Amanda Knox - Guilty or Innocent

[Brounmoney]

 

 

You could well be right, however I've not seen anything about what the US Govt's thoughts are and how they supersede those of their judiciary. On the other hand I have no idea that the Italian Judiciary or govt. let alone the people are that worried what Uncle Sam think. The question remains though, what has 'Manda got to worry about if she can prove her innocence? At present it is not a case of her having done so already, merely that the first appeal has been found to be faulty.

 

So I read more into what the US government thinks, and it seems the governor of Washington Amanda's home state had real question about the trial. She had a meeting with Hilary Clinton about the trial. I could not get any more information other than that. I would assume though that her lawyer would tell her not to go. I do not believe Italy has extradition laws with the US, so they would have no legal bounds to force her back.

 

If I were her even if I was innocent I would be scared to go back. She is not a fan favorite, and do any of us really think she would get a fair trial? Also do they have any better evidence than they did the first time? Was that not why they overruled the first time?

 

I think the Italian investigation really screwed the whole thing up. The sad part is now most likely we will never know who did it.

Edited April 26, 2013 by Brounmoney

[Loose]

After Amanda got put in prison Hilary Clinton spoke on the governments behalf saying they believed she was innocent and they would do everything they could to get her back home.If I were her even if I was innocent I would be scared to go back. She is not a fan favorite, and do any of us really think she would get a fair trial? Also do they have any better evidence than they did the first time? Was that not why they overruled the first time?I think the Italian investigation really screwed the whole thing up. The sad part is now most likely we will never know who did it.

 

Yeah, at the time I believe that Hillary Clinton was speaking as Secretary of State on behalf of Knox but understandably she can only offer Consular aid and any decision on Extradition would be for the US Dept of Justice (Judiciary) to address.

 

The appeal did not present any new evidence to find Knox "Not Guilty" but found the trial procedures at fault and following the appeal releasing Knox, she was upheld to still be found guilty but ordered a fresh appeal. As it stands Knox is still a convicted criminal in Italy.

 

Would she get a fair trial? Why would she not? What axe do the Italian Prosecution have to grind? Knox was not an italian national and neither was the victim Meredith Kercher. The axe they do have I suppose is that they don't like any foreign national being murdered in their country but for that matter they don't approve of their own citizens being killed either. Perhaps they didn't fall under Foxy's spell. They disliked her? However Italy is not the Banana Republic some people like to portray, they have flushing loos with seats and all that - I know, hard to believe.

 

Italy and the USA have a shared Extradition Treaty.

Edited April 26, 2013 by Loose

[Brounmoney]

 

 

Yeah, at the time I believe that Hillary Clinton was speaking as Secretary of State on behalf of Knox but understandably she can only offer Consular aid and any decision on Extradition would be for the US Dept of Justice (Judiciary) to address.

 

The appeal did not present any new evidence to find Knox "Not Guilty" but found the trial procedures at fault and following the appeal releasing Knox, she was upheld to still be found guilty but ordered a fresh appeal. As it stands Knox is still a convicted criminal in Italy.

 

Would she get a fair trial? Why would she not? What axe do the Italian Prosecution have to grind? Knox was not an italian national and neither was the victim Meredith Kercher. The axe they do have I suppose is that they don't like any foreign national being murdered in their country but for that matter they don't approve of their own citizens being killed either. Perhaps they didn't fall under Foxy's spell. They disliked her? However Italy is not the Banana Republic some people like to portray, they have flushing loos with seats and all that - I know, hard to believe.

 

Italy and the USA have a shared Extradition Treaty.

 

I say she would not get a fair trail because she got such negative press while she was there. There was all kind of stories about her sex life, and other things that had nothing to do with trial. Maybe not but I kind of think she would not.

 

I thought the appeal was made and the high court did not find enough evidence. If that is the case has new evidence been found? The evidence they had with DNA was not handled correctly, so I have seen nothing that suggest they would have new evidence that could convict her.

[Loose]

I say she would not get a fair trail because she got such negative press while she was there. There was all kind of stories about her sex life, and other things that had nothing to do with trial. Maybe not but I kind of think she would not.

 

I thought the appeal was made and the high court did not find enough evidence. If that is the case has new evidence been found? The evidence they had with DNA was not handled correctly, so I have seen nothing that suggest they would have new evidence that could convict her.

 

No, no new evidence as I understand it. It's about what the first appeal said the prosecution did wrong in the first place and that the second appeal is about what they did right, the higher court than the court of appeals is saying a fresh appeal needs to take place because they ruled that the prosecution did nothing wrong. It is not about the evidence from the original trial. A jury does not sit on the appeal so not influenced by what is said in the press.

[Brounmoney]

 

 

No, no new evidence as I understand it. It's about what the first appeal said the prosecution did wrong in the first place and that the second appeal is about what they did right, the higher court than the court of appeals is saying a fresh appeal needs to take place because they ruled that the prosecution did nothing wrong. It is not about the evidence from the original trial. A jury does not sit on the appeal so not influenced by what is said in the press.

 

OK so how did they let her go? Here in the states if you appeal and the ruling is over turned it is over. You can't be tried for the some crime twice. Now if there was a mistrial I think it can go back to trial. Is the prosecution appealing, or was there ever even a ruling?

 

I just read an article in the New York Times that stated the ruling was over turned and she was to be freed. So is the prosecution appealing that ruling? If so that sounds like one messed up judicial system. It seems if you appeal goes to the highest court and they make a ruling that is it.

Edited April 26, 2013 by Brounmoney

[Loose]

OK so how did they let her go? Here in the states if you appeal and the ruling is over turned it is over. You can't be tried for the some crime twice. Now if there was a mistrial I think it can go back to trial. Is the prosecution appealing, or was there ever even a ruling?

 

I just read an article in the New York Times that stated the ruling was over turned and she was to be freed. So is the prosecution appealing that ruling? If so that sounds like one messed up judicial system. It seems if you appeal goes to the highest court and they make a ruling that is it.

 

I think the difference is that the crime didn't happen in the US. Neither the US or a different country can have any effect in saying that - "we don't do things that way" - doesn't really carry any weight does it? You have every right to campaign for your citizen but you cannot complain that it's not fair, it's fair for all in that particular country. The judiciary in another country has a sovereign right to hold its own justice system up to maintain it or for change and development in their own country.

[Brounmoney]

 

 

I think the difference is that the crime didn't happen in the US. Neither the US or a different country can have any effect in saying that - "we don't do things that way" - doesn't really carry any weight does it? You have every right to campaign for your citizen but you cannot complain that it's not fair, it's fair for all in that particular country. The judiciary in another country has a sovereign right to hold its own justice system up to maintain it or for change and development in their own country.

 

I was not saying it is not fair. I am saying the court ruled it does not seem like that ruling can be over turned. If that is the way they do business then that is their right. I seems strange to me. Right or wrong that is how things are. I will keep campaigning for her cause I believe she is innocent, but I also understand what I believe does not matter.

 

I was reading that yes they could try to bring Amanda back to Italy for a trial, but because (like I said before) we have a law against double jeopardy that the U.S. could refuse an appeal to extraditing her.

Edited April 27, 2013 by Brounmoney

[Eastside Urchin]

Whether you think she has done it or not,and I am not sure, don't really know enough about the case and any latest updates re evidence.Its clear that she probably wouldn't get a fair trial again,therefore the Americans aren't going to give her up,they would have looked at this case scrupulously,my guess is that if they were 100% sure she was guilty they would hand her over,any doubt and they simply wouldn't chance it with one of her citizens.The Italian judicial system had its chance,any if she is guilty they blew it!

[Brounmoney]

Whether you think she has done it or not,and I am not sure, don't really know enough about the case and any latest updates re evidence.Its clear that she probably wouldn't get a fair trial again,therefore the Americans aren't going to give her up,they would have looked at this case scrupulously,my guess is that if they were 100% sure she was guilty they would hand her over,any doubt and they simply wouldn't chance it with one of her citizens.The Italian judicial system had its chance,any if she is guilty they blew it!

 

I agreed. I say they screwed up bad the first time. I said it before if she was or was not the one that did it, they now will never know because they messed it up so bad the first time.

[Loose]

Well I don't think it really matters as you say, because in the US the system says that no citizen should be subject to Double Jeopardy and as such she will not be given up by the authorities. However in Italy it is not a case of that she was ever found "Not Guilty". This is a fact, she is still Guilty. She was allowed to go while the judicial system ran through it's process of checks and balances. You can find it ridiculous but it is older than the history of the British and US systems and their development put together. Italian Law is grounded in civil law and of all the civilised nations in the world Britain and the US are the only nations excepted (who do it differently) from all others and the history of both US and UK jurisprudence is based in feudalism and what is known as common law whilst all others have developed from the Code Napoleon or Roman Civil Law in some form.

 

So the UK and US have a similar core of checks and balances and the rest of Europe and in fact the rest of the world follow a different set of checks and balances. And at the moment whatever US citizens want to say, Amanda Knox as far as Italian Law is concerned is still guilty until the checks and balances say otherwise, no-one else. The US cannot find Knox "Not Guilty" she would always have a criminal record somewhere.

 

It will probably be enough for the italians to just know that Knox is guilty of murder. I hear that her ex-boyfriend is leaving Italy though. No surprise there.

Edited April 27, 2013 by Loose

[Brounmoney]

Well I don't think it really matters as you say, because in the US the system says that no citizen should be subject to Double Jeopardy and as such she will not be given up by the authorities. However in Italy it is not a case of that she was ever found "Not Guilty". This is a fact, she is still Guilty. She was allowed to go while the judicial system ran through it's process of checks and balances. You can find it ridiculous but it is older than the history of the British and US systems and their development put together. Italian Law is grounded in civil law and of all the civilised nations in the world Britain and the US are the only nations excepted (who do it differently) from all others and the history of both US and UK jurisprudence is based in feudalism and what is known as common law whilst all others have developed from the Code Napoleon or Roman Civil Law in some form.

 

So the UK and US have a similar core of checks and balances and the rest of Europe and in fact the rest of the world follow a different set of checks and balances. And at the moment whatever US citizens want to say, Amanda Knox as far as Italian Law is concerned is still guilty until the checks and balances say otherwise, no-one else. The US cannot find Knox "Not Guilty" she would always have a criminal record somewhere.

 

It will probably be enough for the italians to just know that Knox is guilty of murder. I hear that her ex-boyfriend is leaving Italy though. No surprise there.

 

You can't say she is guilty. It was never held up, so therefore you can't say she is. You can say you think she is, but by Italian law she is still neither guilty or not guilty. You think she is guilty, but that does not matter what you think.

[Rhodes]

Well as usual you are discarding the evidence that proved she was there

What flimsy evidence are you referring to, we all know how the incompetent Italian Police and Judicial system did all they possibly could to fit Amanda up

[Loose]

You can't say she is guilty. It was never held up, so therefore you can't say she is. You can say you think she is, but by Italian law she is still neither guilty or not guilty. You think she is guilty, but that does not matter what you think.

 

Well you are ignoring the facts but please carry on. She was not found Not Guilty, in the eyes of Italian Law she is still convicted while the appeals go on.

[Rhodes]

Well you are ignoring the facts

Loosely - I'm sorry but what facts are you referring to, I repeat we all know how the incompetent Italian Police and Judicial system did all they possibly could to fit Amanda up

[Rhodes]

Well you are ignoring the facts

If you want facts then read this link but I doubt you'll bother, as a starter for ten it's stated that the back street laboratory that dealt with the DNA was not certified at the time the tests were conducted, that says it all doesn't it:

 

http://www.groundreport.com/Politics/Amanda-Knox-Case-What-Are-The-Italian-Authorities-/2952865

[Brounmoney]

 

 

Well you are ignoring the facts but please carry on. She was not found Not Guilty, in the eyes of Italian Law she is still convicted while the appeals go on.

 

Yes I understand that. I am just saying that you are giving a firm yes she is guilty when that is just your opinion. We have been over the facts a long, long time ago. I don't really feel like getting into that again. There is really no purpose cause nothing has changed.

 

By what I have seen I think she was the easiest target and they went as hard as they could after her. They found small things that could possible make her the killer and ran with it. They never really had hard evidence in my mind. Like I said before they messed up evidence and now in the Americans minds they feel like it is not reliable. If Italy ever wanted to have the US send Amanda back they would have to do a lot better job with evidence. Many, many lawyers and other legal people in the states have said there is no way any of this could be held up as evidence in a US court. Now I do realize like you said the Italian court has their laws, and that is there business. I am just saying they are not getting her back because they were sloppy. It cost them big time.

 

Again all this is just our opinion whether she did it or not. Which changes nothing, and most likely we will never know who did it for sure.

[Loose]

Well again you are ignoring what I've said which is that she is still guilty in the eyes of Italian Law. This is fact.

 

My opinion is that she had something to do with it. Her behaviour was only one indicator which drew suspicion, capering around while her housemate wasn't even cold in the morgue but that aside, her admittance that she was there, trying to throw the investigators off with the false accusation of the bar owner, the calls from her mobile when supposedly her alibi was that she and boyfriend were asleep, the sighting of buying cleaning materials - again during the time of her alibi. The bloody foot stains in the bathroom matched when they claimed they'd not entered the house and all of this without the contested DNA evidence which is currently (it may yet be allowed) thrown out due to a technicality. Defence lawyers fight their cases on "technicalities". And I'm as entitled to my opinion as anyone. It doesn't really matter what is in "american's minds", the US does not control sovereign judiciaries.

 

Of course we've never heard of a prosecution in the States that was "sloppy", a few found on death row even and then found to be innocent after corrupt prosecution officials have been found out. These things happen all over the world and while Italy may not get her back from the US I'm willing to bet that Knox will never set foot in a country that doesn't lick US botty.

[Brounmoney]

Well again you are ignoring what I've said which is that she is still guilty in the eyes of Italian Law. This is fact.

 

My opinion is that she had something to do with it. Her behaviour was only one indicator which drew suspicion, capering around while her housemate wasn't even cold in the morgue but that aside, her admittance that she was there, trying to throw the investigators off with the false accusation of the bar owner, the calls from her mobile when supposedly her alibi was that she and boyfriend were asleep, the sighting of buying cleaning materials - again during the time of her alibi. The bloody foot stains in the bathroom matched when they claimed they'd not entered the house and all of this without the contested DNA evidence which is currently (it may yet be allowed) thrown out due to a technicality. Defence lawyers fight their cases on "technicalities". And I'm as entitled to my opinion as anyone. It doesn't really matter what is in "american's minds", the US does not control sovereign judiciaries.

 

Of course we've never heard of a prosecution in the States that was "sloppy", a few found on death row even and then found to be innocent after corrupt prosecution officials have been found out. These things happen all over the world and while Italy may not get her back from the US I'm willing to bet that Knox will never set foot in a country that doesn't lick US botty.

 

I never once said you were not entitled to your opinion you are. You just keep telling me she is guilty in the Italian court, but she is not the ruling was over turned. It is still up in the air whether she is or not. It is only your opinion that says she is.

 

You are right the US has had some really sloppy cases before. Look at the OJ Simpson case. In that case we let a murder go. It happens all the time. You can say what you will, but they screwed up. If they thought it was her then they should have done a much better job. If they did do a better job this thread would not even be here. It would be clear that Amanda did it. As it stands there is no hard evidence saying she did it.

 

I am not sure if you are just holding on to the fact that she was found guilty the first time, or you don't agree with the fact that they over turned the ruling. The fact is the guilty conviction was overturned. You can't keep saying she is guilty because what ever verdict was made no longer stands.

[Loose]

I'm afraid you continue to refuse to listen to how the Italian system is set up. We're going round in circles and at the end of the day it doesn't matter what you or I think, you asked why I believe that she is guilty and I stated why. And we go round again in more circles with you ignorin.

 

Are you a relative of our Rhodesy or are you really as I was emailed this morning a well know cyber shill who has been banned from several forums for your activities? I never like to just believe the admins of a forum on face value.

[Brounmoney]

I'm afraid you continue to refuse to listen to how the Italian system is set up. We're going round in circles and at the end of the day it doesn't matter what you or I think, you asked why I believe that she is guilty and I stated why. And we go round again in more circles with you ignorin.

 

Are you a relative of our Rhodesy or are you really as I was emailed this morning a well know cyber shill who has been banned from several forums for your activities? I never like to just believe the admins of a forum on face value.

 

I don't recall asking you why she was guilty. I know why you think she is. We had this discussion a couple of years ago. You saying she is guilty is simple not true. If she is free right now she was not found guilty. I am not saying in the court whether she will be found guilty or not. I am just telling you she is free and most likely will never see an Italian court room again. You and I can believe what we want to believe.

 

You stated that she most likely never step foot in Italy again. Like that is suppose to prove something. I ask you this. If you were convicted of a crime guilty or not, and you were set free because that was how the courts worked, would you ever step foot in that country again if you did not have to? I do not believe that you would. Even if you knew that you did not do it because in every country sometimes they get stuff wrong.