 
2013-03-26 08:05:28 PM  
Shouldn't fellow hottie Casey Anthony be giving her a shoulder to cry on by now?  Don't hate them because they're pretty.
 
2013-03-26 08:05:31 PM  

pedobearapproved: Bungles: sudo give me more cowbell: Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.

Which is precisely why we are all thinking that the intellectual jurisprudence  of the Italian supreme court  is about as good as that of day-old dogshiat.

Propose some evidence that is even remotely incriminating against her. You can't. There just isn't any, and this whole thing is a sick farking circus that's ruining the lives of two innocent people.

They aren't innocent by definition.

Yes they are. In Italy just like the US it's innocent until proven guilty. They were last proven not guilty. A new trial would start over with the same assumption on innocence.


A "presumption of innocence" is not the same as you saying "they are innocent".
 
2013-03-26 08:07:39 PM  

pedobearapproved: Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.

Except you have no clue why the supreme court said there has to be a re-trial, for all we know it's stupidly procedural. The only thing we do know if they supreme court didn't rule on the guilt or innocence of Knox, however the last court did, and they found her not guilty, where they said the association between Guede, Knox and Sollecito was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable."

so judge judy, it's not about if she's guilty or not for you, it's about what? never admitting you're wrong? Trying to go through life with a complete lack of common sense?


What we do know is that it was the appeal court's finding of aquittal that was specifically overturned. The judgement may have also overturned the initial trial's findings too, we just don't know that yet.

I find it odd that you don't want to know what actually happened.
 
2013-03-26 08:24:14 PM  

Bungles: pedobearapproved: Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.

Except you have no clue why the supreme court said there has to be a re-trial, for all we know it's stupidly procedural. The only thing we do know if they supreme court didn't rule on the guilt or innocence of Knox, however the last court did, and they found her not guilty, where they said the association between Guede, Knox and Sollecito was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable."

so judge judy, it's not about if she's guilty or not for you, it's about what? never admitting you're wrong? Trying to go through life with a complete lack of common sense?

What we do know is that it was the appeal court's finding of aquittal that was specifically overturned. The judgement may have also overturned the initial trial's findings too, we just don't know that yet.

I find it odd that you don't want to know what actually happened.


We know what happened. A burglar and common criminal broke into Meredith Kercher's apartment and brutally raped and murdered her. Due to prosecutorial misconduct an innocent couple were charged with the murder despite minimal evidence against them.
Apparently due to politics the Supreme Court has ordered a new trial and unless the prosecution is sitting on some bombshell they withheld in the previous trial they've got next to nothing on Ms. Knox and her boyfriend.
 
2013-03-26 08:33:05 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: pedobearapproved: Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.

Except you have no clue why the supreme court said there has to be a re-trial, for all we know it's stupidly procedural. The only thing we do know if they supreme court didn't rule on the guilt or innocence of Knox, however the last court did, and they found her not guilty, where they said the association between Guede, Knox and Sollecito was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable."

so judge judy, it's not about if she's guilty or not for you, it's about what? never admitting you're wrong? Trying to go through life with a complete lack of common sense?

What we do know is that it was the appeal court's finding of aquittal that was specifically overturned. The judgement may have also overturned the initial trial's findings too, we just don't know that yet.

I find it odd that you don't want to know what actually happened.

We know what happened. A burglar and common criminal broke into Meredith Kercher's apartment and brutally raped and murdered her. Due to prosecutorial misconduct an innocent couple were charged with the murder despite minimal evidence against them.
Apparently due to politics the Supreme Court has ordered a new trial and unless the prosecution is sitting on some bombshell they withheld in the previous trial they've got next to nothing on Ms. Knox and her boyfriend.


No, that's your spin of events. When you say "due to politics" you mean "has had their aquittal quashed for reasons I don't know, and I don't like it".

The reason the the majority of non-Americans do not agree with you is not because they are insane, or stupid, or anti-American. It's because they haven't been feed a steady diet of media poo-pooing the case.

Outside the US, UK, and Italian media, the general opinion of is Knox's involvement.
 
2013-03-26 08:36:36 PM  

Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.


No, it's not. It's a very FACT-centric view.

Look, the US isn't North Korea. We have unfettered access to information from the rest of the world here. The facts of the case are just as available to people in the US as they are to people anywhere else in the world. Knowing the facts of the case would cause any UNBIASED person to be shocked at the fact that the first trial didn't end in acquittal, and would think that the fact that she spent any time in prison at all as a gross miscarriage of justice. In the United States, this case wouldn't have even made trial in the first place, because there is NO REAL EVIDENCE that Knox was involved with the murder at all. The justice system in Italy is different. I get that. So it goes to trial, even without evidence. Ok. But even given that, the fact that she was convicted and spent time in prison is beyond the pale, and a "different" system of justice simply doesn't account for that unless "different" means "corrupt and unfair".

Did she behave weirdly? Maybe. Did she do some things that were unwise? Probably. Are either of those things crimes in Italy? I don't think so. Maybe I'm wrong. But, as someone who simply doesn't care who Knox is, where she's from, and where the crimes and trial took place, this whole thing is a sick joke.

Thankfully, she's out of reach of the corruption and craziness over there if this farce continues. Sure, maybe she might not be able to go to Italy or anywhere else in the EU ever again... but after what she's been through, why would she want to? Even if this DOES end in a final acquittal, she'd be wise never to go back anyways, because she'd likely end up in trouble for some other imagined thing as revenge for making people over there look like fools.
 
2013-03-26 08:45:19 PM  

Falin: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

No, it's not. It's a very FACT-centric view.

Look, the US isn't North Korea. We have unfettered access to information from the rest of the world here. The facts of the case are just as available to people in the US as they are to people anywhere else in the world. Knowing the facts of the case would cause any UNBIASED person to be shocked at the fact that the first trial didn't end in acquittal, and would think that the fact that she spent any time in prison at all as a gross miscarriage of justice. In the United States, this case wouldn't have even made trial in the first place, because there is NO REAL EVIDENCE that Knox was involved with the murder at all. The justice system in Italy is different. I get that. So it goes to trial, even without evidence. Ok. But even given that, the fact that she was convicted and spent time in prison is beyond the pale, and a "different" system of justice simply doesn't account for that unless "different" means "corrupt and unfair".

Did she behave weirdly? Maybe. Did she do some things that were unwise? Probably. Are either of those things crimes in Italy? I don't think so. Maybe I'm wrong. But, as someone who simply doesn't care who Knox is, where she's from, and where the crimes and trial took place, thi ...


So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.

Why, uniquely, does the US public believe on mass of her innocence? it's two reasons: nationalism - as occurs in any country when one of their own is charge abroad - and the lens of the US press.
 
2013-03-26 08:51:26 PM  

Bungles: Falin: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent.  There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

No, it's not. It's a very FACT-centric view.

Look, the US isn't North Korea. We have unfettered access to information from the rest of the world here. The facts of the case are just as available to people in the US as they are to people anywhere else in the world. Knowing the facts of the case would cause any UNBIASED person to be shocked at the fact that the first trial didn't end in acquittal, and would think that the fact that she spent any time in prison at all as a gross miscarriage of justice. In the United States, this case wouldn't have even made trial in the first place, because there is NO REAL EVIDENCE that Knox was involved with the murder at all. The justice system in Italy is different. I get that. So it goes to trial, even without evidence. Ok. But even given that, the fact that she was convicted and spent time in prison is beyond the pale, and a "different" system of justice simply doesn't account for that unless "different" means "corrupt and unfair".

Did she behave weirdly? Maybe. Did she do some things that were unwise? Probably. Are either of those things crimes in Italy? I don't think so. Maybe I'm wrong. But, as someone who simply doesn't care who Knox is, where she's from, and where the crimes and trial took place, thi ...

So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.

Why, uniquely, does the US public believe on mass of her innocence? it's two reasons: nationalism - as occurs in any country when one of their own is charge abroad - and the lens of the US press.


Bulkshiat, I believe she's innocent because there's no credible evidence that shows that she or her boyfriend had a damn thing to do with this rape/murder.
 
2013-03-26 09:03:21 PM  

Bungles: Falin: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


(snippage)



So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.
Why, uniquely, does the US public believe on mass of her innocence? it's two reasons: nationalism - as occurs in any country when one of their own is charge abroad - and the lens of the US press.


If you've spent any time in Europe as you say you have, you've seen the schadenfreude demonstrated with an almost 'Mean Girls' level of cruelty towards stupid, loud overbearing Americans from almost every quarter. Even from the countries like us. Now add a sensationalist culture of journalistic free for all, the kind that printed excerpts from Hitler's diaries without validating them first, killed Princess Di for a picture and hacked the phones of dead children. Stir in a little procedural zealotry on behalf of a poorly run Italian police force, and you've got a perfect storm of bullshiat and utter indifference to the truth.
 
2013-03-26 09:08:19 PM  

eggrolls: Bungles: Falin: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


(snippage)


So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.
Why, uniquely, does the US public believe on mass of her innocence? it's two reasons: nationalism - as occurs in any country when one of their own is charge abroad - and the lens of the US press.

If you've spent any time in Europe as you say you have, you've seen the schadenfreude demonstrated with an almost 'Mean Girls' level of cruelty towards stupid, loud overbearing Americans from almost every quarter. Even from the countries like us. Now add a sensationalist culture of journalistic free for all, the kind that printed excerpts from Hitler's diaries without validating them first, killed Princess Di for a picture and hacked the phones of dead children. Stir in a little procedural zealotry on behalf of a poorly run Italian police force, and you've got a perfect storm of bullshiat and utter indifference to the truth.


Exactly. It's not that America is biased TOWARDS Americans, it's that Europe is biased AGAINST Americans.
 
2013-03-26 09:48:59 PM  

eggrolls: Bungles: Falin: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


(snippage)


So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.
Why, uniquely, does the US public believe on mass of her innocence? it's two reasons: nationalism - as occurs in any country when one of their own is charge abroad - and the lens of the US press.

If you've spent any time in Europe as you say you have, you've seen the schadenfreude demonstrated with an almost 'Mean Girls' level of cruelty towards stupid, loud overbearing Americans from almost every quarter. Even from the countries like us. Now add a sensationalist culture of journalistic free for all, the kind that printed excerpts from Hitler's diaries without validating them first, killed Princess Di for a picture and hacked the phones of dead children. Stir in a little procedural zealotry on behalf of a poorly run Italian police force, and you've got a perfect storm of bullshiat and utter indifference to the truth.



Well, I'm European, so yes, I've spent a lot of time in Europe.

What you're saying is just simply untrue. Yes, lots of people dislike loud, overbearing Americans, including many Americans. That doesn't mean that people want them framed for murder.
 
2013-03-26 10:03:51 PM  
Maybe it's payback for this ugly american in Italy incident:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavalese_cable_car_disaster_(1998)
 
2013-03-26 10:07:19 PM  

fo_sho!: Maybe it's payback for this ugly american in Italy incident:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavalese_cable_car_disaster_(1998)


That was REEEEEEEEALY bad.  Those guys...wow.  Homicidal negligence and destroying/hiding evidence.
 
2013-03-27 01:58:32 AM  

Bungles: So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.


I haven't the faintest idea, as I can't read German. Why don't you tell us why the Germans think she was involved?

In fact, why won't you tell us anything about why the rest of the EU think she's guilty of something, instead of just repeatedly assuring us that they do (and burying the thread in minutiae as to why the present ruling doesn't constitute double jeopardy)?
 
2013-03-27 06:23:10 AM  

steverockson: Exactly. It's not that America is biased TOWARDS Americans, it's that Europe is biased AGAINST Americans.


Exactly, if she had done it she shouldn't see another sunrise that isn't framed by bars, but she didn't. The dude that did... well he raped and murdered an innocent girl and he might be able to get out as early as 2016. Why? He said he was sorry. And this guy beyond a shadow of a doubt raped and killed that woman.
 
2013-03-27 06:38:09 AM  

Bungles: pedobearapproved: Bungles: sudo give me more cowbell: Bungles: Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you that it's so cut and dry, armchair Poirot.

Which is why there will now be a new phase in the trial.

Which is precisely why we are all thinking that the intellectual jurisprudence  of the Italian supreme court  is about as good as that of day-old dogshiat.

Propose some evidence that is even remotely incriminating against her. You can't. There just isn't any, and this whole thing is a sick farking circus that's ruining the lives of two innocent people.

They aren't innocent by definition.

Yes they are. In Italy just like the US it's innocent until proven guilty. They were last proven not guilty. A new trial would start over with the same assumption on innocence.

A "presumption of innocence" is not the same as you saying "they are innocent".


Maybe if I say it ONE more time you'll get it in your head. innocent by definition means blameless. You said they aren't by definition innocent, but they were proved that at the last trial.The judge even specifically pointed that out. So because I assumed you aren't a total moron (my bad), and that you meant that as a legal definition and that the court judgement yesterday somehow rendered them guilty (it did not). So what did you mean? This whole time you can't point to ANY motive other than a sex game, but no other bodily fuilds were in the room other than from the victim and Rudy. Speaking of, you can't point to ANY specific evidence that shows they were in the apartment at the time, or that they harmed the girl in anyway. Whereas I can point to specific evidence that they weren't there (Rudy, the man that had raped and murdered the girl not saying "they were in the apartment").

fark it, you can't argue with stupid.

BTW what do you think of Rudy's 16 years? You think that was a fair time? Do you even think he did it, or was he set up?
 
2013-03-27 07:59:21 AM  

Bungles: eggrolls: Bungles: Falin: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.


(snippage)


So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.
Why, uniquely, does the US public believe on mass of her innocence? it's two reasons: nationalism - as occurs in any country when one of their own is charge abroad - and the lens of the US press.

If you've spent any time in Europe as you say you have, you've seen the schadenfreude demonstrated with an almost 'Mean Girls' level of cruelty towards stupid, loud overbearing Americans from almost every quarter. Even from the countries like us. Now add a sensationalist culture of journalistic free for all, the kind that printed excerpts from Hitler's diaries without validating them first, killed Princess Di for a picture and hacked the phones of dead children. Stir in a little procedural zealotry on behalf of a poorly run Italian police force, and you've got a perfect storm of bullshiat and utter indifference to the truth.


Well, I'm European, so yes, I've spent a lot of time in Europe.

What you're saying is just simply untrue. Yes, lots of people dislike loud, overbearing Americans, including many Americans. That doesn't mean that people want them framed for murder.


I don't think they really care if someone is innocent or not, as long as the media circus never ends.
 
2013-03-27 08:12:44 AM  

Bungles: So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.


I'm Canadian, currently living in Germany long enough to call myself German. I have no loyalty whatsoever to the U.S. government, and think that the world-wide hostility directed towards the US government over Iraq was completely justified, and that George W. Bosh was a colossal POS.

That doesn't change the fact that there is absolutely no evidence to support accusations against Knox or Sollecito; it doesn't change the fact that the overwhelmingly more plausible explanation for everything is one in which both of them are totally innocent of any involvement, and it doesn't make Knox responsible for the actions of her government's foreign policy -something which I think a lot of people in Europe are forgetting.
 
2013-03-27 10:51:31 AM  
Basically Bungles is full of shiat and refuses to answer any legitimate questions as to why Knox is guilty.

Just like every other fart sniffing European that is so sure that they are right about everything.
 
2013-03-27 11:16:49 AM  

Bungles: pedobearapproved: Are you suggesting that Kercher's parents are insane, and are happy with today's decision because they've had some sort of psychotic break and can't fathom a world where Knox wasn't involved?


Yes, that seems the long and short of it, based  on finding this:

Are you saying it's outrageous that two people could have hooked up with a stranger, returned home, tried to expand that threesome to a foursome, and that situation couldn't have turned horrific?

to be a reasonable scenario.  This sounds like something that would make a grieving tabloid journalist salivate in a Pavlovian style.  To the sane amongst us, it sounds like something made up by people who watched way too much daytime European television.
 
2013-03-27 11:28:17 AM  
Actually, just amend that to "too much daytime television".  I don't want to give the impression that our Soap Operas are any better than elsewhere.  They remain Soap Operas, just like the Prosecution's notion of a threesome foursome gone wrong.
 
2013-03-27 11:29:08 AM  

crab66: Basically Bungles is full of shiat and refuses to answer any legitimate questions as to why Knox is guilty.

Just like every other fart sniffing European that is so sure that they are right about everything.



Why are you afraid of having a proper trial?
 
2013-03-27 11:37:09 AM  

crab66: Basically Bungles is full of shiat and refuses to answer any legitimate questions as to why Knox is guilty.

Just like every other fart sniffing European that is so sure that they are right about everything.


Hey, I consider myself European, and I'm fully on board with you that the persecution of Knox is completely looney-toons.

This isn't a USA vs. the world thing. Although there is a touch of the "let's stick to American's" in the European public perception of the case, the case itself is more of an example of how Judicial systems everywhere can be horribly screwed up and unfair at times... -plenty of black men who've gone through the American Justice system have been treated just as unfairly.
 
2013-03-27 11:40:59 AM  

Bungles: Why are you afraid of having a proper trial?


A proper trial would be predicated on the assumption that there's even enough evidence to bring this bullshiat case to trial in the first place. And there isn't.

Your usage of "proper trial" would be analogous to me dragging you into court for a "proper trial" on charges of Child molestation, and putting your name all over the papers in the process. I have absolutely no shred of evidence to support the claim that you are a child-molester, but don't you think we should have a proper trial (with full media scrutiny) before we jump to any conclusions about whether you are, or are not, a child-molester?
 
2013-03-27 11:50:08 AM  

Bungles: Why are you afraid of having a proper trial?


There was one. As far as any civilized nation is concerned, there's no asterisk after an acquittal. It's over. Italy can go fark itself. I don't even care if she IS guilty, it's better to let a hundred guilty go than to lock up an innocent person.
 
2013-03-27 12:03:29 PM  

R.A.Danny: Bungles: Why are you afraid of having a proper trial?

There was one. As far as any civilized nation is concerned, there's no asterisk after an acquittal. It's over. Italy can go fark itself. I don't even care if she IS guilty, it's better to let a hundred guilty go than to lock up an innocent person.



The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

We will find out the details very soon, I imagine.
 
2013-03-27 12:12:25 PM  

Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: Why are you afraid of having a proper trial?

There was one. As far as any civilized nation is concerned, there's no asterisk after an acquittal. It's over. Italy can go fark itself. I don't even care if she IS guilty, it's better to let a hundred guilty go than to lock up an innocent person.


The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

We will find out the details very soon, I imagine.


Funny, no one in Italy took the position that the trial was improper when Know was convicted. It was only when the verdict was overturned that certain people started demanding a do-over.
 
2013-03-27 12:13:36 PM  

Bungles: The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.


How can you seriously say that there wasn't a trial?

Are you just jerking off to this?
 
2013-03-27 12:14:16 PM  

Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: Why are you afraid of having a proper trial?

There was one. As far as any civilized nation is concerned, there's no asterisk after an acquittal. It's over. Italy can go fark itself. I don't even care if she IS guilty, it's better to let a hundred guilty go than to lock up an innocent person.


The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

We will find out the details very soon, I imagine.


 I agree that if there isn't a proper trial, there should be the possibility for appeal. I think that there should be more pressure on the state to prove its case the first time, but I can understand a nation that allows its own prosecutors to appeal an acquittal, so from a procedural point of view, I'm ok with the fact that a case can be appealed in this way.

But this still doesn't address the underlying reality that there is no farking evidence against the accused, and that any rational human being who's spent more than 10 minutes looking at the facts would easily conclude that she obviously had nothing to do with this crime.

I don't really give a shiat about proceduralistic/legalistic bullshiat, I care about two innocent people having their lives destroyed over nothing. Anyone who thinks they're guilty has been reading sensationalized tabloid bullshiat and is completely ignorant of the facts in the case, or is some combination of stupid and crazy. Sorry, but that's just how it is.

Do you agree that the basic facts of the case should matter, even a little?
 
2013-03-27 12:17:20 PM  

eggrolls: Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: Why are you afraid of having a proper trial?

There was one. As far as any civilized nation is concerned, there's no asterisk after an acquittal. It's over. Italy can go fark itself. I don't even care if she IS guilty, it's better to let a hundred guilty go than to lock up an innocent person.


The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

We will find out the details very soon, I imagine.

Funny, no one in Italy took the position that the trial was improper when Know was convicted. It was only when the verdict was overturned that certain people started demanding a do-over.


Right, so if they lose this one is going to be "Ok guys best 3 out of 5! Go!".?
The crazy thing is THEY CAUGHT THE PERPETRATOR ALREADY.  The theory that this was a Blood Satan Sex Orgy gone wrong is completely idiotic, and no evidence exists to back up the lunatic prosecutors claim.
 
2013-03-27 12:30:04 PM  

sudo give me more cowbell: Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: Why are you afraid of having a proper trial?

There was one. As far as any civilized nation is concerned, there's no asterisk after an acquittal. It's over. Italy can go fark itself. I don't even care if she IS guilty, it's better to let a hundred guilty go than to lock up an innocent person.


The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

We will find out the details very soon, I imagine.

 I agree that if there isn't a proper trial, there should be the possibility for appeal. I think that there should be more pressure on the state to prove its case the first time, but I can understand a nation that allows its own prosecutors to appeal an acquittal, so from a procedural point of view, I'm ok with the fact that a case can be appealed in this way.

But this still doesn't address the underlying reality that there is no farking evidence against the accused, and that any rational human being who's spent more than 10 minutes looking at the facts would easily conclude that she obviously had nothing to do with this crime.

I don't really give a shiat about proceduralistic/legalistic bullshiat, I care about two innocent people having their lives destroyed over nothing. Anyone who thinks they're guilty has been reading sensationalized tabloid bullshiat and is completely ignorant of the facts in the case, or is some combination of stupid and crazy. Sorry, but that's just how it is.

Do you agree that the basic facts of the case should matter, even a little?


Well, there was evidence - a confession, eyewitness accounts and DNA evidence. During the trial, it was all determined to be very suspect evidence.
 
2013-03-27 12:32:30 PM  

R.A.Danny: Bungles: The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

How can you seriously say that there wasn't a trial?

Are you just jerking off to this?



Why exactly do you think this ruling has happened?
 
2013-03-27 12:43:59 PM  

fo_sho!: During the trial, it was all determined to be very suspect evidence.


Indeed.

sigh... you're a troll. I'm going to stop feeding you.
 
2013-03-27 12:51:47 PM  

Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

How can you seriously say that there wasn't a trial?

Are you just jerking off to this?


Why exactly do you think this ruling has happened?


It happened because unlike most first world countries, Italy allows appeals of acquittals.  In those other countries, there's no such thing as "acquittal pending appeal/review".  It's an acquittal, period.

Even if Amanda Knox is convicted in a new trial, you can bet no US judge will allow her to be extradited.  Just as European countries will not extradite to the United States if the death penalty is a possibility, I seriously doubt the United States would extradite if Italy pulls this stunt, which in the United States would be considered double jeopardy.
 
2013-03-27 12:52:10 PM  

Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

How can you seriously say that there wasn't a trial?

Are you just jerking off to this?


Why exactly do you think this ruling has happened?


Why do I think she was acquitted? Because either A) She's not guilty of B) She may or may not be guilty but the prosecution was unable to prove its case.

In either case, she's not guilty. Going back and trying to find new ways to twist a losing argument goes against everything a fair court stands for.
 
2013-03-27 12:56:41 PM  
Bungles:
So why do you think that the average opinion in say Germany - a country with no dog in this fight whatsoever and a very conservative press - is of Knox's involvement? I was there for a month at the height of the circus, and while it was only page 4 news, it was greatly discussed, with an overwhelming opinion that the prosecution were incompetent and that she was readily lying.
Why, uniquely, does the US public believe on mass of her innocence? it's two reasons: nationalism - as occurs in any country when one of their own is charge abroad - and the lens of the US press.

You're making several assumptions here, all of which are incorrect.

1. I'm some sort of nationalist, where the nationality of a person matters more to me than actual fact. This is wrong. As I've said, I don't give a rat's ass who she is or where she's from. If she was my next-door neighbor and there was any evidence at all that she was involved, or even a plausible theory that included her involvement, I'd put her on a plane back to Italy myself.

2. That I pay any attention at all to the US press. Wrong again. I don't. They're stupid and sensationalist. I have the opinion I have about this case because I've been actually following the facts of this case, mostly from the BBC. The funny thing is that the national press in the UK has been, for the most part, LAUGHABLY biased against Knox in this case. It's ridiculously transparent to someone who doesn't actually live over there. They've been even worse than the US national press about this.

3. That Americans are largely biased in favor of Knox, and Europeans are largely impartial. Once more, with feeling: wrong, of course. Are there Americans who believe she's innocent simply because she's American, without knowing the facts of the case? Of course. Are there Europeans who believe she's guilty simply because she's American, without knowing the facts of the case? Absolutely, there are. Just because you live in Europe doesn't automatically make you some bastion of impartial integrity about this. On the contrary, everything you've said (and failed to say) in this thread points the bias finger squarely back at you.

This whole case is a crock. They have no evidence. They have no plausible theory. The fact that it made it past the first week of the first trial  without being dismissed is a sick, cruel joke. At this point, it's nothing but a farcical witch hunt, and anyone with any amount of impartiality and sense of fairness sees this clearly.
 
2013-03-27 12:58:24 PM  

sudo give me more cowbell: fo_sho!: During the trial, it was all determined to be very suspect evidence.

Indeed.

sigh... you're a troll. I'm going to stop feeding you.


I'm not trolling. I think she is most likely innocent.  You are saying there is no evidence - there was evidence prior to the trial, but when examined it doesn't hold up. It looks like most of it was fabricated by zealous or incompetent authorities.

Also the opinion piece that everyone is linking to seems to be at odds with other sources. The opinion piece states that Rudy Guede was not known to Knox, but other sources state that she served him at work, and they all smoked up together in the basement of the apartment a couple of weeks before the murder.
 
2013-03-27 01:10:59 PM  

R.A.Danny: Bungles: R.A.Danny: Bungles: The fact that there wasn't is the entire point of this ruling.

How can you seriously say that there wasn't a trial?

Are you just jerking off to this?


Why exactly do you think this ruling has happened?

Why do I think she was acquitted? Because either A) She's not guilty of B) She may or may not be guilty but the prosecution was unable to prove its case.

In either case, she's not guilty. Going back and trying to find new ways to twist a losing argument goes against everything a fair court stands for.


She wasn't acquitted.
 
2013-03-27 01:29:46 PM  

fo_sho!: I'm not trolling. I think she is most likely innocent. You are saying there is no evidence - there was evidence prior to the trial, but when examined it doesn't hold up. It looks like most of it was fabricated by zealous or incompetent authorities.


Yes, sorry, my troll accusation was intended for Bungles, not you. My bad.
Hopefully I don't get charged with Calumnia

fo_sho!: Also the opinion piece that everyone is linking to seems to be at odds with other sources. The opinion piece states that Rudy Guede was not known to Knox, but other sources state that she served him at work, and they all smoked up together in the basement of the apartment a couple of weeks before the murder.


That's an awfully flimsy basis for a "connection". Consider how many people she probably served at the bar. And then, there may have been one occasion when she and Kercher went to visit their neighbours downstairs and Guede happened to be hanging around smoking pot. They hung around for a few minutes and then left. That's it. Didn't even speak to the guy.
If that's sufficient basis for a "connection", then you and I are probably connected to countless other criminals.
 
2013-03-27 01:39:44 PM  

sudo give me more cowbell: fo_sho!: I'm not trolling. I think she is most likely innocent. You are saying there is no evidence - there was evidence prior to the trial, but when examined it doesn't hold up. It looks like most of it was fabricated by zealous or incompetent authorities.

Yes, sorry, my troll accusation was intended for Bungles, not you. My bad.



How kind. All I've done is explain how the Italian tiered court review system worked (what a shiat of me, putting things in context for people!) and explained that the US view on this is the one which is out of kilter with public opinion (again what an ass I am! Placing this in an international context, given it's an international case)


Hopefully I don't get charged with Calumnia

fo_sho!: Also the opinion piece that everyone is linking to seems to be at odds with other sources. The opinion piece states that Rudy Guede was not known to Knox, but other sources state that she served him at work, and they all smoked up together in the basement of the apartment a couple of weeks before the murder.

That's an awfully flimsy basis for a "connection". Consider how many people she probably served at the bar. And then, there may have been one occasion when she and Kercher went to visit their neighbours downstairs and Guede happened to be hanging around smoking pot. They hung around for a few minutes and then left. That's it. Didn't even speak to the guy.
If that's sufficient basis for a "connection", then you and I are probably connected to countless other criminals.



What you're doing there is considering the balance of evidence. You know, the thing they want to do in court.
 
2013-03-27 01:48:44 PM  

Bungles: What you're doing there is considering the balance of evidence. You know, the thing they want to do in court.


Let's return to my example for a second: have you ever sat down in a bus at the same time as a child-molester?
Well then we'd better ascertain whether or not you are a child-molester by putting you on trial and inviting frenzied media speculation to run wild.  You know... just to be sure.

Do you or do you not think it would be reasonable to put you on trial for child-molestation?
 
2013-03-27 01:51:15 PM  

sudo give me more cowbell: Bungles: What you're doing there is considering the balance of evidence. You know, the thing they want to do in court.

Let's return to my example for a second: have you ever sat down in a bus at the same time as a child-molester?
Well then we'd better ascertain whether or not you are a child-molester by putting you on trial and inviting frenzied media speculation to run wild.  You know... just to be sure.

Do you or do you not think it would be reasonable to put you on trial for child-molestation?



Well, that's terribly interesting, but not really relevant.

There is a suggestion of a connection, however flimsy on the surface. The sort of thing that needs to be investigated in court.

Earlier in this thread it was suggested that finding a connection was key. The hint that though could have been smoking buddies is therefore something rather critical.
 
2013-03-27 01:56:30 PM  

Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: SnarfVader: Bungles: TwistedFark: Bungles: I was on a trip in the US at the height of the case.... the USA had coverage that is radically different from how the rest of the world perceived it.

Be aware that if you're in the US, you've been presented this case through an incredibly strong prism of "innocent American girl abroad", with a massive PR campaign focused on a "corrupt system".. Check out the coverage in essentially neutral countries on this, like Australia or Germany. It is not positive of Knox.

I live in Australia, it's not negative towards Knox. If anything, the take away is - corrupt and incompetant prosecutor, girl is probably innocent.


That's just not true, I was in Melbourne for a huge chunk of this trial. The common view was "corrupt mess of a system" that was pushed into collapse by a massive US media interest, but that at the core of the case, Knox was not innocent (not premeditated, but some sort of manslaughter "everything went wrong" style narrative).


It's not entirely different from certain current views of the Pistorius case..

I haven't heard anybody here claim Pistorius is innocent. I think you're just making things up now.

Ummmmm.... I didn't suggest anyone has.

Then the Pistorius case is not an apt comparison to the Knox case.


I'm not quite sure you've grasped the comparison I was making.

Alright. Can you clarify what type of comparison you are making between the two cases, please? I thought perhaps you were trying to say the American media views Pistorius as innocent and the system in South Africa as corrupt.

I mean that something widely viewed as a mess of a judicial system (SA local courts and Italian local courts) that were pushed into collapse by a massive media interest (like the circus around the bail trial and the whole of the Knox trial) where essentially lowish level district officials are suddenly dancing for an international crowd (and basking amateurishly in the limelight), ...


We'll have to agree to disagree about the guilt or innocence of Knox, but I do see your point now. Thanks for the clarification.
 
2013-03-27 01:59:09 PM  

Bungles: sudo give me more cowbell: fo_sho!: I'm not trolling. I think she is most likely innocent. You are saying there is no evidence - there was evidence prior to the trial, but when examined it doesn't hold up. It looks like most of it was fabricated by zealous or incompetent authorities.

Yes, sorry, my troll accusation was intended for Bungles, not you. My bad.


How kind. All I've done is explain how the Italian tiered court review system worked (what a shiat of me, putting things in context for people!) and explained that the US view on this is the one which is out of kilter with public opinion (again what an ass I am! Placing this in an international context, given it's an international case)


Hopefully I don't get charged with Calumnia

fo_sho!: Also the opinion piece that everyone is linking to seems to be at odds with other sources. The opinion piece states that Rudy Guede was not known to Knox, but other sources state that she served him at work, and they all smoked up together in the basement of the apartment a couple of weeks before the murder.

That's an awfully flimsy basis for a "connection". Consider how many people she probably served at the bar. And then, there may have been one occasion when she and Kercher went to visit their neighbours downstairs and Guede happened to be hanging around smoking pot. They hung around for a few minutes and then left. That's it. Didn't even speak to the guy.
If that's sufficient basis for a "connection", then you and I are probably connected to countless other criminals.


What you're doing there is considering the balance of evidence. You know, the thing they want to do in court.



What do you mean "the thing they want to do in court"?  There was already a trial, the judges on the appeals panel said that there is "no corroborating evidence of a connection between Knox/Sollecito and Guede" and that a connection was "far from probable" which I interpret as meaning "very improbable".
This is nuts.
 
2013-03-27 02:02:40 PM  

Bungles: How kind. All I've done is explain how the Italian tiered court review system worked (what a shiat of me, putting things in context for people!) and explained that the US view on this is the one which is out of kilter with public opinion (again what an ass I am! Placing this in an international context, given it's an international case)


While you've gotten something of a bad rap on the notion of the court system, your attempts to give value judgments on the court of public opinion have been pretty weak.  You've attempted to do far more than simply state that the US view is out of kilter, you've actively attempted to make that mean that US opinion is more biased and wrong.  Please don't waste time denying it.  Trouble is, that doesn't really seem to be the case.

You asked what bias reporting in other countries would have, as if this would be a nationalist issue alone and that countries with no dog in the game (Germany) could be trusted to be impartial, but that's a remarkably naive idea to even attempt to foster in your head, because it ignores the MOST important bias ANY reporter is going to have: newsworthiness and marketability.  So tell me which makes the better story to sell newspapers:

--Drifting thief breaks in, rapes and murders girl
--Threesome sex ritual amongst sex-starved college kids featuring supposedly wholesome American girl who is actually a drug-fueled sex vixen gets unwelcome advance on fourth party and leads to sordid sex death

One makes for great tabloid coverage.  One happens too often to even get mentioned.  Which one gets covered by anyone who has no skin in the game?
 
2013-03-27 02:03:07 PM  

Bungles: Well, that's terribly interesting, but not really relevant.


It is extremely relevent. The burden of evidence that I have just satisfied to put you on trial for child-molestation is about the same as what's currently being used by the insane prosecutor in perugia.
 
2013-03-27 02:53:16 PM  

Bungles: She wasn't acquitted.


Liar.
 
2013-03-27 03:12:58 PM  

R.A.Danny: Bungles: She wasn't acquitted.

Liar.


How is this a lie? She was acquitted pending review by the higher court, because the appeal and the trial disagreed.

That's not the same as the American "acquitted". It was made very clear at the verdict.

You're the one demonstrably lying. You can disagree with the Italian system, you can damn the press coverage, but you can't pretend she was "acquitted" in the American sense. The trial, under Italian law, would have only concluded two days ago. This isn't a new thing, the date was set on the very day of the original announcement.

She was not acquitted.
 
2013-03-27 03:25:16 PM  

Bungles: How is this a lie? She was acquitted pending review by the higher court, because the appeal and the trial disagreed.


She was either acquitted or not acquitted. The very definition of the word tells you there is no if, and, or, or but.
 
2013-03-27 03:32:08 PM  

R.A.Danny: Bungles: How is this a lie? She was acquitted pending review by the higher court, because the appeal and the trial disagreed.

She was either acquitted or not acquitted. The very definition of the word tells you there is no if, and, or, or but.



This isn't an American court. That's like saying someone in the UK can't be charged with Grievous Bodily Harm because you, watching in the US, don't have the same precise crime.
 
2013-03-27 03:45:34 PM  
Bungles continues to be allergic to any and all discussion of the actual facts of the case. The only things he seems able to discuss are the procedural details of the Italian legal system and why they should be considered trustworthy, and the media coverage of the case in Europe and why that should be considered superior to the "biased" coverage in the US. Except even there, he still doesn't want to talk about what the "biased" US press won't tell us.

I would like to remind you, sir, that you are posting on Fark, which is a no representative sample of Internet commenters, and the US posters are not a representative sample of Americans. Though individual variations exist, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the ability and willingness of police and courts in general to arrive at justice - and more importantly, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the news and entertainment media. Indeed, the belief that the press tends to favor sensationalism over facts is the very idea on which this site was founded.

Given that, please understand that expecting us to blindly trust the Italian justice system isn't a winning argument around here, and expecting us to blindly trust the EU media and the "court of public opinion" is even less so. If you want to actually persuade anyone here, you should be prepared to provide specific facts that call Amanda Knox's innocence into question - and be prepared to face a dismissive attitude if the facts you present cover only her demeanor, her personal life, or her coerced testimony while imprisoned.

Of course, maybe you just want to see your name in purple bold. That's part of Fark too.
 
2013-03-27 03:47:30 PM  

Bungles: This isn't an American court.


But it is a reason for the US to block extradition. Americans are guaranteed certain rights, and the right against double jeopardy is HUGE. It doesn't matter that Italy is a backassed shiathole, handing her over to the Italians would be a grievous crime against her as far as we are concerned. Not unlike the Italians not handing someone over who is facing the death penalty. As far as the US is concerned, she was acquitted. None of this "pending" crap counts.
 
2013-03-27 04:02:37 PM  

pedobearapproved: furry satanic sex orgy


www.retrocrush.com
 
2013-03-27 04:17:25 PM  

R.A.Danny: Bungles: This isn't an American court.

But it is a reason for the US to block extradition. Americans are guaranteed certain rights, and the right against double jeopardy is HUGE. It doesn't matter that Italy is a backassed shiathole, handing her over to the Italians would be a grievous crime against her as far as we are concerned. Not unlike the Italians not handing someone over who is facing the death penalty. As far as the US is concerned, she was acquitted. None of this "pending" crap counts.


I've no doubt the US would never extradite her. I've never said otherwise.
 
2013-03-27 04:23:04 PM  

Mithiwithi: Bungles continues to be allergic to any and all discussion of the actual facts of the case. The only things he seems able to discuss are the procedural details of the Italian legal system and why they should be considered trustworthy, and the media coverage of the case in Europe and why that should be considered superior to the "biased" coverage in the US. Except even there, he still doesn't want to talk about what the "biased" US press won't tell us.

I would like to remind you, sir, that you are posting on Fark, which is a no representative sample of Internet commenters, and the US posters are not a representative sample of Americans. Though individual variations exist, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the ability and willingness of police and courts in general to arrive at justice - and more importantly, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the news and entertainment media. Indeed, the belief that the press tends to favor sensationalism over facts is the very idea on which this site was founded.

Given that, please understand that expecting us to blindly trust the Italian justice system isn't a winning argument around here, and expecting us to blindly trust the EU media and the "court of public opinion" is even less so. If you want to actually persuade anyone here, you should be prepared to provide specific facts that call Amanda Knox's innocence into question - and be prepared to face a dismissive attitude if the facts you present cover only her demeanor, her personal life, or her coerced testimony while imprisoned.

Of course, maybe you just want to see your name in purple bold. That's part of Fark too.


I've no wish to play Miss Marple here, and I think all this armchair detective work is frankly daft.

None of us can discuss the "evidence", because all anyone here knows, including me, if the dribble and drabs of whatever media they listened to at the time. Playing internet sleuth using random flotsam isn't helping anyone, and it happens in every case here on Fark, and it always just looks ridiculous.


I'm not saying blindly trust the Italian system, all I'm saying is that the demonisation of it here is ridiculous, that she was never acquitted in the US sense, and that the view from much of the world is not as homogeneous as it seems to be in the US.


All those things are demonstrably true, so I'm not quite sure why people are getting so angry about it.
 
2013-03-27 04:28:20 PM  

Bungles: Mithiwithi: Bungles continues to be allergic to any and all discussion of the actual facts of the case. The only things he seems able to discuss are the procedural details of the Italian legal system and why they should be considered trustworthy, and the media coverage of the case in Europe and why that should be considered superior to the "biased" coverage in the US. Except even there, he still doesn't want to talk about what the "biased" US press won't tell us.

I would like to remind you, sir, that you are posting on Fark, which is a no representative sample of Internet commenters, and the US posters are not a representative sample of Americans. Though individual variations exist, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the ability and willingness of police and courts in general to arrive at justice - and more importantly, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the news and entertainment media. Indeed, the belief that the press tends to favor sensationalism over facts is the very idea on which this site was founded.

Given that, please understand that expecting us to blindly trust the Italian justice system isn't a winning argument around here, and expecting us to blindly trust the EU media and the "court of public opinion" is even less so. If you want to actually persuade anyone here, you should be prepared to provide specific facts that call Amanda Knox's innocence into question - and be prepared to face a dismissive attitude if the facts you present cover only her demeanor, her personal life, or her coerced testimony while imprisoned.

Of course, maybe you just want to see your name in purple bold. That's part of Fark too.

I've no wish to play Miss Marple here, and I think all this armchair detective work is frankly daft.

None of us can discuss the "evidence", because all anyone here knows, including me, if the dribble and drabs of whatever media they listened to at the time. Playing internet sleuth using random flotsam isn't helping anyone, and it happens in every ...


But the facts came out in court!  They are there for us to peruse.
 
2013-03-27 04:41:32 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: Mithiwithi: Bungles continues to be allergic to any and all discussion of the actual facts of the case. The only things he seems able to discuss are the procedural details of the Italian legal system and why they should be considered trustworthy, and the media coverage of the case in Europe and why that should be considered superior to the "biased" coverage in the US. Except even there, he still doesn't want to talk about what the "biased" US press won't tell us.

I would like to remind you, sir, that you are posting on Fark, which is a no representative sample of Internet commenters, and the US posters are not a representative sample of Americans. Though individual variations exist, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the ability and willingness of police and courts in general to arrive at justice - and more importantly, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the news and entertainment media. Indeed, the belief that the press tends to favor sensationalism over facts is the very idea on which this site was founded.

Given that, please understand that expecting us to blindly trust the Italian justice system isn't a winning argument around here, and expecting us to blindly trust the EU media and the "court of public opinion" is even less so. If you want to actually persuade anyone here, you should be prepared to provide specific facts that call Amanda Knox's innocence into question - and be prepared to face a dismissive attitude if the facts you present cover only her demeanor, her personal life, or her coerced testimony while imprisoned.

Of course, maybe you just want to see your name in purple bold. That's part of Fark too.

I've no wish to play Miss Marple here, and I think all this armchair detective work is frankly daft.

None of us can discuss the "evidence", because all anyone here knows, including me, if the dribble and drabs of whatever media they listened to at the time. Playing internet sleuth using random flotsam isn't helping anyone, and it happens ...



But the facts came out in court!  They are there for us to peruse. First, I'm impressed by your mastery of Italian legalese.

Secondly, the entire reason that the Supreme Court has initiated a retrial is because, presumably in his opinion, the trial was flawed. You can't say "But we know everything! There was a trial!" when the entire point of this is because the judge has found the trial, for reasons we don't yet know, legally unsound.

That's a little like saying that appeals are pointless, because they retread facts we already know.

Look, I've never said I think Knox is going to be found guilty. All I've said is I find what I know about her testimony suspicious and probably an invention, and the media circus that came about the first time incredibly distasteful (and still is: her book deal - not a penny of which is going to the Kercher Memorial Scholarship - even more distasteful). That doesn't mean I think she's guilty of this crime, only lying (for reasons unknown, but there are a lot of possibilities of varying innocence). My opinion isn't unusual, and is pretty mainstream, outside the US.
 
2013-03-27 04:53:39 PM  

Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Mithiwithi: Bungles continues to be allergic to any and all discussion of the actual facts of the case. The only things he seems able to discuss are the procedural details of the Italian legal system and why they should be considered trustworthy, and the media coverage of the case in Europe and why that should be considered superior to the "biased" coverage in the US. Except even there, he still doesn't want to talk about what the "biased" US press won't tell us.

I would like to remind you, sir, that you are posting on Fark, which is a no representative sample of Internet commenters, and the US posters are not a representative sample of Americans. Though individual variations exist, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the ability and willingness of police and courts in general to arrive at justice - and more importantly, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the news and entertainment media. Indeed, the belief that the press tends to favor sensationalism over facts is the very idea on which this site was founded.

Given that, please understand that expecting us to blindly trust the Italian justice system isn't a winning argument around here, and expecting us to blindly trust the EU media and the "court of public opinion" is even less so. If you want to actually persuade anyone here, you should be prepared to provide specific facts that call Amanda Knox's innocence into question - and be prepared to face a dismissive attitude if the facts you present cover only her demeanor, her personal life, or her coerced testimony while imprisoned.

Of course, maybe you just want to see your name in purple bold. That's part of Fark too.

I've no wish to play Miss Marple here, and I think all this armchair detective work is frankly daft.

None of us can discuss the "evidence", because all anyone here knows, including me, if the dribble and drabs of whatever media they listened to at the time. Playing internet sleuth using random flotsam isn't helping anyone, ...


So what you're saying is that in the do-over that was inexplicably granted that some new facts that the prosecution forgot to present at the original trial are going to come to light.  Brilliant.
 
2013-03-27 06:34:37 PM  

Bungles: My opinion isn't unusual, and is pretty mainstream, outside the US.


You keep saying stuff like this as if it actually has any bearing AT ALL on whether or not you're actually correct.

It doesn't.
 
2013-03-27 07:14:26 PM  

Falin: Bungles: My opinion isn't unusual, and is pretty mainstream, outside the US.

You keep saying stuff like this as if it actually has any bearing AT ALL on whether or not you're actually correct.

It doesn't.


It has a massive bearing on the general given in the US that this is some sort of injustice. Most people are delighted at the checks and balances here.
 
2013-03-27 07:17:27 PM  

steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Mithiwithi: Bungles continues to be allergic to any and all discussion of the actual facts of the case. The only things he seems able to discuss are the procedural details of the Italian legal system and why they should be considered trustworthy, and the media coverage of the case in Europe and why that should be considered superior to the "biased" coverage in the US. Except even there, he still doesn't want to talk about what the "biased" US press won't tell us.

I would like to remind you, sir, that you are posting on Fark, which is a no representative sample of Internet commenters, and the US posters are not a representative sample of Americans. Though individual variations exist, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the ability and willingness of police and courts in general to arrive at justice - and more importantly, we tend to have a jaundiced view of the news and entertainment media. Indeed, the belief that the press tends to favor sensationalism over facts is the very idea on which this site was founded.

Given that, please understand that expecting us to blindly trust the Italian justice system isn't a winning argument around here, and expecting us to blindly trust the EU media and the "court of public opinion" is even less so. If you want to actually persuade anyone here, you should be prepared to provide specific facts that call Amanda Knox's innocence into question - and be prepared to face a dismissive attitude if the facts you present cover only her demeanor, her personal life, or her coerced testimony while imprisoned.

Of course, maybe you just want to see your name in purple bold. That's part of Fark too.

I've no wish to play Miss Marple here, and I think all this armchair detective work is frankly daft.

None of us can discuss the "evidence", because all anyone here knows, including me, if the dribble and drabs of whatever media they listened to at the time. Playing internet sleuth using random flotsam isn't helping ...


So what you're saying is that in the do-over that was inexplicably granted that some new facts that the prosecution forgot to present at the original trial are going to come to light.  Brilliant.

When two courts disagree, a third steps in to see why, and to judge if the trial was flawed to begin with.

That's how it works. It's not the US system, but it's an entirely logically sound system.


Shall we bring up US conviction and overturn rates, if we want to see which system brings a more reliable justice?
 
2013-03-27 07:18:38 PM  

Bungles: Falin: Bungles: My opinion isn't unusual, and is pretty mainstream, outside the US.

You keep saying stuff like this as if it actually has any bearing AT ALL on whether or not you're actually correct.

It doesn't.

It has a massive bearing on the general given in the US that this is some sort of injustice. Most people are delighted at the checks and balances here.


Again, not American. Zero loyalty to the United States. Still pretty sure that this is a huge injustice. The fact that you take pleasure in subjecting an obviously innocent person to this kind of persecution and media tar/feathering makes you a huge tool no matter what country you come from.
 
2013-03-27 07:25:33 PM  

sudo give me more cowbell: Bungles: Falin: Bungles: My opinion isn't unusual, and is pretty mainstream, outside the US.

You keep saying stuff like this as if it actually has any bearing AT ALL on whether or not you're actually correct.

It doesn't.

It has a massive bearing on the general given in the US that this is some sort of injustice. Most people are delighted at the checks and balances here.

Again, not American. Zero loyalty to the United States. Still pretty sure that this is a huge injustice. The fact that you take pleasure in subjecting an obviously innocent person to this kind of persecution and media tar/feathering makes you a huge tool no matter what country you come from.


The level of presumption if your post is pretty impressive.

"Obviously innocent" - many disagree. In fact, most. Including the court. And the victim's family.

"Persecution" - many disagree. Most see the time served as being barely adequate for the slandering of an innocent man.

How is it being a tool to want a proper trial? And to follow the law of the land?

The tool here is you, not giving two shiats about the Kercher family -  you know the family of the actual victim here.
 
2013-03-27 07:40:10 PM  

Bungles: The level of presumption if your post is pretty impressive.

"Obviously innocent" - many disagree. In fact, most. Including the court. And the victim's family.


Facts are not determined by the democratic process. Throughout this entire process youve offered absolutely nothing by way of logical reasons to think that she might have been involved in the crime.

"Persecution" - many disagree. Most see the time served as being barely adequate for the slandering of an innocent man.

She suggested a lead for the police to follow up on. The fact that they accused him was their mistake, rather than acknowledge this mistake they've doubled down by blaming everything on the pretty American girl.

How is it being a tool to want a proper trial? And to follow the law of the land?

That would be respectable if the people in charge of the prosecution were demonstrating even the slightest bit of reasonable fairness. They're not. They're egomaniacs who can't admit that they're wrong and are drunk off of the tabloid spectable that has brought attention to their otherwise unimportant lives.

The tool here is you, not giving two shiats about the Kercher family - you know the family of the actual victim here.

At this point, my sympathy for them has been utterly exhausted. It must be horrible to lose a loved-one to a senseless crime, but to be so vindictive as to seek the lives of two other people that obviously (yes, I will use that word again, it is obvious to anyone with more than two farking neurons in their brain who's willing to look at the situation objectively) wasn't responsible for it is petty and vindictive.

It occurs to me now that perhaps you are a member of the Kercher family. In fact, that's really the only explanation that I can come up with for how you could stick so strictly to a conviction that is so drastically at odds with reason. If that's the case, all I can say is this isn't going to bring her back. Ruining someone else's life just isn't going to make you feel any better.
 
2013-03-27 07:47:03 PM  

sudo give me more cowbell: Bungles: The level of presumption if your post is pretty impressive.

"Obviously innocent" - many disagree. In fact, most. Including the court. And the victim's family.

Facts are not determined by the democratic process. Throughout this entire process youve offered absolutely nothing by way of logical reasons to think that she might have been involved in the crime.

"Persecution" - many disagree. Most see the time served as being barely adequate for the slandering of an innocent man.

She suggested a lead for the police to follow up on. The fact that they accused him was their mistake, rather than acknowledge this mistake they've doubled down by blaming everything on the pretty American girl.

How is it being a tool to want a proper trial? And to follow the law of the land?

That would be respectable if the people in charge of the prosecution were demonstrating even the slightest bit of reasonable fairness. They're not. They're egomaniacs who can't admit that they're wrong and are drunk off of the tabloid spectable that has brought attention to their otherwise unimportant lives.

The tool here is you, not giving two shiats about the Kercher family - you know the family of the actual victim here.

At this point, my sympathy for them has been utterly exhausted. It must be horrible to lose a loved-one to a senseless crime, but to be so vindictive as to seek the lives of two other people that obviously (yes, I will use that word again, it is obvious to anyone with more than two farking neurons in their brain who's willing to look at the situation objectively) wasn't responsible for it is petty and vindictive.

It occurs to me now that perhaps you are a member of the Kercher family. In fact, that's really the only explanation that I can come up with for how you could stick so strictly to a conviction that is so drastically at odds with reason. If that's the case, all I can say is this isn't going to bring her back. Ruining someone else's life just isn't going to make yo ...


I've no connection to the Kercher familiy whatsoever (I do, incidentally, know several people who have met Knox, but that has little bearing on my opinion.... what they describe could be explained as someone who was brutally changed by 3 years in jail and innocent, as much as someone broken and dangerous from the beginning).

If you're not American I find it odd that you find my view so odd. I'm positively pro-Knox compared to the non-US mainstream. People are demanding blood. I'd just like a proper trial, run by competent people.
 
2013-03-27 08:17:36 PM  

Bungles: If you're not American I find it odd that you find my view so odd. I'm positively pro-Knox compared to the non-US mainstream. People are demanding blood. I'd just like a proper trial, run by competent people.


Before you can justify that, there has to be credible reason to accuse her of a crime.
 
2013-03-27 08:31:18 PM  

Mithiwithi: Bungles: If you're not American I find it odd that you find my view so odd. I'm positively pro-Knox compared to the non-US mainstream. People are demanding blood. I'd just like a proper trial, run by competent people.

Before you can justify that, there has to be credible reason to accuse her of a crime.


The list of issues has been posted previously in this thread.
 
2013-03-27 08:33:13 PM  

Bungles: Mithiwithi: Bungles: If you're not American I find it odd that you find my view so odd. I'm positively pro-Knox compared to the non-US mainstream. People are demanding blood. I'd just like a proper trial, run by competent people.

Before you can justify that, there has to be credible reason to accuse her of a crime.

The list of issues has been posted previously in this thread.


Exactly.
 
2013-03-27 10:21:46 PM  

Mithiwithi: Bungles: Mithiwithi: Bungles: If you're not American I find it odd that you find my view so odd. I'm positively pro-Knox compared to the non-US mainstream. People are demanding blood. I'd just like a proper trial, run by competent people.

Before you can justify that, there has to be credible reason to accuse her of a crime.

The list of issues has been posted previously in this thread.

Exactly.



It's clearly enough to launch a case, unless you're already pre-judged your opinion.
 
2013-03-28 12:13:58 AM  
A fun question for Bungles - did Rudy Guede rape and murder Meredith Kircher, yes or no?
 
2013-03-28 12:42:09 PM  

Bungles: I'm not saying blindly trust the Italian system, all I'm saying is that the demonisation of it here is ridiculous, that she was never acquitted in the US sense, and that the view from much of the world is not as homogeneous as it seems to be in the US.


You keep saying this, but the problem is, you're wrong. In the US you only get one shot. They got their shot. In our book its over. that's what you arent getting. The reason you only get one shot is the strain it places on the individual and the incredible resources the prosecution has to make its case. It's a fair system. Putting an individual through years of court wrangling to be essentially at the mercy of forces beyond his control is cruel and unusual.
 
Displayed 436 of 436 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report