Amanda Knox should surrender to Italian authorities, The EVIDENCE Is Clear Enough- SHE DID IT.
Last edited Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:08 PM - Edit history (16)http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence
Her ex bf was picked up byauthorities today, and released with just confiscation of his passport and drivers license.....why the American media is all so very upset with the Italian justice system and in favor of this twice convicted murderess is beyond me. And I notice that the there is ZERO American outrage over the co-accused Raffaele Sollecito who has gone exactly the same route through the Italian justice system.
"The family's lawyer (of the murder victim), Francesca Maresca, said: "I hope this is justice for Meredith and for her family."
Raffaele Sollecito Picked Up Near Italian Border After Guilty Verdict, Forced To Surrender Passport
Raffaele Sollecito, convicted with former lover Amanda Knox of the grisly murder of a British student, has been picked up by police near the Italian border and has surrendered his passport.
Police tracked him to a hotel in Venzone, a town in northeast Italy near the Austrian and Slovenian borders, just hours after an appeal court in Florence sentenced him to 25 years in prison, a source at the police station in the nearby city of Udine told AFP.
"Police went to find him in his hotel and he followed them willingly" back to the police station, the source said.
"He is still there now. He is not under arrest. He has to hand over his passport, which can be a lengthy process," he added.
"The Florence verdict is the latest development in more than six years of legal battles which have seen the former lovers convicted in 2009, then acquitted on appeal in 2011 and then, last year, refused a definitive acquittal by the Court of Cassation, which ordered a second appeal, accusing the Perugia appeals court which had annulled the convictions of "numerous deficiencies, contradictions and manifest lack of logic".
There was no "second trial" or "double jeopardy".
"The Florence court began hearing the second appeal in late September. There, prosecutors argued that Knox and Sollecito carried out the murder alongside Rudy Guede, a young man from Ivory Coast who was convicted of the killing and is serving a 16-year sentence following a fast-track trial."
As is standard practice in Italy, the Florence court gave no explanation for its verdict and now has up to 90 days to publish its reasoning.
"The family's lawyer (of the murder victim), Francesca Maresca, said: "I hope this is justice for Meredith and for her family."
The body of Kercher, a 21-year-old Leeds University student from Coulsdon, Surrey, was found in the bedroom of her shared flat in Perugia on the morning of 2 November 2007. She had been in the first weeks of an Erasmus year in the Umbrian hilltop town.
After the verdict, Knox whose original sentence was for 26 years issued a fiercely critical statement, attacking the Italian justice system and saying she had "expected better".
THIS is Knox's teary explanation in 2011: "I did not kill Meredith Kercher, Im so sorry shes dead, Im so sad for her family, I was with Raf all night and I am angry as heck with Rudy Guede who killed her. She should have had some honest indignation about that, if she believes Guede is the real killer who has caused Merediths death but also Amandas own four year ordeal. Wouldnt you blame the person who had thrown you in prison for a crime you hadnt committed? Instead, she chalks it up to the police and their betrayal of her kind help.
If she were innocent, she would rage against Guede. Its the feelings Amanda doesnt have that speak the loudest. Same with Raffaele."
Harken To The EVIDENCE, and the admissible EVIDENCE only, shall we?:
The Evidence of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito's Involvement in the Murder of Meredith Kercher
* More Than One Person Attacked the murder victim Meredith Kercher. From the time of Rudy Guede's final sentencing, the Court has accepted that more than one person attacked Meredith Kercher, with an unusually strong report that pointed towards Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as the other attackers. Meredith was dressed, awake, and standing for the attack, yet did not defend herself. Unusually, she had no defensive wounds but for three tiny (0.24 inch or 6 mm) cuts on her hand, indicating an inability to express normal reflexes, flinch from the small cuts to her neck, or attempt to block the incoming blows with her hands or forearms. Indeed, in addition to wounds which fit two different knife profiles, she suffered numerous compression or restraint bruises to her elbows, wrists, and face. At the trial, consultants for Knox and Sollecito each proposed a single-attacker scenario but could not agree whether this lone wolf had attacked from the front (Torre, Amanda's consultant) or from behind (Introna, Raffaele's consultant). At the appeal, under Judge Hellmann, Sollecito's defense team introduced two witnesses to testify first, that Guede had acted with two people other than Knox and Sollecito, and second, that two people excluding Guede had carried out the attack after mistakenly entering the home. The Supreme Court faulted Judge Hellmann for ignoring their sentence of Guede and supporting the single-wolf theory, which they found unsupported by the facts. They direct the new Appeals Court in Florence to see what evidence ties Rudy Guede together with Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in the cottage at the same time.
* Someone RETURNED To Move Meredith. As is detailed by Judge Micheli (who convicted Guede for his part and committed Knox and Sollecito to trial to answer for the evidence of theirs) Meredith's body was discovered in a position and location different from that in which she died, judging by the lividity reported by the medical examiner and an indentation in her shoulder of a bra strap (with a corresponding impression on the floor). She had died and rested on her shoulder to the right of the room, wearing her bra, and was moved to center of the room and her bra discarded at her feet, soaked through but nowhere near any blood. He notes that the blood droplets on the cups show she was wearing the bra while still breathing, but her chest, which the bra had been covering, remained clean, indicating no breaths were being drawn when or after the bra was removed.
* The bra clasp, cut or torn off from the bra the victim was wearing and originally hidden under the victim, had Raffaele's DNA on the hooks. No plausible argument for contamination was successfully made. Stefano Conti, the independent reviewer who testified to this point, could only suppose that "anything is possible." The Supreme Court strongly rejected that finding, and Judge Hellmann's acceptance of it, stating that the contamination must be proven likely, and not merely presented as a hypothetical possibility.
*** The knife recovered at Sollecito's apartment contained the victim and Amanda Knox's DNA.* In her court testimony Carla Vecchiotti, one of the pair of independent experts who reviewed the DNA evidence at the first appeal, as well as forensic scientists from the Scientific Police, ruled out contamination in the laboratory with respect to the knife, owing to the six-day interval since testing items related to the Kercher case. When confronted with the knife DNA result in 2007, Raffaele responded with a fabricated story about accidentally pricking Meredith's hand while they were cooking together. Meredith had never been to his flat, and they had never cooked together. The Supreme Court ruled the Scientific Police's findings must stand, absent any new proof. Another trace containing human DNA was found on the blade of the knife  by the independent reviewers, Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, who argued the trace was too minute too test, even though renowned forensic expert Professor Novelli argued that newer, more sensitive tests would be quite able to successfully test the sample. This test was performed in October 2013 and found to be Knox's DNA.
* A bare footprint made in the victim's blood was discovered on the mat in the bathroom. Rudy's bloody shoe prints lead from Meredith's room directly down the hall and out the front door. The bathroom print, which could not have been made by Rudy Guede, is highly compatible with Raffaele Sollecito's right foot. His defense expert presented a crudely altered footprint diagram in the Massei court, to try to prove it couldn't be his client's, but the judge ruled it was more compatible with Raffaele, and completely ruled out that it could have been Rudy's.
*** Knox's DNA was found mixed with the victim's blood in the room where the burglary was staged, and in the bathroom they shared; some of this blood was Amanda's. Amanda testified that the bathroom was clean the day before the murder.
* Footprints compatible with Knox and Sollecito's, and made in the victim's blood, were discovered when the forensic investigators tested the crime scene with luminol.
*** The burglary was staged, and there is no one other than Knox and Sollecito who would have any motivation to alter the crime scene that way. Broken glass had fallen on top of the scattered objects, meaning the window was broken after the ransacking, and Luminol revealed the presence of two traces of the victim's blood on the floor, showing conclusively that whomever had tracked it in had done so after the girl was dead. Raffaele knew nothing had been stolen in the course of this supposed burglary, assuring the 112 (911) operator of this fact well before the occupant of the room had come home and verified it for herself.
***** Amanda Knox INTENTIONALLY and REPEATEDLY lied to Italian police to discourage them from considering Meredith's locked door suspicious. In her email home Amanda relates a scene of rising panic as she and Raffaele shout for Meredith, climb the balcony to try to see in her window, and Raffaele attempts to force the door open, but only splinters the frame. She says it was then they decided to call the cops. Despite all this concern, they did not mention the door, or their worries about Meredith, to the communications police who arrived unexpectedly to return Meredith's discarded cellphones. Filomena and her friends arrived shortly thereafter, and it was Filomena who said that it was not Meredith's habit to lock her door. Amanda falsely offered that this was not true: Meredith had locked it before, even to take a shower. The Supreme Court rules this is in itself proof of an attempt to prevent the discovery of the body, with all the implications that has for her guilt.
* Knox and Sollecito's alibis are contradicted by each other, by physical evidence and by witness testimony. While this does not directly implicate them in the murder, they have clearly lied about what they did on the night of the murder and the following morning. It is inconceivable that they would risk lying about their activities if they were not involved in Meredith's murder. It is one thing to claim they cannot remember due to the influence of drugs. It is another to knowingly lie. The recent ruling confirms that they lied repeatedly.
* Raffaele withdrew support for Knox's alibi, claiming that he lied at her request. He elected to not testify, and he refused to confirm that Knox was with him the night of the murder, for the entire trial. Confronted with the news that Raffaele had ceased to support her alibi, Knox quickly changed her story, placing herself at the cottage and falsely accusing an innocent man of committing the deed.
* Amanda Knox's false accusation of her boss Patrick Lumumba. The appeals court has been directed by the Supreme Court to seriously consider this as yet more evidence of her guilt.
Enough to convict? PLENTY.
And I'm very much a victim's rights person - however . . . from an Everyone For Themselves Perspective - she should not just give herself up.
obey only American laws and American convictions?
Knox and Sollecito were first convicted of the murder in 2009, then acquitted in 2011 on appeal.
The supreme court last year ordered a re-trial, leading to the guilty verdicts issued on Thursday.
Just the way the legal system crumbles in Italy, is America's any better?
Last edited Fri Jan 31, 2014, 01:23 PM - Edit history (1)
I actually think our system is a system of inJustice. On some thread - some fool in Florida is faux 'offended' because I won't step foot in florida because Zimpig is running around with a loaded gun and I'm black. Person thought I was a black male - I make the point -
No black person - male/female young/old will ever be safe in that state with that guy just running around, eating ice cream, beating women and brandishing a gun.
However - since people get to walk around footloose and fancy free in America - why shouldn't she (Knox) be out for herself?
Zimpig and his supporters at du are out for themselves - why shouldn't she be too?
No one should ever just go gentle into the night or their own personal hell.
And I don't think they will extradite her. This is all grand standing. So if they won't extradite - why should she give herself up?
We all know the Italians didn't just lay down and give up after the appeal why should she do that now?
What a joke. And yes the American justice system with its faults it's still better than the Italian justice system, which is in the Middle Ages still.
For a crime she did not commit. If anything she should sue the Italians for millions and live the rest of her life in luxury. The poor girl has been through unfair hell. I feel horrible for her.
civil liberties violations, based on its record with the European Court of Human Rights.
America's system is far better. We would never, ever, under any circumstances, convict Amanda based on stipulations made between the prosecutor and another defendant in a whole separate "fast track" trial -- stipulations as to "fact" that resulted in a reduced sentence for that defendant -- without even allowing Amanda's attorneys to question him or present counter-evidence in her trial.
in this country, once found NOT GUILTY, a person cannot be tried again for the same crime (even if they later admit guilt). This would give the USA enough reason to not extradite her to Italy.
(Their supreme court still has to rule as to whether or not this trial was Ok under Italian law.)
the Court of Cassation that questioned the decision of the appellate court that overturned her original conviction.
So now you go back to the Supreme Court/Court of Cassation to ask if the result of the second trial was correct and should be let stand?
So its no so much to see if the verdict was correct.
Her of guilt's lawyer's will now take this verdict to the Court of Cassation again but I have a feeling they won't have a leg to stand on and the Court's decison will be final.
Her original sentence was made longer this time too. 28.5 years.................. That's Life as Frank Sinatra once sung.
In general any adverse comments here re. the Italian legal system are somewhat outweighed by 60 million Italians.
What idiot "flees" to a border town and then doesn't cross the border? There are no passport checks to stop you.
in an Italian hotel.
What idiot who had successfully flown would not stay in the other country?
and double jeopardy are not baseless assertions. This poor woman has spent a good chunk of her life in their medieval joke of a court system.
Don't give her back.
Giuliano Mignini, the Italian prosecutor who originally implicated Knox, Sollecito and Guede in bizarre a satanic sex game that resulted in the murder of Meredith Kercher, was deeply involved for years in the Monster of Florence case, a series of unsolved murders that resulted in the imprisonment of about a dozen innocent people in court cases brought by Mignini, who alleged (not surprisingly) that the murders were carried out by a coven of Satanists (an allegation that is easily accepted by a generally conservative Italy).
Mignini accused, arrested and imprisoned town counsellors, politicians and investigative journalists, generally those who were opposed to him (Italian Chief prosecutors appear to be a hybrid between a Chief of Police, a Homocide Detective and a court room Prosecutor).
When journalists Mario Spezi and Douglas Preston started investigating Mignini and the miscarriages of justices he was responsible for, Mignin had Spezi and Preston bugged and followed by the police. Speizi was arrested and Preston was interrogated. Mignini insinuated that Spezi and Preston were somehow involved in the Monster of Florence murders.
Mignini received a sixteen month prison sentence for abuse of office and bugging journalists in connection with the Monster of Florence case in 2010. He appealed the sentence in 2011, I guess he didn't serve any time.
View that thread for more info.
the case of the Italian geologists who where convicted of manslaughter for NOT predicting an earthquake.
Yeah their justice system is flawless....
Mignini never mooted any Satanic theory during the Knox trial nor is any mention of any Satanic element made by him or any other prosecutor in the court transcripts.
Mignini didn't allege any Satanic link in the MOF case either. An occult link had been suggested by three independent sources as far back as 1985, one of them being a current consultant for the Raffaele Sollecito defence team, Dr Francesco Bruno, who wrote up a profile of the killer at the behest of the Italian secret service in 1985 and suggested an occult link to the murders.
The coven theory was only mooted after numerous witnesses including two convicted suspects made references to being hired, with disproportionate weatlh being found in their accounts and after bugging the homes/phones of two other supects, thought to be memebers of the occult group.
Mignini wasn't involved in the Monster of Florence case & merely investigated one death- that of Dr Francesco Narducci in Perugia- whose death was suspected by the Florantine cops of being connected to the MOF case but Mignini never was involved in the MOF case itself. he only investigated the Narducci death after hearing it alluded to on a wiretap in 2001, with further references to the "murder" of another convicted MOF suspect, Pietro pacciani, who died in odd circumstances while awaiting a retrial, and a prosecutor in Italy is bound by law to investigate any crime he/she becomes aware of. Mignini was not the only prosecutor involved in the Amanda Knox trial either. The only prosecutor involved in both the Knox & MOF cases was Allesandro Crini.
No, Mignini had mario Spezi imprisoned on suspicion of evidence tampering in the MOF case in order to frame an innocent man and Spezi is still facing charges for this, with his court case due on June 25th.
No he didn't serve any time as he was acquitted upon his appeal on the grounds that no crime had been proven to have taken place.
like Mario Spezi, Douglas Preston, Daniela Preziozi, and others who investigated his activities.
The case of prosecutorial abuse against Mignini was dismissed on the grounds that it had been filed in the wrong jurisdiction, and because time had run out. So he's still at loose.
The international Committee to Protect Journalists wrote a scathing letter about Mignini's behavior:
The Committee to Protect Journalists, an independent, nonpartisan organization dedicated to defending the rights of journalists worldwide, is deeply concerned about the fate of Mario Spezi, a veteran crime journalist imprisoned in the central Italian city of Perugia.
Daniela Preziosi, editor at the Rome-based independent weekly Left Avvenimenti, told CPJ that journalists in Italy work in a climate of fear and feel that press freedom is in danger in Italy. Preziosi said she had been questioned by Mignini several times about her own work on the "Monster of Florence" case. "For journalists, working in a climate like this is a very serious problem," Preziosi told CPJ.
Journalists should not be fearful to conduct their own investigations into sensitive matters or to speak openly and criticize officials. In a democratic country such as your own, one that is an integral part of the European Union, such fear is unacceptable. We call on you to make sure that Italian authorities clarify the serious charges against our colleague Mario Spezi and make public all available evidence supporting those charges, or release him immediately.
The persecution of Mario Spezi and his U.S. colleague Douglas Preston, who is afraid to travel to Italy for fear of prosecution, sends a dangerous message to Italian journalists that sensitive stories such as the Tuscany killings should be avoided. Government efforts to promote this climate of self-censorship are anathema to democracy.
We call on you to do everything in your power to stop the harassment of our Italian colleague, Mario Spezi, and to ensure that our U.S. colleague, Douglas Preston, can travel to Italy and be allowed to work freely. Thank you for your attention to these urgent matters. We await your response.
And the U.S. journalist Douglas Preston has written in detail about his own experiences with Mignini, when Preston began to investigate the Monster of Florence murders.
He was only involvedc in the Narducci case. Please show me any records which shows Mignini investigated the MOF murders.
No it was dimissed on the grounds that a crime wasn't proven to have occurred.
Oh I'm well aware of the CPJ fiasco, notably hopw they took Preston's (who happens to be a financial contributor to the CPJ) word at face value without even contacting Mignini to get his side of the story.
Preston's silence in regards to the evidence tampering allegations on the CPJ site is deafening. He also praises Mignini in an earlier interview with the Atlantic and calls him a sincere man and an honest and incorruptible judge. [url]http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/07/the-journalis-and-the-murderer/304997/2/[/url]
Your link is from July 2006, mine is from June 2006. Preston praises Mignini one month with Giuttari as the viallian, yet then slimes him a month later, proving what a liar he is.
Yes I'm aware of Preston & Spezi's book, I've read it. Spezi is facing a court date next June for his evidence tampering charges, and his book on the MOF is full of lies and misrepresentations of the truth, not to mention plagiarized from research done by Magdaline Nabb.
No offence but you're misinformed here.
The Italian justice system seems arbitrary, where prosecutors go off on missions to convict somebody without any reason to do so. Not to say this doesn't happen in the US, but prosecutors aren't able to seek convictions for such ridiculous things, and this case would have been thrown out in the US for lack of evidence.
It really speaks incredibly poorly of the Italian justice system.
Enlighten yourself. You've been wallowing in a hate site.
in this case. I'll admit I haven't been following it too closely so I'm reserving any judgement. It does seem that Amanda and her boyfriend should have been able to prove a solid alibi at this point.
work on his computers during the time frame, but the police "fried" all the hard drives, and the court refused to allow testing by the defense.
This is what Judge Hellman, who report the report for the first appeals trial, had to say about the verdict:
The Supreme Court has ruled on matters of evidence and detail and has not restricted itself to considering whether the appeal process was correctly administered. This shocking judgment infuriated Judge Hellmann who presided over the acquittal. He said, The judges of the Supreme Court incorrectly ruled on matters of substance and added, They handed down a ready-made judgment to the Court of Assizes of Florence, telling them what they must do in order to convict the two defendants.
Hellmann firmly defended his courts judgment: In the small bedroom where there was supposed to have been a struggle, an erotic game that escalated into an orgy and finally the stabbing of Meredith, there was not one single biological trace of Knox and Sollecito, while there were abundant traces of Guede: it is impossible that the two students were able to erase their tracks and leave behind only those of Rudy.
The reasoning of the Supreme Court is clear. It had already ruled that Guede, who had his own fast track trial, had acted with others, so it reduced his sentence, in two stages, from 30 to a mere 16 years. The Knox and Sollecito acquittal is therefore inconsistent with its ruling on Guede. So Knox and Sollecito have to be guilty, regardless of the evidence. The Supreme Court has delved into the evidence that was carefully considered by Hellmanns court and has dismissed everything that demolished the prosecution case.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has rehabilitated all the discredited witnesses and faulty forensics that have characterised this charade of a case. What does this mean? Careful consideration of evidence is not required; reason and logic are not to play a part in this process. The fact that Guede has a sentence of a mere 16 years shows in and of itself that Sollecito and Knox must be guilty. Case closed.
and witness manipulating that can occur, even in this country. The cost of this is terrible to the lives it effects. As a friend told me "you're just a number". Personally, I don't know how those involved with the dishonesty sleep at night.
So it doesn't really matter what he said. He also upheld Knox's callunnia charge, so if he's so correct, it must mean that Knox is indeed a liar.
Also the site you linked is a partisan shill site which seems to be up in arms over Nencini talking to reporters, yet has no problem with Hellman doing the same thing.
Guede chose a fast track trial because it was his choice to do so. Both Knox & Solelcito could have availed of the same option, only they chose to become meedia celebs instead.
It means that Hellman's ruling was annulled due to it haveing no basis in logic or reason, and due to basing his ruling after viewing only two of 36 samples of dna evidence on dispaly and disregarded the 10,000 pages of evidence against both defendants as well as due to it being full of "preposterous straw man sophistry". (Dr Galati appeal)
accepted the results of Rudy Guede's fast-track trial into evidence in Amanda and Raffaele's trial, including his statements/stipulations against them -- even though they were prevented from questioning those stipulations or Guede at their trial. This violates Italy's own Constitutional right to be able to question those who testify against you, a right that is also enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights. Using the results of a different person's fast-track trial to find other defendants guilty without letting them defend themselves was a gross miscarriage of justice, which was never anticipated years earlier when the US signed the extradition treaty with Italy. So this is far from over.
The reason Hellman reviewed only those 2 pieces of DNA evidence is because they were the only 2 that could have linked Amanda and Raffaele to the murder. Finding DNA of Amanda in her own bathroom sink or other common areas was utterly meaningless. So the Judge appointed independent experts, both faculty from the forensics Department at the University of Rome, and they said those 2 items had no probative value -- they were worthless. The DNA on the knife was worthless because with no blood and only breadcrumbs (which would have soaked up any blood that was present) it couldn't have been the murder weapon; and it was too big to have made two of the wounds. Also, for a scientific result it is necessary to be able to repeat any test, and there wasn't enough DNA to do this. Also, the lab where the testing was done lacked the equipment to carry out low-copy number testing. As far as the bra clasp is concerned, it had so much DNA contamination that the experts said they could have found almost man's alleles on it -- including the judge's.
No progressive would support any trial in which the defendants were denied the right to question their accusers, and that is exactly what happened when the high court decided that Rudy Guede's unquestioned and unanswered testimony should be used against Amanda and Raffaele. Judge Hellman is one of the few in the Italian Justice system who has been shown to be a man of honor, unwilling to twist the facts to railroad innocent people for the sake of politics.
Then Knox is obviously guilty of slandering Lumumba and the cops for her claim that she was hit... right? seeing as he's so honourable?
I suspect Hellman was bought off, and he had no business hearing that appeal as he was a business judge inexperienced in criminal matters.
Knox did defend herself, her lies defending herself were partially what got her convicted and Sollecito wouldn't testify as was his right not to.
Lol, the pro Knox cult still peddling that breadcrumbs chestnut?
I believe he was wrong to convict her of slandering Lumumba, when she was obviously coerced, and she withdrew her statement within hours of making it, saying that it didn't seem real to her and no one should rely on it. But I think the Judge made his ruling in good faith.
Reasonable opinions cannot differ, however, on the bottom line: there was no witness, aside from the murderer Rudy Guede, who could place Amanda inside the cottage; and there wasn't a single bit of physical evidence, not a fingerprint, handprint, footprint, hair, fiber, DNA or anything else that connected Amanda to the murder room or to Meredith's body or clothing, or that connected Meredith to Amanda's body or clothing. Amanda could not have murdered Meredith because she wasn't there.
On the other hand, there was abundant evidence connecting the burglar Rudy Guede, including DNA inside and on the victim's body and on her purse, directly to the murder. And yet his lies about Amanda and Raffaele, lies that reduced his sentence, were instrumental in overturning their "innocent" verdict.
The Italian injustice system has been revealed in all its ugly splendor -- yet it can still redeem itself, in the next high court ruling. If not, it's on the the ECHR, where Italy already has one of the worst records in Europe.
How do you reckon his other reasoning is so sound and not prone to more mistakes? This is why the Galati appeal was a success.
How was she obviously coerced when her lawyer is making no noises in this regard and why take the word of a thrice convicted slanderer anyway over the cops who successfully convicted her of slander?
She didn't withdraw her statement, she went and made another one at 5.45 am, as in the five page one. She also left Lumumba in prison for two weeks, so how did she withdraw her statement if he still stayed in jail for weeks after she made it?
The "murder room" wasn't the crime scene, the entire house was and no trace of Guede was found in Romanelli's bedroom, despite Knox's supporters saying he gained entry there. I take it since there's no trace of him in the "burglary room", he must be innocent of it?
There was no dna traces found in Knox's bedroom and Sollecito's car either. Did they not sleep/drive in them so?
There's abundant evidence connecting K & S also.
No, his lies didn't reduce his sentence, his decision to opt for a fast track trial did, just as Knox and Sollecito could have opted for, rather than choosing to become media celebs.
Hopw so? How is a system which gives a defendant an automatic appeal and a shot at another appeal "ugly"? If Knox was convicted in the US, she probably would have gotten life, or the needle.
I have a feeling this case won't pass the ECHR's criteria actually, but we'll just have to wait and see, I guess.
He ruled correctly that there was no evidence to support a guilty verdict. And there wasn't.
The murder room was most certainly the crime scene. Amanda lived in the cottage, so finding her DNA in her own bathroom was meaningless. The lack of any evidence of Amanda in the murder room or on the victims body, OTOH, was critical.
The police didn't collect much evidence from other parts of the cottage. But they did find evidence of the burglar Guede's DNA on Meredith's purse -- evidence that tied him to the stolen rent money, but that the prosecution chose not to pursue.
The police didn't look for Amanda's DNA in her own room because that would have been a ridiculous waste of time. Are you really that uninformed or do you just think other people are?
Guede wouldn't have gotten his fast track trial and his reduced sentence UNLESS he agreed to the prosecution's stipulations -- so yes, his LIES did directly lead to his reduced sentence. The fast track trial required the stipulations, i.e., the lies.
What is particularly ugly about their system is the way they used a trial in which Amanda and Raffaele did not participate -- Rudy Guede's fast track trial -- to produce "truths" that were then used against them in their appeals trial. "Truths" they were not allowed to dispute and that the appeals judge was required to incorporate into his motivation.
This wasn't a modern trial. It was a 14th century inquisition.
He even said at the start of the appeal that the only thing anyone knew for certain was that Meredith had been murdered, which was utter rubbish as both defendants had already been convicted.
Yes there was (and is) lots of evidence against both defendants, hence the reason the Galati appeal was successful and Hellman's ruling annulled. This means that citing Hellman is actually meaningless.
No the entire house was the crime scene with five samples of Knox's dna mixed in with Meredith's blood in three separate areas of the house including Filomena Romanelli's bedroom where the staged burglary (which Knox was also convicted of) took place.
No it wasn't meaningless as Knox had testified that the bathroom was clean the day before. Which means that the blood got there due to Meredith's murder. Which means that in order for Knox's dna to mix with Meredith's blood innocuously, Meredith's blood would have had to have spilled/fallen/spattered in the exact precise same areas of the house where Knox's dna already was and sorry, I'm not buying that.
To clarify, investigating a crime scene would be "A ridiculous waste of time" for you?
No I'm actually informed about this case and I'm not the one making flalse statements that there's "no evidence" or that the crime scene was only Meredith's bedroom or that Mignini was a whacky Satanic conspiracy theorist, you are.
And if their supporters have to continuously make false statements, well, that says it all about their innocence and about the strength of the case against them, doesn't it?
And the dna evidence used to convict Guede lay in the same sealed crime area for the same amount of time as the bra clasp which convicted Sollecito. yet all the dna evidence against Guede is totally spot on, textbook correct, but the dna against Knox & Sollecito is suspect? Really?
Yes Guede would have gotten that fast track trial, as would you or I if we ever were up on trial in Italy as yet again anyone can choose for a fast track trial in Italy. Look it up.
Yes they did as again Guede was tried Separately in his fast track trial which again, Knox & Solelcito could have availed of only they didn't, so it's a it rich complaining about such things now.
No, she was treated more fairly than she would have been in the US as I doubt she would have been even given an appeal based non the strength of the case against her. But in Italy her appeal was automatic.
Again, Knox's supporters attack one of the prosecutors, the country of Italy, the victim's family, an entire judicial system and everything else they can think of to distract attention away from the abundance of evidence against her.
Again, such tactics says it all about their innocence.
Now if you're so sure that this is such a miscarriage of justice, then you've nothing to worry about as they're STILL allowed a final appeal, which is sure to exonerate them as the case is of course so weak against them. So everything will work out fine.
Court of cassation awaits, so I reckon we'll just have to wait and see what happens won't we? Personally, I reckon they're screwed, but again we'll see who's right come their appeal
Please highlight any hateful comemnts it's made. The site you've linked is a partisan joke and any hateful comments- such as repugnant attacks on the Kercher family- seem to come from Knox supporters.
from Wikipedia by Jim Wales himself.
I've seen the talk page on the wiki site, lots of pro Knox posters got banned for trying to pass off the likes of Steve Moore as a reputable source.
And again, please provide actual evidence of any hateful comments they've made on said site, thanks.
Only hateful comments come from the pro Knox crowd, comparing those who agree with the court's verdicts as akin to holocaust deniers (Mark Olshaker, "Ramblings on the fringe" April 29 2014) or attack the Kercher family on Knox's creepy blog. Despicable behaviour.
People understand that the Kerchers have been grossly misled by Maresca, their Italian attorney, and by the tabloid media.
The haters who controlled the Wiki site -- till Jim Wales kicked them out -- banned many posters who posted evidence of Amanda and Raffaele's innocence (the pro-Knox supporters, as you call them). You are right about that.
One poster referred to John Kercher as "The dirty old man" and another opined that Meredith brought her murder upon herself due to her "poor taste in men". These and other comments can be found here. [url]www.amandaknox.com/2013/12/18/with-respect-to-the-kercher-family[/url]
She also arrogantly demanded on her blog that the Kercher family would have to contact her personally before she'd agree to take down a link soliciting donations for Meredith's family, disregarding their lawyer's request despite him being the family spokesperson. He gets a lot of attacks also, being called a sleazy slimeball etc etc.
Here's another gem from "Kgeddy" btw.
"I think the time for treating them (the Kercher family) with kid gloves is over.. I can no longer tolerate their blatant disregard for the evidence. Nor can I tolerate their emotional drive to send you to prison. I think t's fair to say that their behaviour has been shamefull and I'm not afraid to say that"
Knox is a moderator of her blog and approves such comments in order for them to be posted, so nice to see she's keeping it classy as always.
No an e book or biased article written by a profiteer such as Steve Moore or Bruce Fischer does not equate to evidence of their innocence, sorry.
Also if the pro Knox camp need to use emotive terms such as "hater" and made up fictitious lexicons such as "guilter" then that intimates a decidedly weak argument and has her supporter coming across as a creepy Jim Jones style cult who have guzzled down the Kool Aid. It also makes the actual case against both defendants look all the stronger, so they may wish to consider that when making an argument for their innocence.
and the Massei report.
There is simply no evidence that puts Amanda in the room with Meredith, or physically links her to Meredith, so she couldn't have been involved in that violent murder. Everything else put forth by the prosecution is just smoke and mirrors.
I am among those losing patience with the Kerchers. I think at least one of them should have attended the first appeals trial so they would understand that verdict. Instead, they continued to listen to their self-serving attorney -- the one who will receive a large chunk of any civil monetary award -- and so they continue to contribute to the pile-on against the two innocent students.
I looked for the other comments you mentioned and couldn't find them. But there were dozens of comments from the haters, who Amanda for some reason allows to post there. And there was Amanda's own statement, explaining why she had linked to a donation button in Meredith's memory on the Kercher's site, and why she had taken it down.
As a friend who did NOT kill Meredith, but who had been hurt in the aftermath, Amanda had every moral right to link to the Kercher's site. But she removed the link upon their request, through their attorney.
"I hope that everyone can understand that this is an issue of perspective, and from mine and those who know my innocence, its clear that my actions are an attempt to show compassion and solidarity.
"However, I have to accept that the Kerchers believe Im guilty and my attempts to honor her memory can cause them pain. I do not wish to antagonize their grief, even with my best intentions.
"It is with a broken heart that I acquiesce with the Kercher familys attorneys request to remove from my site the link to the Kercher familys fund raising page and the page I have dedicated in memory of my friend, Meredith.
"I feel trapped in a position where any attempts I make to respect their grief from a distance are perceived as indifference, and any attempts to make a connection are perceived as antagonism and arrogance.
Thank you to all who have supported me in wanting to keep Merediths memory as a friend alive in my heart."
There's no evidence that places Guede in Romanelli's bedroom either where her supporters insist he climbed a 13.5 foot wall (rather than avail of five easier access points) after hurling a big rock through the upstairs window, despite Romanelli testifying that her shutters had been closed.
Now can you address this discrepancy? If "no evidence" of Knox in the "murder room" equates to her innocence, then surely no evidence of Guede in the "Burglary room" equates to him being innocent? You can't have it both ways, sorry.
How s someone who agrees with the Italian court's verdict a "hater"? Who do they hate and why? How are those showing sympathy for the victim as opposed to the convicted felon a "hater"?
Again it intimates a very weak argument from the Knox cult.
Again there's boatloads of evidence against both and it's her supporters who are engaging in the smoke and mirrors approach with their baseless attacks on anyone who disagrees with Knox's innocence as well as espousing whacky conspiracy theories that she was railroaded or the victim of "confirmation bias" or whatever other baseless shit they burble ad nauseaum.
My apologies but if it wasn't under that particular blog entry then it was under other entries and anyone can simply read her creepy blog to find out for themselves.
No as Meredith's convicted murderer, it was grossly tasteless & offensive for Knox to have any link involving Meredith in her lblog, and for someone who claims that Meredith was her "dear friend" (in sharp contrast to her "shit happens" comment to go with her "at the end of the day I only knew her for a few weeks" comment. Knox's problem is she can't even remember her own contradictory statements) she sure had no problem allowing attacks on Meredith & bher family non her own blog.
And who are you to say they were friends? Again, you're going on the word of a twice convicted sex killer & thrice convicted slanderer. Knox's own flatmates testified that she and Meredith didn't really get on and there were tensions between them.
I'll take court testimony over a convicted killer's and slanderer's lies thanks.
So you're losing patience with the victim's family too huh? And it's okay to attack them because they stubbornly agree with a court of law's verdict rather than Amanda Knox or Steve Moore or whatever other hack Knox's cult peddles? Are you serious here? And since when are the Kercher family obliged to go by your level of patience? Your comments are very insensitive to say the very least.
Knox has been convicted, allowed an appeal and convicted again during a retrial. She is currently regarded by the Italian court as being provisionally guilty. Therefore the onus is upon Knox's cult to disprove the evidence against her and again, citing sources such
as Chrsi Halkides/Greg Hampikian (The sciency guys), John Douglas (the law & order guy) or Frank Sfarzo (the batshit nuts profiteer guy) and expecting the Kercher family to go along with this crap is completely arrogant at best. After reading your comment, I can only imagine what your thoughts on rape victims are btw, especially those who dress "provocatively".
Yes and she only put out her self serving statement after arrogantly demanding that the Kercher's themselves personally contact her and only after she received a backlash over this and if you've read her disturbing blog then you should be well aware of this.
After reading all the relevant reports, do you think she'll be exonerated and her conviction quashed come her final appeal?
and Mignini even introduced a cartoon showing how it was done in that very room.
I'm not going to bother to read the rest of your drivel. Your lies are just way too obvious. And so is your hate.
Last edited Tue May 20, 2014, 11:02 PM - Edit history (1)
What lies have I told? Only one lying here is you. You're the one who's lying that there's no evidence against them (there's lots), that Mignini was a Satanic conspiracy theorist (he isn't), that he "was up to his eyeballs in the Monster of Florence" case (he wasn't & didn't even investigate that case), that Knox's trial was unfair (it wasn't) and that the crime scene consisted solely of Meredith's bedroom. (it didn't.)
Again, the fact that their supporters have to resort to lies rather than try and rationally (as opposed to engaging in silly conspiracy theories) disprove the hard & circumstantial evidence against them says it all about their innocence.
As for drivel, are you serious with this comment? This coming from the guy who appears to think that the site of wikipedia is actually involved in a conspiracy, apparently in conjunction with the Italian judiciary to deliberately cover up information regarding K & S's "innocence" (for reasons we can only imagine) as Wikipedia is apparently "controlled by haters"? Please.
who had been controlling the Meredith Kercher article and turning it into another hate site.
Wikipedia has behaved responsibly in this matter.
Wiki is correct in saying Knox withdrew her original statement. Anyone can read the follow-up statement in which she stated that no one should rely on her original statement and it didn't seem real to her.
You forgot the first appeal in which she was found innocent.
You cannot both say that all her multiple trials add up to one continuous 7 year trial -- and also say that she has been "thrice convicted" of slander.
Oops. Major logic fail. It's hard to keep all the lies straight, isn't it?
As I said, Hellman's ruling was anulled and the fact that you have to keep citing him as if his verdict actually means anything only highlights the amount of straw clutching the Knox cult have to engage in.
Also, she wasn't found inncoent, her conviction was provisionally overturned until her new trial, which Hellman's ruling allowed, so yeah- it pretty much was a continuous trial or at least part of the same process.
yes I can for the sake of brevity as I know you're knowledgeable about this case (hence the reason I pointed out how you're flat out lying as opposed to harbouring a genuine misconception.)
My point was that three courts as part of the same overall judicial process upheld her callunnia charge and was also to highlight your double standard regarding Hellman's ruling- totally awesome provisionally overturning Knox's conviction but totally mistaken upholding her callunnia charge, despite you opining that he was the one judge who got it right.
And I'm not surpised you wouldn't read any more, no way could you counterpoint to any of the points raised, so chose to run away instead and your concession is duly noted, and the reason you're running away is because Knox's account simply doesn't hold up to objective scrutiny. Just make sure you don't trip up over that tail between your legs.
oh and you also lied about reading the nencini report as translated by Cheli as his is just a counterpoint to how much he thinks it sucks, pro Knox acolyte that he is.
You also never answered my question. You think their conviction will be quashed, seeing as the case against them is so clearly flawed? Y/n??
Now iof you don't wish to continue the discussion then fair enough. But don't expect to be taken at all seriously if you have to resort to easily refuted lies in order to back up what laughably passes for your points.
Amanda Knox- guilty as sin and sure to be extradited after her doomed appeal.
but that won't ever erase the truth. The court-appointed, independent forensics experts from the University of Rome were correct. There was no scientific evidence that connects Amanda and Raffaele to the murder.
I have no faith in the Inquisitors on the high court, but I am confident the European Court on Human Rights will rule in Amanda and Raffaele's favor, adding to the long list of cases which have made Italy's justice system a laughingstock of Europe.
At least, no one operating under a modern justice system.
What has to be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, is their guilt. And Italy has failed miserably to do that, with the expert court appointed witnesses saying that the only DNA evidence against Amanda and Raffaele had no probative value.
"Can you believe 7 impossible things before breakfast?"
Must surrender to Malaysian authorities since they were convicted of War Crimes in absentia,
And apparently we're doing things by standards he made up in his own head.
there was no physical nor forensic evidence tying her to the murder, the original prosecutor was under indictment for falsifying and withholding evidence in other cases, several different stories were told by the prosecution of why she was involved, none with a shred of evidence to back up these insane stories.
Run, Amanda, run from this corrupt Italian justice system.
The Italians would have to petition for the USA to extradite her. We have already told Italy...Kiss my WHAT?
Or they can do what America does, extraordinarily rendition her.
and I hope with all my heart that she remains there and the DoJ or the State Dept. tells Italy to fuck off if they request extradition as this conviction is so wrought with errors that it would never hold up in a US court of law.
I would think it's up to Italy to decide.
By the way, there is enough out there that even in a U.S. court of law would get someone charged with murder. However, the U.S. media gladly never mention the many facts that are out there, nor do they ever specify that Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito were never acquitted; their convictions were reversed on appeal. They were never formally acquitted.
That reversal was itself reversed by the higher court which demanded they be retried. And that's where we are now.
The jury (which in Italy is composed of judges and regular citizens) deliberated over 12 hours, not 5 minutes.
Anne Coulter columns ? Nancy disGrace ?
Response to Bonx (Reply #18)
Are you the guy that laid the big turd that is the base of the last case? You seem to know a lot of exclusive info about her!
You do know that the prosecutor at the time was under indictment for fabricating and withholding evidence from other cases, right? You do know that the original statement of Amanda's was thrown out by the appeals judge because of police misconduct, right?
You do know that every theory put forth by the prosecution is without a shred of evidence, right?
when he was not the only prosecutor - there are many prosecutors involved in an Italian trial - and he certainly was not involved at all in this latest round.
To pin this on Mignini is rather ridiculous. It's not Law & Order. There are many prosecutors involved. At first, it was the Perugia district, which included Mignini. This latest trial was held by the Florence district - totally different set of prosecutors, etc.
In addition, something no one has mentioned: there is no obligation at all to demonstrate or prove a motive for homicide trials in Italy. Essentially, it does not matter what the motive was or may have been. What is at trial is that a person is dead, that she died thanks to injuries inflicted by unknown otherS - yes, others, because medical experts proved that Mr. Guede alone could not have killed Ms. Kercher as she showed hardly any defensive wounds, and yet showed restraint bruises. Even the Knox/Sollecito experts couldn't explain this little fact away.
Medical experts my ass!!!
There is no way she and her then BF were involved in this murder at all.
And your right, this isn't Law & Order, Law & Order is more believable than this sham of a investigation and trial was, this whole process was more like Keystone Kops.
And so the original verdict means fuck-all.
girls shouldn't be sexual or party. that's bad. if they like sex they must be immoral sluts who murder.
^^^^That's the prosecution team.
I wonder though if you could point out to me the section of Italian law which prohibits being "a party girl and sex fiend extraordinaire".
If you do happen to find it be aware you are going to give Silvio Berlusconi a permanent case of sad face.
I changed my mind after reading this story.
My original opinion was informed by sensationalist news media
It might be TL;DR for you, but hey, who needs to actually be informed to have an opinion, right?
There was nothing in that article to help anyone come to any conclusions at all, unless you count wild speculation and flowery descriptions as some sort of evidence.
That was a pure puff piece i was hoping for something way better.
As a lawyer, I have been following this case with interest. There are so many issues raised in this article that I am shocked that the case was retried. The Italian justice system is really a joke. The OP's article makes me very sad. I stand by my opinion that this case would never reach a jury in the United States.
Gonna list them.
1) She was coerced.
No she wasn't her questioning took an hour and 15 minutes roughly and she proactively asked for a pen & paper and wrote out a five page statement.
2) A Satanic element was mooted.
No it wasn't and no mention of anything Satanic is made by the prosecutors in the court transcripts.
3) She was judged by her behaviour looks & nationality.
No, she was judges on the 10,000 pages of hard & circumstantial evidence against her and both other defendants were Italian citizens.
4) Sollecito tried to break down the door
No he didn't and he and Knox were in another room when the door was broken down.
Not only that but Knox lied that Meredith always locked her door which was sharply objected to by Filomena Romanelli
5) The "children" ran from the house screaming.
Knox was 10 years of age? Romanelli was 27 at the time.
6) Foxy Knoxy
Knox had referred to herself in such a manner, putting her interests as "men" on her myspace page, so I doubt if her moniker was in regards to her soccer skillz.
7) The footprints were solely Guede's
Pure bs Sollecito's footprint on the bathmat was proven to have been his.
8) Guede was a petty thief.
Guede had no prior criminal record.
9) Demonic influence mooted
See lie 2)
10)Prosecution's failure to establish motive
Not required in a court of law
11 Prosecution would never have been able to have convict K & S all by themselves.
See lie 3)
12) Knox didn't flush the toilet as she was concerned about water conservation.
Lmao. Seems to be the only article that mentions this.
13) Meredith's friends fled the country
No they didn't as they were required to stay for questioning, just like Knox was.
14) Knox refused to leave
Her flatmates testified to hearing her on the phone with her mother & stepfather that no, she couldn't make that flight out to Seattle as the cops were "making" her stay.
15) Knox wanted to help solve the murder.
Knox is nancy Drew, or that old lady from Murder She Wrote?
16) Mignini was a central figure in the Monster of Florence serial murder case.
No, he wasn't even involved in that investigation and had merely investigated one death in Perugia that of Dr Francesco Narducci- whose death the Florence cops suspected was connected to the MOF case. Mignini never investigated the MOF case itself.
17) Mignini proposed that a Satanic cult was behind Narducci's death.
No he didn't, an occult link was suggested (not by Mignini) re the MOF murders and was suggested by three independent sources as far back as 1985.
Mignini felt that Narducci had been murdered and that Narducci's dad who was a freemason was somehow involved in the cover up of his death, but not his death itself.
18) Mignini accused a hostile journalist of Satanism
no he accused him of evidence tampering in the case and said journalist is up in court this coming June to face said charges.
19) An officer stated that Knox "smelled like sex"
no, he said she smelled strongly of B.O.
20) Sollecito asked for and was denied a lawyer.
Lol, utter bs.
21) Knox's interrogation lasted hours
See lie 1)
22) The police first mentioned Lumumba
Not according to Knox in page 84 of her book, in which she claims she proactively mentioned Lumumba to the interpreter. (Amanda Knox, Waiting to be Extradited oops I mean Heard)
23) Knox was hit
No she wasn't. Her own lawyer claims she "was pressured but not hit, he hasn't pressed any charges or launched any investigation against the cops and even Hellman who overturned her conviction upheld her slander charges.
24) Knox signed a confession after breaking down in tears.
Knox proactively asked for a pen & p\per, wrote out a five page statement in which she still blamed Lumumba and then left him to rot in prison for two weeks. Not too cool Amanda.
25) Guede broke into a nursery school.
no he trespassed into a nursery school, no break in occurred.
26) The detectives selected the kitchen knife at random.
No they selected the one with the strong smell of bleach that looked like it had been cleaned thoroughly, as in the one which yielded both the victim's and suspect's dna on the blade and handle.
27) Guede got a rteduction in sentencing for fingering Knox & Sollecito
No it was because he opted for a fast track trial, which Knox and Sollecito also could have availed of.
That is an utterly shameful and truly disgusting excuse for objective journalism.
according to the invalid first verdict
i have not seen that phrase used seriously in so long
your insights could help authorities round up party girls before they destroy us all
And Italy is failing miserably.
But this is no surprise because it's the same country that has found 6 geologists guilty of manslaughter for saying, correctly, that small tremors in an earthquake zone didn't mean that a large earthquake was forthcoming.
Seriously, What is someone like you doing on this site?
Being a "party girl" and a "sex fiend" does not make a someone a bad person or murder. It is not grounds to cast doubt or suspicion on anyone.
It is a bunch of sexist tripe and if that is part of your reasoning then I have no faith in anything you say at all.
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
Bunch of sexist crap. "party girl and sex fiend" do not a make someone a murderer or bad person. FFS. This guy is obviously trolling DU. MIRT should check it out.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:01 PM, and the Jury voted 4-2 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: While I may agree with your assessment of what he is saying, this is not a Community Standards issue to be hidden. Argue it out in the thread. I was going to leave with the caveat that all alerted on posts that are not hidden go to Admin for perusal so someone in power would see this.
Then I reread and thought more and realized this is the "she was a party girl who loved sex so of course she'd be a murderer" as you wrote and decided to hide it instead.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
An Italian jury disagrees with the alerter.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: What is wrong with you talking to a member like that? Hrmjustin
is about as anti-justice as anything, enabling the state to try someone until they get the desired verdict.
...it would not be hard to find strong evidence of "double jeopardy" in the American justice system.
If a mistrial is declared on appeal, the case may be retried without it being considered double jeopardy. If jury nullification is suspected at the local level (e.g. the Rodney King beating) then the federal government can bring charges for the different but "very related" crime of violating civil rights. If a suspect is found innocent of a crime (e.g. OJ), the suspect can none the less be sued for wrongful death.
All this might lead someone who does not understand our system to conclude that it is rife with "double jeopardy".
the grounds they had for overturning the "innocent" verdict?
There were three defendants. The first, Rudy Guede, the burglar whose DNA was found in and on the victim's body, and who admitted to holding her in his arms as she died (but claimed the intimacy was consensual) accepted the Italian version of a no-contest plea, which they call a "fast track trial." To take this plea, and to get his sentence cut by a third, he agreed to a set of stipulations put forth by the prosecution. These included stipulations saying that he was there with Amanda and Raffaele, but that HE wasn't the one wielding the knife -- the other two did the actual murder. Also, that Meredith told him she thought Amanda had stolen her rent money (even though Guede's DNA was the only DNA found on her purse.) So he got his sentence reduced by pointing to Amanda and Raffaele.
Then the high court ratified his trial results and at that point, all the stipulations were considered settled truth. The crazy part is that the full trials Amanda and Raffaele were still wending their way through the system -- and the high court directed the second appeals court to use these unanswered stipulations against Amanda and Raffaele. All those stipulations carried the weight of truth in Amanda and Raffaele's trial, and their attorneys weren't even allowed to question Guede at their trial.
Does this sound like justice to you? Or anything that could happen in a US court?
In case you don't realize it, Raffaele had never even met Guede. Guede was a pal of the murder victim's boyfriend, who lived in the apartment downstairs, so Amanda had seen him at parties, but she had no relationship with him either. But the prosecution's final theory at the latest trial was that Guede pooped in a third roommates' toilet without flushing. And that Meredith got so angry with Amanda about Guede's poop that Amanda and Raffaele and Guede rose up and killed her.
appears to be the American legal position.
and you have yet to present even the slightest argument or facts to support your fetish about Knox rushing to Italy to turn herself in.
Hey, she must be guilty. After all, Italy is a western country who must have a decent legal and police system. Uhm. No.
If you want an informed opinion, read the rolling stone article. It might be TL;DR for those who like to just form opinions without information, but give it a try.
Otherwise, you're just spouting one sided propaganda.
All the general media talks about is the salacious "details" from the tabloid type press.
I feel really badly for this girl.
I just wanted to tell you that cause you are trippin, yo.
Why the poop theory then? And the satanic ritual sex thingy theory?
American author Douglas Preston of opening a portal to hell using a special ritual stone he had found in the apartment of Preston's "collaborator" who was a journalist critical of the investigation.
The special ritual portal to hell stone turned out to be a doorstop.
But this asshole saw a portal to hell!
They convicted a bunch of scientists for failing to predict an earthquake, something that NOBODY can do, and you think we should trust them to reach a proper verdict in a murder trial?
"Italian justice system stinks" comments are effusively moronic.
This mess with Amanda Knox is simply more of the same for the Italians.
How many anomalies before we see that the US and Italian systems are actually quite equal in terms of ability to err? 10? 100? 1000? You don't care?
And, unlike Amanda, GZ can't be tried over and over again until the state reaches a verdict they like.
Americans are laughing at the corrupt Italian justice system which sucks ass.
Of course it was 2 different trials, the prosecutor presented a whole different theory for the crime different from the last trial, with, I may add, no fucking proof at all, no physical or forensic evidence that she was involved at all.
Unflushed shit in a toilet? Really? That's the best the prosecution could come up with?
she was railroaded, no prosecutor in this country would have ever presented this case in court, it was riddled with errors, police misconduct, prosecutorial misconduct, the original prosecutor was under indictment for falsifying and withholding evidence from other cases, he was busted for bugging journalists, etc., and you want to believe this was a fair trial?
I hope the DoJ or the State Dept. tells Italy to go pound sand up their ass if they ever request extradition.
No she wasn't.
no prosecutor in this country would have ever presented this case in court
Yes they would have and Knox didn't commit her murder in America anyway.
it was riddled with errors,]
the original prosecutor was under indictment for falsifying and withholding evidence from other cases, he was busted for bugging journalists, etc.,
And was acqquitted of all charges.
and you want to believe this was a fair trial?
yes. particularly as Knox herself said that her trial was fair, her rights were respected & American reaction really wasn't helping her situation and particularly as she was given an automatic appeal and still is allowed a final appeal, despite being convicted twice.
Her trial may have been bloated and overlong, but it was anything but unfair.
I hope the DoJ or the State Dept. tells Italy to go pound sand up their ass if they ever request extradition.
Well Italy will will be requesting and the state dept will most likely honour it. Google kevin Dahlgren for details.
doesn't mean the Italiian system isn't as equally screwed up, if not more so.
I still take ours over theirs. I like the notion that prosecutors can't keep trying a person until they get the verdict they are looking for, verses the one they have actually proven or not proven as the case may be.
the prosecution totally changed the theory of the murder to unflushed shit in a toilet that prompted Amanda and her BF to murder the victim.
How fucking stupid is that? And you defend this as a fair trial?
This whole sham of a trial was corrupted from the beginning by the corrupt cops and the corrupt prosecutor.
they just can't say oops and take it back.
It's Double Jeapordy any way you look at it whether it is a trial or an appeal.
Ask yourself this if you or a family member was accused of a crime would you like it if the prosecuters were allowed to just keep refiling charges/reappealing the case against you even after you had received an aquittal ad infinitum?
There has to be a point where the prosecution admits it presented its best case and still failed. PERIOD. Thank God the American Justice system still believes that at least.
Where six Italian geologists and a government official where convicted of manslaughter got 6 years for NOT predicting an earthquake.
Are you seriously comparing their legal system and our? Theirs is a joke. Go get better informed.
Does that make the American system a joke also?
Which has been discussed ad nauseumon this board. Due to the way the law was written, terrible police response, and crappy prosecution Zimmerman got off.
But that in my mind is better (one guilty man going free) rather than 7 innocent people spending 6 years of their lives behind bars for a "crime" that would be laughed out of an American court. The two cases are not even comparable.
One was a high profile, violent criminal case with no eye witnesses to the actual events aside from Zimmerman and the other case was an incoherent mess of false science.
You do know that it is not possible to predict earthquakes reliably...? Right? Or are you just looking at the case with blinders going "Bad cases happen in both countries" without any sort of context.
Zimmerman's case no matter how implausible his statements about that night are, they are within the realm of possibility (meaning that the actions could have actually happened, not that I believe it)
But the Italian case the scientist where convicted on an impossibility. Could you imagine getting arrested and convicted because you didn't predict the future. There's a difference and your being willfully ignorant of it.
The townspeople were upset about a series of tremors and wanted to know if they should press to reinforce buildings or take any other precautions. The geologists basically told them they had nothing to worry about. It was more of an active failure to warn, than a passive failure to predict.
Like "the McDonalds coffee lady," a lot gets lost in the retelling.
So, the prosecutor just gets as many bites at the apple as they need to get a politically demanded verdict? Nu uh.
I know it's Australia and the proper term would be geography but after having to digest the OP's "effusively moronic" statement I needed a break.
declaration of something totally wrong.
sound smarter -- especially since "effusive" refers to an emotional state and thus does not relate to something being moronic.
But "effusive" can be used as a synonym for "enthusiastic."
And I've definitely met people who were, indeed, enthusiastically moronic.
But not the people he's accusing.
and since you prosecute based on "the evidence," you can direct the investigation any way you wish to prove your point.
Yes, by law, the prosecutor must be involved in the investigation process since its beginning. In fact, the police have the duty to report all known offences to the prosecutor in the shortest time possible (in certain cases, within 24 hours or even immediately) so to permit the prosecutor to gain the lead of the inquiry and to direct the investigative action (see Q 3).
Once the prosecutor is in full charge he gives instructions to the police, both generic and specific. In the latter case the prosecutor indicates which specific act to carry out and he can also impose to follow particular formalities.
The prosecutor can also personally discharge the investigations. However, in daily practice it is very unusual for the prosecutor to carry out directly all the investigative acts. This happens only for absolutely major crimes (e.g. terrorism). In general, the prosecutor gives instructions to the police: when the offence is a serious one he might prefer to give a specific instruction, otherwise he sets general guidelines and leaves the case to the police. In cases of minor offences it is not uncommon for prosecutors not to give any instruction and to leave the police complete freedom of movement.
However, there are some investigative acts that can be carried out only by the prosecutor himself or only under his impulse.
Only the prosecutor can question the person in custody. Only the prosecutor can take the initiative to adopt wiretapping. For doing so, he will file a request to the judge, asking to be admitted to such investigative act (though, materially, the act is made by the police). The judge can admit the request only if there is a probable cause (gravi indizi) that the alleged crime was committed and only if such pervasive act is absolutely necessary for the prosecution of the inquiry.
You dont get to try someone until you get it "right". Forget it Italy, you will never see her again. Quit being so incompetent.
So far, the only comments I've seen advocating this are from the wing nuts who frequent the KOMO News comments section. Their solution to everything is guns, and a couple of these civics-challenged folk have even offered to bring her in. Real tough guys hiding behind a keyboard spewing ridiculous nonsense. This type of silliness has no place at DU.
On edit: frickin' autocorrect!
rigged the evidence so badly, I don't believe it's possible to come to any firm conclusion. They have certainly not proved their case beyond a REASONABLE doubt. She should not surrender. She should stay in the country and never return to Europe again.
She's a sex fiend? Really? Or maybe.....She's a WITCH!!!!
(cue the Monty Python clip)
Not to mention my "game" is supported by an independent Italian Appeals tribunal, that kind of trolling?
she was tried and found not guilty....the second trial was double jeopardy..
and your can recite all the "facts" you want...you were not there for the blow-by-blow of the trial yet you seem to come to judgement all on your own
then not guilty on the first appeal, and then guilty on this second appeal.
She was acquitted in Italy. No extradition to a country that does double jeopardy. Period.
And who says another country can not have their own legal rules and principles, because only America has got it right?
Here in the US, we prohibit double jeopardy. This woman is a US citizen on US soil. She was acquitted on appeal. According to our laws, which apply to this woman, she was acquitted. No extradition.
You're obviously very interested in this particular case. I"m not sure why that is, but I believe that interest has taken over from an interest in justice in the United States.
I have no idea, one way or another, about her guilt or innocence. She was acquitted. In our system of law, that ends it.
If she goes to Italy, they can arrest her, but she should not be extradited from the US to Italy. I doubt she will be travelling to Italy, though. I wouldn't, if I were her.
Sorry if you don't agree.
makes her immune from extradition.
She was acquitted by the appeals court, which is a not guilty verdict under US law, so this latest trial was double jeopardy under US law and that's all that counts as far as extradition goes.
Some supporters of Knox have argued that having been acquitted in 2011, she would be protected under the U.S. constitution from double jeopardy.
Yet the U.S.-Italy extradition treaty only protects Americans who face prosecution again in Italy for an offence that has already been dealt with by the U.S. This is not applicable in this situation, said Prof Julian Ku, who teaches transnational law at Hofstra University in New York.
For extradition candidates such as Knox, who have already been convicted, the treaty states that Italy must merely produce a brief statement of the facts of the case, as well as the text of the laws governing the crime committed, the punishment the person would receive, and its statute of limitations.
when Italy retried her again, under US law, that's double jeopardy which would disqualify her for extradition.
and that's the only thing that counts, US law as far as an extradition request goes.
She won't be extradited, rightly so.
have a different opinion on the extradition treaty with Italy than you, we should leave it at that.
than you and your Julian Ku.
Even the possibility that Knox would be retried may seem strange to Americans. The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits double jeopardy, meaning a person cant be tried twice for the same crime.
Like most European nations, Italy does not forbid it, treating a retrial as a simple continuation of the first one. Under Italian law, a prosecutor can appeal an acquittal, confirms Adam H. Rosenblum of The Rosenblum Law Firm in Albany, N.Y.
Her home country seems to be taking her side. Since the principle of double jeopardy is highly regarded in the United States, experts believe that there is a good chance the United States will not extradite her to Italy for trial, Rosenblum says. However, under Italian law she can be tried in absentia.
Absent, but Not Fonder
That leaves Italian prosecutors to carry on without her, which they can do.
Knoxs lawyer said recently that she will not return to Italy for trial, points out Rosenblum. I believe due to the very public nature of the case, and the fact that they have devoted so much time and resources to the case thus far, the prosecution will likely conduct a trial in her absence.
In the United States, its unlikely that would happen. Under federal Law, he says, a felony trial can only be held in absentia if [the defendant] begins the trial in person and (1) voluntarily leaves after the trial begins; or (2) is so disruptive that he needs to be removed.
If Knox is convicted in absentia, Rosenblum says the United States will remain unlikely to serve her up to Italy and would refuse to extradite her. She would be safe as long as she stays home in Seattle. We know one vacation spot Ms. Knox wont be visiting any time soon, confirms Rosenblum. Italy.
.... but American citizens in the USA are protected by the U.S. Constitution. IMO, double jeopardy applies.
Multiple lawyers say double jeopardy would not apply in this case because the first verdict was a conviction. If the first verdict was an acquittal, THEN you have an argument for double jeopardy.
The only thing that can block an extradition is if the US State Department intervenes and declines the request. That could potentially have political/diplomatic consequences.
It's also important to note that if the state department does block it, it doesn't mean it's blocked for good. Italy can make a new request every time a new administration is elected.
I doubt that double jeopardy has technically attached because this still the same case. In the US, a person can be retried if the conviction is overturned and the double jeopardy rule will not apply. Professor Dershowitz also thinks that double jeopardy does not apply http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/30/22507219-amanda-knox-convicted-of-murder-in-italian-retrial
Some observers have questioned whether the American protection against double jeopardy being retried and convicted of a crime after being acquitted would give the U.S. an excuse to balk at extradition.
But Dershowitz doubts that would apply in the Knox case because she was intially found guilty and her acquittal took place at an intermediate appeals level.
"If that happened in the U.S., it wouldn't be double jeopardy," he said
My problem with the verdict is that one needs to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard and that is difficult when the circumstantial evidence is weak. The evidence presented in the OP would not be sufficient to make it to a jury or survive a motion to dismiss in the United States. The fact that the prosecution has changed legal theories would also make it difficult to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
As has been explained. if you think it does, then I reckon you're in for a surprise when Knox io indeed extradited.
Simply stating things without transcripts or official records is just bullshit. What crap link it shit anyway?
As you probably know, the first appeals court found that there was "no evidence" of Amanda and Raffaele's guilt and hence found them each "innocent." (Not just "not guilty," which was another option.)
Here's what you might not know. The prosecution appealed to Italy's high court, and the high court threw out the innocent verdict. Why? Because the burglar, Rudy Guede, had chosen to have a separate "fast track trial. " As a requirement of the fast-track, he stipulated to all the prosecution's claims, including a claim that he only had sexual contact with Meredith while the other two knifed her to death. For lying about this, he got a reduced sentence.
Then his case went to the high court, which ratified his fast track verdict -- along with all the "truths" he had stipulated to.
Then comes the really crazy part. The high court tossed the first appeals court verdict because it hadn't incorporated into its written statement all the stipulations that had already been "proven" in Rudy Guede's separate trial (including, for example, Guede's claim that Meredith thought Amanda stole her rent money -- even though only Guede's DNA was found on Meredith's purse.) And it required the new appeals court to accept all Guede's lies as truth when reaching its verdict on Amanda and Raffaele, without even allowing their attorneys to question him in their trial.
We are the fascists not them. They are more socialists nowadays.
I really doubt that this case would get to a US jury or survive a motion to dismiss. The concept of proof beyond a reasonable doubt really does not apply in the Italian system.
I really do not see how this case could meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. It appears that the Italian system works on the basis of feelings and probabilities/possibilities
People on this forum have been listening to/reading/ and analyzing propaganda for over a decade. No one, not one person here, whether they are conservative, lean right, lean left or are flat out liberals are going to care or change their minds because of this post.
There are lawyers arguing the woman's case now-- it's fascinating in terms of international law, but I doubt there is one person here that will be swayed by your cut and paste "argument."
Have a good stay.
geologists for not predicting an earthquake?
Real fair Italian justice system you're defending there fred.
I forgot to add just for him that this is the same Italian justice system that let a prosecutor under indictment for falsifying and manufacturing evidence try the case.
Yeah, that's a real fair justice system.
I was referring to your "She's guilty!" post. See the difference?
he's been locked out of his own thread.
As noted, this case is interesting in that the Italian justice system does not make sense to me. People are convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence in the US system but the evidence has to make sense and be consistent. The evidence in the OP does not come close to meeting the beyond a reasonable doubt standard under US law.
I am sorry for the family of the victim but the evidence does support the theories being used to convict Ms. Knox in my opinion.
Oh yeah, I'm just going to go do life in a foreign prison voluntarily. Are you serious?
So there's that.
With regard to Snowden, I think he was justified in US whistleblowing -- but not his continuing revelations about international spying.
They have not proved her guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. I would hate for her to have to go back and rot in to jail in Italy. Her experience there was horrible.
First of all, I don't think her guilt has been proven at all.
But even if we assume that it was....why on earth should she surrender to the folks that would put her in jail? That makes no sense at all. Because a cold-blooded murderer should do the "right" thing? Incredibly silly thinking.
And if she's actually innocent of the killing there's absolutely no reason at all to turn herself in to the folks that have managed to be wrong 2 out of 3 times.
Amanda Knox should stay as far away from Italy as possible.
If Knox were convicted here, she'd likely be spending 20-23 hours a day in a cell with no human contact.
And in America, she would probably be in general population, which means she would be free to move around the prison during the day to work and participate in activities.
You're only in a cell 23 hours a day in America if you break the rules or are a target for other inmates (child molester, rapist). Or if you're a special case somehow. Amanda would pretty much fall under the category of common criminal, so she would likely be allowed at least some possibility for a normal if highly restricted life.
I read she was pretty free to move around the prison, but I could be wrong.
"Close your eyes and imagine that cell is where she will spend 22 hours a day for the next 26 years."
"In Perugia's Capanne prison, Knox spent 22 hours most days inside an 18-ft.-by-13-ft. cell she shared with at least one and sometimes as many as three inmates. The cell had one bathroom, a small TV and an electric pan cooker; Knox added a tiny radio she bought for $20 at a prison shop. "Amanda would wake up early, make herself coffee, then go out for one of her two hours of outdoor time," says her mother. Knox tried to stay fit by walking in the 30-ft.-by-30 ft. courtyard and doing situps and push-ups in her cell. Still, she lost so much weight during her imprisonment that she dropped from a size 6 to a 0."
I think the Italian Court system fucked this case up from the beginning because of the high profile that it had and then made shit up to cover their asses later.
Read the Rolling Stone article recommended by another poster. Italy's justice system is based on different principles than ours.
Well, let's start with those footprints uncovered by luminol. It proves that no bleach was used (although prosecutor claimed Amanda bleached the house to erase her DNA), because bleach would have destroyed any footprints.
A whole host of lies to refute, starting here:
Raffaele's kitchen knife was the prosecution's "smoking gun." The knife was reported throughout the world as "the double DNA knife." The prosecution claimed that Amanda's DNA was on the handle and Meredith's DNA was on the blade. That is pretty damning evidence. Well, it would be if it was true. But the truth is, Raffaele's kitchen knife was never used in any crime. The prosecution never found the murder weapon that was used to kill Meredith Kercher.
The knife was a common kitchen knife retrieved from the kitchen of Raffaele Sollecito. The knife was chosen from the drawer because it looked clean. No other knives were taken to be tested. Was this an extraordinary case of good luck by the detectives or was this knife not the murder weapon after all?
Italian forensic police expert Patrizia Stefanoni performed the DNA testing on the knife. When the knife was tested, Amanda's DNA was found on the handle. This was expected because Amanda often prepared meals at Raffaele's apartment. She used the knife for cooking.
A sample was taken from the knife blade and was tested for blood. The result was negative. There was no blood on the knife. This needs to be repeated,
THERE WAS NO BLOOD ON THE KNIFE.
What was left of the sample from the blade was tested for DNA.. The results were negative.There was no DNA on the blade. This is when all guidelines for testing DNA were thrown out the window. Stefanoni used a very new, unproven technique called low copy number DNA profiling.
Patrizia Stefanoni had neither the proper equipment nor the proper laboratory to perform low copy number DNA profiling, but she did it anyway. There are only a few such laboratories in the world. Her own lab was not even certified to perform ordinary DNA profiling at the time these tests were performed. Stefanoni performed tests that do not conform to any standard, anywhere.
The knife doesn't match the wounds on Meredith.
The knife doesn't match the bloody imprint left on the bed.
Mark C. Waterbury, Ph.D, summed up the lack of control testing perfectly:
"Perhaps even more important for the knife DNA, no control experiments were run to follow the handling of the item from the field through to the laboratory. That is, to see if other, random objects retrieved from the same drawer and handled in the same, unprofessional way, might also appear to have DNA on them. It would be interesting to hear the prosecution spinning a sinister implication out of DNA found on a can opener. Perhaps one can use canned peas for satanic rituals. Would Meredith's DNA be found on a spoon from the same drawer? How about Filomena's? Would the spoon then be cast as the murder weapon, whether it matches any wounds or not?
The knife in question was not the murder weapon. The knife in question had nothing to do with Meredith's murder. The prosecution never found the murder weapon.
Don't believe that? Maybe you should check out what an expert testified at trial:
Advertise | AdChoices
In the case of Amanda Knox, there was an 83 to 100 percent match with the DNA profile," Berti said, adding that the new test had been completed twice to verify its accuracy.
Who is part of the Friends of Amanda cult oops I mean "group", along with Chris Halkides, Greg Hampikian, Steve Moore, John Douglas, mark Olshaker and any other liar for hire that partisan shill site espouses.
Very telling that Waterbury is so convinced of the strangth of his case, that he highlights his findings on blogs, as opposed to flying to Italy to quash this horrible miscarriage of justice.
Also the knife in question was retested and found to have even more of Knox's dna on it. Waterbury is reduced to lying as he knows the evidence against Knox is very strong indeed.
When the UK newspapers declare Amanda Knox innocent, you know the forensics are overwhelming.
Consider: the appeals court that in 2011 found Knox and Sollecito not guilty of murdering Meredith Kercher and set them free after four years in prison made clear that almost every pillar of evidence mounted against them had collapsed. A court-ordered reappraisal of the forensic evidence completely dismantled the prosecutions claims about the purported murder weapon, refuted the contention that Sollecitos DNA was on Kerchers torn bra strap, and made clear there were no physical traces of either defendant in the room where the murder took place.
Nothing, in other words, tied them to the crime except for theories and conjecture unsupported by actual evidence. By contrast, the DNA of Rudy Guede, the Ivorian-born drifter now serving a 16-year sentence for the murder, was all over the crime scene.
Most sex-attackers are men; Guede had Kercher's blood on his hands and left other evidence behind; there is no incontrovertible evidence placing Knox or Sollecito in the bedroom; forensic evidence cited by the prosecution was discredited at their successful appeal in 2011. Yet the Italian authorities have stood by an idea formed in the immediate aftermath of the killing, which is that a woman must have been the prime mover.
And this: http://www.scotsman.com/news/dani-garavelli-knox-s-endless-court-farce-1-3290215
A. Well, its not think. His DNA spells out his identity to an assurance of one in quadrillions. We know who did it. Its Rudy Guede. Hes serving in prison presently. He was never released. He was convicted before Amanda and Raffaele were tried, theres no question about who did this.
"What (the Italian forensic experts) found was that the knife recovered from Raffaele's apartment not only did not have traces of human blood, but it had not been cleaned in the way the prosecution said. They had said that Amanda bleached the knife. Instead, what experts appointed by the judge said was that the blade had potato starch on it. It was a typical kitchen knife. It was found in a kitchen drawer with other knifes. It wasn't well cleaned and it wasn't used as a murder weapon."
The Italian prosecutors used a DNA detection limit far below that of the independent U.S. experts or the FBI in determining the presence of blood DNA on the blade, Hampikian said, which made contamination a much more likely source of the genetic material.
The second piece of evidence was Kercher's bra clasp that allegedly had Sollecito's DNA but was inconclusive, according to Hampikian. Police investigators found no DNA from Sollecito or Knox on the rest of the bra, other items of Kercher's clothing, objects collected from Kercher's room, or in samples from her body. However they did find large amounts of DNA from Rudy Guede, a drifter from the Ivory Coast who was separately convicted of Kercher's murder and is serving 16 years in prison.
Abrams is a good lawyer and has looked at the evidence and it was his opinion that there was no case here or a very weak case. The real issue is that the media in Italy have decided that Knox is guilty and so the facts do not matter.
The facts recited on thus there'd in the OP are weak and this case would survive a motion to dismiss. It is sad that someone thinks that the facts set forth in OP are sufficient to support a conviction. The Italian justice system is a joke and I think that Amanda Knox is innocent
man scorned than anything else. ~ Fred, are you an executioner as well as a prosecutor and jury?
we, in the USA, don't give prosecutors more than one bite of the apple.
So, based on subject line--FAIL.
Plus, she did not do it.
A provisional overturning of a conviction cannot be appealed by the prosecution in the US?
yeah she did and was convicted twice.
We don't do "provisional."
She won't be able to travel for at least the time being, but she's safe as houses in USA. She will not be extradited.
This is a discussion board, what I was doing is termed "discussing."
Not meant literally.
What I meant was though is that you seem to think there's no way that Knox will be extradited. I disagree. We'll see who's proven right.
Our laws don't permit multiple bites of the apple by the prosecution; you make your case and that's it. There's no such thing as a "provisional acquittal" in USA that can be overturned on appeal. The Italian courts can and do politicize their process.
Some people think that the Italians won't even put in an extradition request.
Time will tell.
except on technical grounds.
In this case, the Nencini court considered new evidence and a new motive (specifically, that Meredith got so outraged by Guede's poop in the other roommates' toilet, that Amanda and Raffaele -- who had never even met Guede-- rose up and killed her).
A new appeals trial with new evidence would never be allowed in the US due to double jeopardy laws.
In Texas, Tom Delay was convicted by the trial court and a divided court of appeals on a partisan or straight party line vote overturned this conviction. The Travis county district attorney appealed this to the highest criminal court in Texas and that court accepted the appeal. The Court of Criminal Appeals could reinstate the guilty verdict.
This is a very different situation compared to the Knox verdict. The reasoning for the latest verdict is based on a theory not mention at trial on evidence that would not be admitted in the US. The Italian justice system is a joke and this verdict would not stand in the US. I still believe that Knox will not have to back to Italy
a new trial with new evidence and a new motive.
If you think it does, then I reckon you're in for a nasty shock should Knox's conviction be upheld and an extradition request made by Italy.
A suspect from the US may not be extradited to Italy provided they've already been convicted/acquitted of the same crime in the requested nation...which would be the US. Knox has never even been charged with Meredith's murder n the US, so that's that settled. You're harbouring a misconception in this regard and again, you're in for a rude awakening should that request be made by Italy.
But again we'll just have to wait & see. If you're correct then everything will work out awesome for you and you'll have no worries.
were denied the right to question the "stipulations" from Rudy Guede's fast track trial -- and the witness who made them, Guede himself.
Italy may try to extradite, but it will never succeed.
And the truth is the murder took place in Meredith's bloody bedroom and there wasn't a single speck of physical evidence that places Amanda in the room OR connects Amanda's body/clothing to Meredith's body/clothing.
You have never refuted the fact that there was no DNA in the murder room that was linked to Amanda; or on Meredith's body; and Meredith's DNA wasn't found on Amanda, even though they were supposedly involved in a violent fight to the death. And there wasn't a single other piece of physical evidence in that room or on the girls bodies or clothing that connected Amanda to the murder.
Guede left his DNA inside and on Meredith's body, and on her purse, and he left his palm print and shoe prints in blood in the room; and his feces in the other girls' toilet. He acknowledged being in the cottage at the time of the murder and said that he held Meredith while she lay dying.
He was the only murderer, and yet his statement was used against the two innocent students.
The single person who left numerous physical traces gets to condemn two people who left no trace at all -- according to the only court-appointed independent forensic experts who have given testimony. What an insane outcome.
you think you "get it right". They let her go. As far as im concerned its over.
The high court ruled that the Hellman appeals court, the one that found Amanda and Raffaele, erred by not taking into account the "truths" that had already been "proven" in Rudy Guede's separate, fast-track trial. In order to get his fast track trial and its reduced sentence, Guede was required to "stipulate" to the truth of all the prosecution claims, including the claim that Guede had two accomplices who wielded the knives while he took advantage of Meredith sexually. And Amanda and Raffaele were named repeatedly as the accomplices. Guede also stipulated to having heard the girls argue, and to the claim that Meredith thought Amanda had stolen her rent money.
The prosecution accepted these claims of Guede's even though they knew the only non-Meredith DNA found on the purse belonged to Guede himself, the burglar.
So Amanda and Raffaele were essentially convicted, along with Guede, in his fast track trial -- a trial in which they could not participate. The claims stipulated to in that trial were then incorporated into the "proof" of their "guilt" that Judge Nencini put together in his Motivation report.
And this is what they call justice in Italy.
every time you post about it. At this point, it looks like an obsession.