Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(NBC News)   Amanda Knox found guilty of murder...again (link fixed)   (worldnews.nbcnews.com) divider line 365
    More: Interesting, Amanda Knox, found guilty, murders, ebola, West Nile virus  
•       •       •

9441 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jan 2014 at 5:04 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-30 07:04:47 PM  
This is fun. In any other thread, European countries are all far more educated, sophisticated and run better than stupid old "Merica.
 Except for the justice system! That's where we are suddenly far superior!

The biatch is guilty. Twice convicted. Your argument was used in court already, and deemed invalid.
 
2014-01-30 07:07:00 PM  

The Fett: Not every country operates on the principles of assumed innocence.


Indeed.  Does France really operate on the principle of presumptive guilt?  If so, will the US extradite someone there for trial?
 
2014-01-30 07:07:20 PM  

dforkus: I'm not going to comment on the whole troll vs not a troll controversy upthread, but unless you spent time there, or actively read them online it's hard to fathom how batshiat crazy the European tabloids (UK especially) got with this story..Regardless of troll v not a troll, rest assured there is a sizable number of the European public who actually believe this shiat.


And millions of Americans believe Fox News is fair and balanced, or that 9/11 was an inside job. People all over the world believe what sounds good to them, discarding any contradicting evidence in the vast majority of cases.

If you read UK tabloids on other stories, they go batshiat crazy over everything, the Knox case doesn't really even stand out as a particularly egregious case. I mean if you want to plumb the depths of UK journalism, try several papers making a single clearly accidental £10 (~$15) expenses claim from a politicians husband front page news for nearly a month*. Or of course the Murdoch phone hacking scandal where they deleted texts from a phone of a girl the police were searching for one of the times they hacked her phone, making the police/parents think she still had the phone, etc.

Or if you want to laugh at their audacious hypocrisy you might pick out the issue of I think the Daily Mirror in the late 90s where the front page was splashed with something about a "most sick evil pervert of all time" relating the story of some guy that had been convicted of having sex with a 15 year old, while on the back pages (sport) was Anna Kournikova's (then underage) butt, and in the entertainment pages was an upskirt photo of (then underage) Natalie Portman getting out of a car.

*It was for a PPV adult movie, which explains why it might get some play, but that also means there is no way it was deliberate
 
2014-01-30 07:08:13 PM  
This her?

 This Might Be The Worst Teenager On Instagram (Featured Partner)
 
2014-01-30 07:08:46 PM  

dforkus: Casey Anthony


Contrary to popular opinion, the jury was right to acquit Casey Anthony. The prosecution failed to rule out the theory, quite plausible, that the girl died accidentally, probably by Casey's culpable negligence, and that Casey made a clumsy attempt to cover it up by making it look like a kidnapping and murder.

Casey Anthony is a very irresponsible person. But nothing in her background makes me think she's so cold she would kill her own child so she could live a party lifestyle. I think my theory is much more plausible than that advanced by the prosecution.
 
2014-01-30 07:10:30 PM  

TheMysticS: ElPresidente: Maud Dib: ElPresidente:

Hmmmm...my phone's still not ringing. What a surprise.

You've got nothing.

On the contrary - I have two things you don't. An independent unbiased mind and the good sense not to argue with someone who doesn't - you.

Pfft.
Clown.

/I know you can defend yourself Maud Dib, but the troll got me! He got me. I'm sorry. It's just he thinks he's the Brain, but he's Pinky. Narf.


Using a child's cartoon as a basis for an argument to try to prove you're intellectually superior is no way to go through life, son.

the_vegetarian_cannibal: ElPresidente: I just love how everyone is happy to believe the Italian prosecutors are lying scumbags, but the defence team and defendants must be angels telling the complete truth and incapable of lying themselves.

There's a simple solution. Send her to Guantanamo Bay. Still on US territory and facing Italian-style American justice for the next ten years. She must be a threat and need locking up, right?

You sound unbiased.


Radio Shack called - they have batteries for your non-functioning Sarcasm Meter.
 
2014-01-30 07:12:34 PM  

doglover: It's kind of funny for Anericans to call someone's judicial system corrupt.


It's funny you think the Italian justice system is better than the United States, buddy.

Hint: Every single piece of evidence in this case would have been thrown out in the US Justice System as tainted and/or illegally obtained.
 
2014-01-30 07:13:30 PM  

doubled99: This is fun. In any other thread, European countries are all far more educated, sophisticated and run better than stupid old "Merica.
 Except for the justice system! That's where we are suddenly far superior!

The biatch is guilty. Twice convicted. Your argument was used in court already, and deemed invalid.


No, northern European countries are. The Mediterrean states peaked about 44 BCE.
 
2014-01-30 07:14:20 PM  

nekom: This is the country that jailed geologists for failing to predict an earthquake, after all.


Huh.  In GE101, I was told the story of Italy jailing some civil engineers because a dam didn't break when a landslide (possibly triggered by an earthquake) dumped an entire hillside into the reservoir.  The argument was that this was proof that the dam had been built much stronger than the specification required, and the engineers had therefore defrauded the government.  Could these be two morphs of the same urban legend?
 
2014-01-30 07:14:39 PM  
I don't need to say she did it because her eyes are screaming it.
 
2014-01-30 07:17:32 PM  

xria: dforkus: I'm not going to comment on the whole troll vs not a troll controversy upthread, but unless you spent time there, or actively read them online it's hard to fathom how batshiat crazy the European tabloids (UK especially) got with this story..Regardless of troll v not a troll, rest assured there is a sizable number of the European public who actually believe this shiat.

And millions of Americans believe Fox News is fair and balanced, or that 9/11 was an inside job. People all over the world believe what sounds good to them, discarding any contradicting evidence in the vast majority of cases.


Without a doubt, a sizable number of the American public are dumber than shiat consumers of a phony reality created by garbage media sources.. There is no disputing that.

My only point was that, whether they want to admit it or not, this also holds true for European society.
 
2014-01-30 07:17:47 PM  

flondrix: nekom: This is the country that jailed geologists for failing to predict an earthquake, after all.

Huh.  In GE101, I was told the story of Italy jailing some civil engineers because a dam didn't break when a landslide (possibly triggered by an earthquake) dumped an entire hillside into the reservoir.  The argument was that this was proof that the dam had been built much stronger than the specification required, and the engineers had therefore defrauded the government.  Could these be two morphs of the same urban legend?


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/world/europe/italy-convicts-7-for- fa ilure-to-warn-of-quake.html?_r=0

Back to this case, as mentioned, they have guy in jail who's DNA was found on the victim and admitted to it, they have no proof that Knox and her bf were involved.
 
2014-01-30 07:18:37 PM  

flondrix: nekom: This is the country that jailed geologists for failing to predict an earthquake, after all.

Huh.  In GE101, I was told the story of Italy jailing some civil engineers because a dam didn't break when a landslide (possibly triggered by an earthquake) dumped an entire hillside into the reservoir.  The argument was that this was proof that the dam had been built much stronger than the specification required, and the engineers had therefore defrauded the government.  Could these be two morphs of the same urban legend?


The earthquake trial isn't an urban legend. A quick bing will show the relevant articles.
 
2014-01-30 07:19:19 PM  

flondrix: nekom: This is the country that jailed geologists for failing to predict an earthquake, after all.

Huh.  In GE101, I was told the story of Italy jailing some civil engineers because a dam didn't break when a landslide (possibly triggered by an earthquake) dumped an entire hillside into the reservoir.  The argument was that this was proof that the dam had been built much stronger than the specification required, and the engineers had therefore defrauded the government.  Could these be two morphs of the same urban legend?


Not sure about your story nekom's example actually happened for real.
 
2014-01-30 07:19:41 PM  

CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.


I think she's guilty. I listened to it at the start and I simply cannot believe her story, she had to be in on it, actively too.

She's attractive, so that makes her innocent to some. Look at how Casey Anthony got away with it.
 
2014-01-30 07:20:30 PM  

Bungles: Ummmm, an Appeal Court and a Supreme Court reviewing cases isn't double jeopardy, no matter how easy a sound bite that makes.


In the US legal system, once there is an acquittal, the prosecution cannot "appeal"--at least for that crime.  The courts can try for a second round with charges like "violating the victim's civil rights" or "interfering with a crime scene" or some such.
 
2014-01-30 07:22:59 PM  

ElPresidente: I just love how everyone is happy to believe the Italian prosecutors are lying scumbags, but the defence team and defendants must be angels telling the complete truth and incapable of lying themselves.

There's a simple solution. Send her to Guantanamo Bay. Still on US territory and facing Italian-style American justice for the next ten years. She must be a threat and need locking up, right?


Oooooo. Too far playing the Gitmo card.

0/10
 
2014-01-30 07:25:22 PM  
Her tits are too pretty for her to be guilty.
 
2014-01-30 07:27:02 PM  

MagicianNamedGob: PoRL: With regards extradition, I'm not sure the USA politicos will want to open a can of worms by not honouring an extradition treaty with an EU country as who knows where it'll end. Double jeopardy may well apply in the USA, but not in Italy where the offence and guilty verdict took place.

You're wrong about that. Italy refuses to extradite murderers to the U.S. on  human rights grounds because we have the death penalty. The U.S. will almost certainly refuse to extradite Knox. The consensus opinion is that the U.S. will cite double jeopardy as a "polite" way to say no. But if it wants to make a statement it will refuse on the grounds that the evidence against her was insufficient. E.U. countries and the U.s. refuse extraditions to each other some what regularly.


This is why they did this - they were able to save face, in the knowledge that they won't be extraditing her, and they don't have to deal with the backfire from that. It was an empty gesture to make a corrupt, perverted old prosecutor feel better about himself - and it costs only the expense of the trial.
 
2014-01-30 07:28:26 PM  

rka: Is there a way to negative care? Can we actually care so little we go below zero?


Sure.  For example, some conservatives will go out of their way to do something ecologically unfriendly, just to piss off "the hippies".
 
2014-01-30 07:30:18 PM  

theflatline: Her tits are too pretty for her to be guilty.


Agreed.  That rack is borderline epic.

img.fark.net
 
2014-01-30 07:31:03 PM  

flondrix: rka: Is there a way to negative care? Can we actually care so little we go below zero?

Sure.  For example, some conservatives will go out of their way to do something ecologically unfriendly, just to piss off "the hippies".


So much for conservation.
 
2014-01-30 07:31:57 PM  

walktoanarcade: CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.

I think she's guilty. I listened to it at the start and I simply cannot believe her story, she had to be in on it, actively too.

She's attractive, so that makes her innocent to some. Look at how Casey Anthony got away with it.


You know, it's interesting you say that, because I've seen a couple of these threads, and that seems to be the standard reason that people believe that she is guilty.  Because they simply cannot believe her, and she just Has to be in on it, actively.  And that the only reason anyone thinks she's innocent is because she's pretty.

But I admit that I have my own biases.   One of which is that anytime somebody comes out and says that an American college student, male or female, murdered somebody in a satanic sex ritual gone wrong, I'm going to have something of an immediate rejection of that.  Particularly when that appears to be the major foundation of the case.
 
2014-01-30 07:32:20 PM  

flondrix: Bungles: Ummmm, an Appeal Court and a Supreme Court reviewing cases isn't double jeopardy, no matter how easy a sound bite that makes.

In the US legal system, once there is an acquittal, the prosecution cannot "appeal"--at least for that crime.  The courts can try for a second round with charges like "violating the victim's civil rights" or "interfering with a crime scene" or some such.


But she wasn't tried in the US, she was tried in a country with a tri-part judicial system with in-built rounds of appeal. That isn't double jeopardy, nor would it be a surprise to the people who drafted the treaty. It's the natural course.

To make it equivalent, it would be like someone in Italy being outraged that someone in the US wasn't sentenced at verdict - and therefore should be set free - but rather at a later sentencing hearing, as if they're two separate trials. They aren't, they're part of the same multi-step process. It's exactly the same thing here: it's a multi-part judicial process.
 
2014-01-30 07:34:34 PM  
(incidentally, she wasn't "acquitted" in the sense used by the US judicial system, that's just shoddy translation. The trial was still in progress)
 
2014-01-30 07:34:53 PM  

CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.


I'm British and I think the British media have done everything but brand her as a witch because the victim was British. The US media seemed to want the trial to go on forever ending with her conviction. Then they could play the victim card. Truth told, nobody is sure whether she did it unless they had a horse in the race, in which case she's either an angel or a demon in human form.
 
2014-01-30 07:36:33 PM  

ElPresidente: TheMysticS: ElPresidente: Maud Dib: ElPresidente:

Hmmmm...my phone's still not ringing. What a surprise.

You've got nothing.

On the contrary - I have two things you don't. An independent unbiased mind and the good sense not to argue with someone who doesn't - you.

Pfft.
Clown.

/I know you can defend yourself Maud Dib, but the troll got me! He got me. I'm sorry. It's just he thinks he's the Brain, but he's Pinky. Narf.

Using a child's cartoon as a basis for an argument to try to prove you're intellectually superior is no way to go through life, son.

the_vegetarian_cannibal: ElPresidente: I just love how everyone is happy to believe the Italian prosecutors are lying scumbags, but the defence team and defendants must be angels telling the complete truth and incapable of lying themselves.

There's a simple solution. Send her to Guantanamo Bay. Still on US territory and facing Italian-style American justice for the next ten years. She must be a threat and need locking up, right?

You sound unbiased.

Radio Shack called - they have batteries for your non-functioning Sarcasm Meter.


Forgive me, E, old boy, l was just dumbing down my references to give you a chance to further participate in this discussion.
I was correct in my inference that you would recognize said cartoon characters, and that my reference would help you absorb the fact that I am, in essence, calling you a boob.

But really, I'm not trying to prove my intellectual superiority. I'm just calling you out as a wanker.
But, you win! Your annoying posts and snipes at a poster I like made me stick my nose in. Others have responded to you, as well. This one was a two-fer!
Trolly troll trolls the fark boards!

/and that's daughter, not son
 
2014-01-30 07:37:18 PM  

jonas opines: walktoanarcade: CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.

I think she's guilty. I listened to it at the start and I simply cannot believe her story, she had to be in on it, actively too.

She's attractive, so that makes her innocent to some. Look at how Casey Anthony got away with it.

You know, it's interesting you say that, because I've seen a couple of these threads, and that seems to be the standard reason that people believe that she is guilty.  Because they simply cannot believe her, and she just Has to be in on it, actively.  And that the only reason anyone thinks she's innocent is because she's pretty.

But I admit that I have my own biases.   One of which is that anytime somebody comes out and says that an American college student, male or female, murdered somebody in a satanic sex ritual gone wrong, I'm going to have something of an immediate rejection of that.  Particularly when that appears to be the major foundation of the case.


Why is it so hard to believe?   The debil [sic] part is probably pure bunk, but what if it isn't? Some sick bastards actually do kill people in "rituals" on a fairly regular basis. Maybe you're weary and remember the cult hysteria of the 80s deep down inside?

It isn't like I'm faulting anyone for thinking she's innocent, as she may well be. Her story perfectly tickles my "Bitach Be-Guitly" bone.
 
2014-01-30 07:37:26 PM  

CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.


0-media-cdn.foolz.us

1/10
At least share your crazy ass theory of how she managed to do this.
 
2014-01-30 07:39:23 PM  

r1niceboy: CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.

I'm British and I think the British media have done everything but brand her as a witch because the victim was British. The US media seemed to want the trial to go on forever ending with her conviction. Then they could play the victim card. Truth told, nobody is sure whether she did it unless they had a horse in the race, in which case she's either an angel or a demon in human form.


I think that's an odd position to hold. I'm also British, and apart from the "Foxy Knoxy" headlines in the first few weeks, I think the British tabloids have been incredibly, bizarrely, restrained. It's almost a non-story. Which is, considering the British tabloids, odd.
 
2014-01-30 07:39:29 PM  

Bungles: flondrix: Bungles: Ummmm, an Appeal Court and a Supreme Court reviewing cases isn't double jeopardy, no matter how easy a sound bite that makes.

In the US legal system, once there is an acquittal, the prosecution cannot "appeal"--at least for that crime.  The courts can try for a second round with charges like "violating the victim's civil rights" or "interfering with a crime scene" or some such.

But she wasn't tried in the US, she was tried in a country with a tri-part judicial system with in-built rounds of appeal. That isn't double jeopardy, nor would it be a surprise to the people who drafted the treaty. It's the natural course.

To make it equivalent, it would be like someone in Italy being outraged that someone in the US wasn't sentenced at verdict - and therefore should be set free - but rather at a later sentencing hearing, as if they're two separate trials. They aren't, they're part of the same multi-step process. It's exactly the same thing here: it's a multi-part judicial process.



Doesn't matter what the Italians think. We do not have a fully observed extradition treaty with them. they routinely refuse to extradite Americans who might face the death penalty - and America would be entirely within it's rights to withold extradition.
The Italians don't care that the DP is legal; under our system - and we don't care if double jeopardy is allowed under theirs.
 
2014-01-30 07:43:59 PM  
The only scenario under which Kerry would allow her extradition would be if Italy then turned her over to Iran with her pockets stuffed with polonium and high-speed centrifuges.
 
2014-01-30 07:45:15 PM  

jso2897: MagicianNamedGob: PoRL: With regards extradition, I'm not sure the USA politicos will want to open a can of worms by not honouring an extradition treaty with an EU country as who knows where it'll end. Double jeopardy may well apply in the USA, but not in Italy where the offence and guilty verdict took place.

You're wrong about that. Italy refuses to extradite murderers to the U.S. on  human rights grounds because we have the death penalty. The U.S. will almost certainly refuse to extradite Knox. The consensus opinion is that the U.S. will cite double jeopardy as a "polite" way to say no. But if it wants to make a statement it will refuse on the grounds that the evidence against her was insufficient. E.U. countries and the U.s. refuse extraditions to each other some what regularly.

This is why they did this - they were able to save face, in the knowledge that they won't be extraditing her, and they don't have to deal with the backfire from that. It was an empty gesture to make a corrupt, perverted old prosecutor feel better about himself - and it costs only the expense of the trial.


They are also putting an innocent Italian man in prison.
 
2014-01-30 07:46:01 PM  

Bungles: r1niceboy: CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.

I'm British and I think the British media have done everything but brand her as a witch because the victim was British. The US media seemed to want the trial to go on forever ending with her conviction. Then they could play the victim card. Truth told, nobody is sure whether she did it unless they had a horse in the race, in which case she's either an angel or a demon in human form.

I think that's an odd position to hold. I'm also British, and apart from the "Foxy Knoxy" headlines in the first few weeks, I think the British tabloids have been incredibly, bizarrely, restrained. It's almost a non-story. Which is, considering the British tabloids, odd.


dontstepinthepoop.com
 
2014-01-30 07:46:56 PM  

jso2897: Bungles: flondrix: Bungles: Ummmm, an Appeal Court and a Supreme Court reviewing cases isn't double jeopardy, no matter how easy a sound bite that makes.

In the US legal system, once there is an acquittal, the prosecution cannot "appeal"--at least for that crime.  The courts can try for a second round with charges like "violating the victim's civil rights" or "interfering with a crime scene" or some such.

But she wasn't tried in the US, she was tried in a country with a tri-part judicial system with in-built rounds of appeal. That isn't double jeopardy, nor would it be a surprise to the people who drafted the treaty. It's the natural course.

To make it equivalent, it would be like someone in Italy being outraged that someone in the US wasn't sentenced at verdict - and therefore should be set free - but rather at a later sentencing hearing, as if they're two separate trials. They aren't, they're part of the same multi-step process. It's exactly the same thing here: it's a multi-part judicial process.


Doesn't matter what the Italians think. We do not have a fully observed extradition treaty with them. they routinely refuse to extradite Americans who might face the death penalty - and America would be entirely within it's rights to withold extradition.
The Italians don't care that the DP is legal; under our system - and we don't care if double jeopardy is allowed under theirs.


This isn't double jeopardy, and the US has regularly extradited to Italy (with the sole time it wasn't observed because of it involved CIA agents). The only clause in the treaty even relating to anything like what you'd call "double jeopardy" is about crimes that have already been through the court system in the US/Italy and essentially would be retried in the country of extradition. Which isn't the case here.

You're not speaking from a position of knowledge here, you're making things up. It doesn't help Knox's case for her supporters just to make stuff up.
 
2014-01-30 07:47:31 PM  

MagicianNamedGob: jso2897: MagicianNamedGob: PoRL: With regards extradition, I'm not sure the USA politicos will want to open a can of worms by not honouring an extradition treaty with an EU country as who knows where it'll end. Double jeopardy may well apply in the USA, but not in Italy where the offence and guilty verdict took place.

You're wrong about that. Italy refuses to extradite murderers to the U.S. on  human rights grounds because we have the death penalty. The U.S. will almost certainly refuse to extradite Knox. The consensus opinion is that the U.S. will cite double jeopardy as a "polite" way to say no. But if it wants to make a statement it will refuse on the grounds that the evidence against her was insufficient. E.U. countries and the U.s. refuse extraditions to each other some what regularly.

This is why they did this - they were able to save face, in the knowledge that they won't be extraditing her, and they don't have to deal with the backfire from that. It was an empty gesture to make a corrupt, perverted old prosecutor feel better about himself - and it costs only the expense of the trial.

They are also putting an innocent Italian man in prison.


This. He's the guy I feel the most sorry for in this media circus of a case. But I guess to the Italians, he's just another statistic that "balances out" the rights and wrongs of their broken justice system.
 
2014-01-30 07:48:29 PM  

jso2897: Bungles: flondrix: Bungles: Ummmm, an Appeal Court and a Supreme Court reviewing cases isn't double jeopardy, no matter how easy a sound bite that makes.

In the US legal system, once there is an acquittal, the prosecution cannot "appeal"--at least for that crime.  The courts can try for a second round with charges like "violating the victim's civil rights" or "interfering with a crime scene" or some such.

But she wasn't tried in the US, she was tried in a country with a tri-part judicial system with in-built rounds of appeal. That isn't double jeopardy, nor would it be a surprise to the people who drafted the treaty. It's the natural course.

To make it equivalent, it would be like someone in Italy being outraged that someone in the US wasn't sentenced at verdict - and therefore should be set free - but rather at a later sentencing hearing, as if they're two separate trials. They aren't, they're part of the same multi-step process. It's exactly the same thing here: it's a multi-part judicial process.


Doesn't matter what the Italians think. We do not have a fully observed extradition treaty with them. they routinely refuse to extradite Americans who might face the death penalty - and America would be entirely within it's rights to withold extradition.
The Italians don't care that the DP is legal; under our system - and we don't care if double jeopardy is allowed under theirs.


Given some of the pictures in this thread... I hope that the DP is available for Ms. Knox... if you know what I mean.

/if she really is as crazy as the Italian "legal" system says she is... she's gotta be a demon in the sack
 
2014-01-30 07:48:29 PM  

MagicianNamedGob: jso2897: MagicianNamedGob: PoRL: With regards extradition, I'm not sure the USA politicos will want to open a can of worms by not honouring an extradition treaty with an EU country as who knows where it'll end. Double jeopardy may well apply in the USA, but not in Italy where the offence and guilty verdict took place.

You're wrong about that. Italy refuses to extradite murderers to the U.S. on  human rights grounds because we have the death penalty. The U.S. will almost certainly refuse to extradite Knox. The consensus opinion is that the U.S. will cite double jeopardy as a "polite" way to say no. But if it wants to make a statement it will refuse on the grounds that the evidence against her was insufficient. E.U. countries and the U.s. refuse extraditions to each other some what regularly.

This is why they did this - they were able to save face, in the knowledge that they won't be extraditing her, and they don't have to deal with the backfire from that. It was an empty gesture to make a corrupt, perverted old prosecutor feel better about himself - and it costs only the expense of the trial.

They are also putting an innocent Italian man in prison.


Yes - but that won't have the downside of a huge uproar in the American press, and the subsequent  loss of tourist revenue.
Without American tourist dollars, Italy is Somalia.
 
2014-01-30 07:48:30 PM  

the_vegetarian_cannibal: Bungles: r1niceboy: CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.

I'm British and I think the British media have done everything but brand her as a witch because the victim was British. The US media seemed to want the trial to go on forever ending with her conviction. Then they could play the victim card. Truth told, nobody is sure whether she did it unless they had a horse in the race, in which case she's either an angel or a demon in human form.

I think that's an odd position to hold. I'm also British, and apart from the "Foxy Knoxy" headlines in the first few weeks, I think the British tabloids have been incredibly, bizarrely, restrained. It's almost a non-story. Which is, considering the British tabloids, odd.

[dontstepinthepoop.com image 349x350]


Umm, are you familiar with the British tabloid press? They've been positively cordial, compared to similar cases in the past.
 
2014-01-30 07:49:49 PM  

Bungles: the_vegetarian_cannibal: Bungles: r1niceboy: CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.

I'm British and I think the British media have done everything but brand her as a witch because the victim was British. The US media seemed to want the trial to go on forever ending with her conviction. Then they could play the victim card. Truth told, nobody is sure whether she did it unless they had a horse in the race, in which case she's either an angel or a demon in human form.

I think that's an odd position to hold. I'm also British, and apart from the "Foxy Knoxy" headlines in the first few weeks, I think the British tabloids have been incredibly, bizarrely, restrained. It's almost a non-story. Which is, considering the British tabloids, odd.

[dontstepinthepoop.com image 349x350]

Umm, are you familiar with the British tabloid press? They've been positively cordial, compared to similar cases in the past.


Says the British guy who is totally unbiased towards this case and hasn't posted endlessly about it in past Knox threads.
 
2014-01-30 07:50:17 PM  

Bungles: jso2897: Bungles: flondrix: Bungles: Ummmm, an Appeal Court and a Supreme Court reviewing cases isn't double jeopardy, no matter how easy a sound bite that makes.

In the US legal system, once there is an acquittal, the prosecution cannot "appeal"--at least for that crime.  The courts can try for a second round with charges like "violating the victim's civil rights" or "interfering with a crime scene" or some such.

But she wasn't tried in the US, she was tried in a country with a tri-part judicial system with in-built rounds of appeal. That isn't double jeopardy, nor would it be a surprise to the people who drafted the treaty. It's the natural course.

To make it equivalent, it would be like someone in Italy being outraged that someone in the US wasn't sentenced at verdict - and therefore should be set free - but rather at a later sentencing hearing, as if they're two separate trials. They aren't, they're part of the same multi-step process. It's exactly the same thing here: it's a multi-part judicial process.


Doesn't matter what the Italians think. We do not have a fully observed extradition treaty with them. they routinely refuse to extradite Americans who might face the death penalty - and America would be entirely within it's rights to withold extradition.
The Italians don't care that the DP is legal; under our system - and we don't care if double jeopardy is allowed under theirs.

This isn't double jeopardy, and the US has regularly extradited to Italy (with the sole time it wasn't observed because of it involved CIA agents). The only clause in the treaty even relating to anything like what you'd call "double jeopardy" is about crimes that have already been through the court system in the US/Italy and essentially would be retried in the country of extradition. Which isn't the case here.

You're not speaking from a position of knowledge here, you're making things up. It doesn't help Knox's case for her supporters just to make stuff up.


So are you going on record as predicting she will be extradited?
 
2014-01-30 07:52:09 PM  
Bungles:

This isn't double jeopardy, and the US has regularly extradited to Italy (with the sole time it wasn't observed because of it involved CIA agents). The only clause in the treaty even relating to anything like what you'd call "double jeopardy" is about crimes that have already been through the court system in the US/Italy and essentially would be retried in the country of extradition. Which isn't the case here.

You're not speaking from a position of knowledge here, you're making things up. It doesn't help Knox's case for her supporters just to make stuff up.


I think you are speaking without knowledge. Here is the opinion of someone with knowledge:

It is unlikely that Knox, who lives in Seattle, Washington, will return to Italy to serve additional prison time because U.S. law dictates that a person cannot be tried twice on the same charge, a legal expert told CNN. He believes that if Italy were to ask for extradition, U.S. officials would deny the request. "She was once put in jeopardy and later acquitted," said Sean Casey, a former prosecutor who is now a partner at Kobre & Kim in New York. "Under the treaty, extradition should not be granted."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/30/world/europe/italy-amanda-knox-retrial /
 
2014-01-30 07:56:46 PM  

CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.


1st, there is very strong forensic evidence against Rudy Guede http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Kercher#Rudy_Guede alone while the evidence against Knox and Sollecto was weak at best. 2nd, in the US it is against the law to try someone twice for the same crime. If the prosecutors lose an appeal, they can't go to the Supreme Court and have the case tried again. If a conviction gets overturned, that's it, the person walks. Knox's conviction was overturned and she was declared innocent, then the supreme court sent it back to the appeals court and told them try her again, then she was convicted again. That's the definition of Double Jeopardy. Try them again until you get the "right" results.
 
2014-01-30 07:58:00 PM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: ChrisDe: Good luck with getting her to come back to Italy.

I like how the article makes it clear (a couple times) that she doesn't plan on going back.  Is there really anybody reading the article who thinks "OMG, now she has to go back to Italy and go to prison!"

Assuming she really is innocent...I think I'd just kick back and enjoy life as a "wanted murderer in Italy".  Might as well own it.  Of course, I'd be wary of ever traveling out of the country.  Not sure I'd ever trust any other country to NOT pack me up and send me to Italy.


Exactly. She'll need to stay in the US the rest of her life. Good thing it's a big country.
 
2014-01-30 07:58:24 PM  
So once everyone here has finished biatching and moaning about what should happen to her, we all have a vote and so Fark has final say? Is that how it works?


// methinks if Farkers had any say in the situation, she would probably be allowed to stay if she goes into porn.
 
2014-01-30 07:59:20 PM  

Bungles: This isn't double jeopardy, and the US has regularly extradited to Italy (with the sole time it wasn't observed because of it involved CIA agents). The only clause in the treaty even relating to anything like what you'd call "double jeopardy" is about crimes that have already been through the court system in the US/Italy and essentially would be retried in the country of extradition. Which isn't the case here.

You're not speaking from a position of knowledge here, you're making things up. It doesn't help Knox's case for her supporters just to make stuff up.


I'm curious how you state what just happened is not an invocation of Double Jeopardy. Please educate us.
 
2014-01-30 08:00:28 PM  

greentea1985: CleanAndPure: And yet Americans all think she is innocent because an American would never do anything wrong overseas.

Seriously American media has been extremely biased in this case... backing the murderess.

1st, there is very strong forensic evidence against Rudy Guede http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Kercher#Rudy_Guede alone while the evidence against Knox and Sollecto was weak at best. 2nd, in the US it is against the law to try someone twice for the same crime. If the prosecutors lose an appeal, they can't go to the Supreme Court and have the case tried again. If a conviction gets overturned, that's it, the person walks. Knox's conviction was overturned and she was declared innocent, then the supreme court sent it back to the appeals court and told them try her again, then she was convicted again. That's the definition of Double Jeopardy. Try them again until you get the "right" results.


We don't extradite people under those circumstances, any more than the Italians extradite people subject to the death penalty.
Seems to be a complicated concept to some people.
 
2014-01-30 08:03:49 PM  

walktoanarcade: Why is it so hard to believe?   The debil [sic] part is probably pure bunk, but what if it isn't? Some sick bastards actually do kill people in "rituals" on a fairly regular basis. Maybe you're weary and remember the cult hysteria of the 80s deep down inside?

It isn't like I'm faulting anyone for thinking she's innocent, as she may well be. Her story perfectly tickles my "Bitach Be-Guitly" bone.


Are you sure it doesn't tickle your "I want this bitach to be guilty" bone?  I wouldn't fault you, it's highly salacious, would make a great movie.  We all like lurid stories.  Perhaps, though, we should define what you mean when you refer to the sick bastards who actually do kill people in rituals on a fairly regular basis.  What rituals?  What's a "regular basis" to you?  I see a lot of that crap on TV shows, but very rarely in real life except for in travesties of justice like the afore-mentioned West Memphis 3 back in the '80s.

I was friends with the local fetish troupe back in college (well, mostly due to my eventually-to-be-wife) and I have trouble believing the sex game idea from my experience with them.  Because as a group they were both careful, and consensual, and, as a group, most everybody who was not into that scene balked at the idea.

That is, of course, purely anecdotal, and if there was much of anything other than a couple loose connections and some shaky aspects of her interrogation story, I'd be less inclined to discount the idea.  But there really isn't, and as documented there's another person who really Does seem to have killed the girl, under much more common (but admittedly mundane and less-lurid) motives of robbery and rape.
 
2014-01-30 08:04:17 PM  

LrdPhoenix: borg: The US extradited John Demjanjuk to Germany after he was acquitted in an Israeli court.

Those were two separate charges for two separate things (Well, similar, but separate. Israel thought he a specific nazi guard at a concentration camp who he likely wasn't, Germany thought he was a totally different nazi guard at another concentration camp) made by two separate governments.


Also, when he was extradited to Germany, he was a stateless person.  His U.S citizenship was revoked in the late 70s, restored in 1998, and revoked again about 5 years later.
  There's also a bit of difference between being accused of working as a guard in Nazi death camps, and a murder trial based on flimsy evidence and fantastical claims by the prosecution that have no evidence to support them whatsoever.
 
2014-01-30 08:05:42 PM  

jso2897: We don't extradite people under those circumstances, any more than the Italians extradite people subject to the death penalty.
Seems to be a complicated concept to some people.


I think it's funny how they think the death penalty is so abhorrent, but they seem to have no problem with ruining innocent people's lives, just as long as it's not an execution.
 
Displayed 50 of 365 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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