No Knox? FOFC is slipping

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Amanda Knox imagines life in prison with 'letter to my unborn child' - TODAY.com

Wtf

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Still pretty sure she has no soul.

Yeah. Not sure whether she killed this guy or not or what the actual evidence shows.

But I am pretty sure that she could kill a guy much more easily than most people could.

What's that line from the beginning of Shawshank? "You're an icy and remorseless man, Mr. Dufrene, and it chills my blood just to look at you." Pretty much how Knox comes off to me.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Amanda Knox found guilty again in Italian murder case

[dawgfan]

What a fucked-up judicial system they have.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

What a fucked-up judicial system they have.

And I was thinking how nice it was to see a court get something right for a change.

Go figure

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And I was thinking how nice it was to see a court get something right for a change.

Go figure

Not sure how close you followed the case but it's been a cluster from the start. Could she be guilty ? Sure. Beyond a resknable doubt. No way.

[cartman]

The prosecution has gone from saying she was killed in a sex game gone wrong, to now she was killed after an argument over an unflushed toilet.

[bob]

Originally Posted by cartman

The prosecution has gone from saying she was killed in a sex game gone wrong, to now she was killed after an argument over an unflushed toilet.

Maybe it was a sex game with an unflushed toilet.

Note that I dont ever want to play that game.

[molson]

"Italy would usually refuse to extradite someone convicted of murder to the U.S. based on human rights grounds, because of the death penalty," said Argia Bignami, a Rome-based attorney and frequent commentator on criminal justice issues. "But that is not relevant for an extradition request to Italy from the U.S."

I'd say it is relevant. if there's a precedent for refusing to extradite due to differences in opinion about legal systems, then that should work both ways. And I'd say there's quite a few differences in opinion between the U.S. and Italy regarding how criminal trials work.

I'm about 55% sure she's guilty of some crime related to the murder. It annoys me that the Idaho Innocence project has declared her exonerated based on the fact that Kercher's DNA wasn't found on the alleged murder weapon. It's evidence useful to the defense, but obviously Kercher was killed by some means, and it certainly doesn't prove that Knox had nothing to do with it. I could give you a huge list of other faulty "exonerations" set forth by innocence groups, but that's a rant for another time.

[Toddzilla]

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Not sure how close you followed the case but it's been a cluster from the start. Could she be guilty ? Sure. Beyond a resknable doubt. No way.

{shrug} I don't find any reasonable doubt. She's like a better traveled version of Casey Anthony to me (obviously with a different victim)

[Scarecrow]

It is unlikely that Knox, who lives in Seattle, Washington, will return to Italy to serve additional prison time because U.S. law dictates that a person cannot be tried twice on the same charge, a legal expert told CNN. He believes that if Italy were to ask for extradition, U.S. officials would deny the request.

So apparently, refusal of extradition goes both ways...

[molson]

I've read a little more about the procedure of this case and remembered again that the double jeopardy question is not so obvious.

In the U.S. of course, you can't be retried after a jury acquits you. But Knox has never been acquitted by a jury. She was convicted at trial, and then an appellate court overruled that, tried her themselves, and found that she was not guilty. Then another appellate retrial, in a higher appellate court, found her guilty, and essentially reinstated the trial verdict.

In the U.S., appellate courts don't re-try people. But in the U.S., if someone is found guilty at trial, and an intermediate appellate court throws out the conviction, a higher appellate court can overrule that and reinstate the original conviction. You could made the argument that that's the equivalent of what happened here.

I don't think she'll be extradited though. That'd just be too ugly

[ISiddiqui]

Yeah, it isn't really double jeopardy, but I don't think there is much of a chance she's extradited due to the way the criminal case has been handled.

[stevew]

I think it would be amusing fallout if they sent some goombas over to do a snatch and grab and her ass woke up in a roman prison.

[RomaGoth]

I often wonder if the people doing the interviews with alleged killers fear for their own safety. The woman interviewing her is sitting like 10 feet away.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And I was thinking how nice it was to see a court get something right for a change.

Go figure

I don't know how anyone can come to that conclusion after reading about the prosecutor and their case. After reading through their accounts of what happened you have to kind of laugh at their judicial system.

[FLC28]

Forgetting about if she's guilty or not, is it technically double jeopardy anyway?


1)Found Guilty
2)Appealed. Found Innocent by Judge.
3)Supreme court rules that the Judge in the appeal court made fundamental mistakes (the statistics etc. ) so his ruling was overruled.

Is that technically the same as being tried twice?

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I don't know how anyone can come to that conclusion after reading about the prosecutor and their case. After reading through their accounts of what happened you have to kind of laugh at their judicial system.

JMIG thinks everyone is guilty. Except him, because he's a special snowflake.

In reality, there's no solid evidence to tie Knox to the crime. No DNA. The DNA on the bra clasp was supposedly found after laying on the floor for 6 weeks - in fact, much of the supposed forensic evidence is highly suspect. The knife print didn't match. The footprints appeared to be staged. And the star "witness" was a heroin addict that had also somehow testified in two other murder trials for the police (what are the odds of witnessing 3 separate murders in the span of a year?). The entire narrative and motive of the case has been changed multiple times. The entire case stinks to high heaven and any competent attorney in a fair court system would have no problem getting this tossed out. This was and is a simple case of railroading. There was no doubt in my mind that they would "re-convict" her because it takes people's minds off the countries' domestic issues.

Of course, I can't laugh at their judicial system. There are more than enough cases of US prosecutors and judges railroading people through the system for personal and/or professional gain.

As far as Knox being extradited, there's also almost no chance of that. Polls in this country consistently show that people think Knox is innocent. The political outrage would be palpable and significant if we decided to let her be extradited.

[flere-imsaho]

I'm gonna just quote myself from 2009:

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I'm not sure there's any consensus, per se. On one hand, it's pretty clear to even the most casual observer that neither the investigation nor the trial were handled in a particularly objective manner. On the other hand, it's also pretty clear to a relatively casual observer that even in the best possible light it's hard to conclude that Knox wasn't involved in some way.

I'm not sure the rather obvious fuckups in the investigation and trial of this case are specific to Italian justice, however. After all, it's not as if we don't execute innocent people in this country.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

...(what are the odds of witnessing 3 separate murders in the span of a year?).

Well, she is a heroin addict...

[cartman]

Originally Posted by FLC28

Forgetting about if she's guilty or not, is it technically double jeopardy anyway?


1)Found Guilty
2)Appealed. Found Innocent by Judge.
3)Supreme court rules that the Judge in the appeal court made fundamental mistakes (the statistics etc. ) so his ruling was overruled.

Is that technically the same as being tried twice?

The Italian courts don't have same the concept of double jeopardy as US courts. It is only considered double jeopardy in Italy once a final ruling has been made, and there hasn't been a final ruling in this case.

[albionmoonlight]

Appellate reversals in the United States tend not to implicate Double Jeopardy.

Say that I am tried and found guilty and the state's evidence includes my diary that they found when searching my bedroom. Then an appellate court says that the search violated the Fourth Amendment and the diary should have been excluded.

The state has the right, if it chooses, to try me again and just not use the diary.

With some exceptions, the general rule is that DJ protects you from being tried again after a jury has found you innocent or after the government moves to dismiss your case after a jury has been sworn in.

[Easy Mac]

Watching the Amanda Knox doc on Netflix. I could have sworn it happened while I was in college. Nope, long after. I no longer have any concept of time in terms on when things happened in the past.

[Butter]

It was a pretty good doc though.

[Sweed]

When it all happened I didn't pay much attention other than whatever the news had on at any particular time. I thought the doc was good and while I haven't spent much time thinking it over there are a couple of things that stick out.

It seemed there was no real evidence to pursue a case against Amanda or her boyfriend. I though it was a simple case of Gude (?) being caught doing a burglary and ended with the murder. How do they take his word that anybody else was involved?

The one thing that threw me was when Amanda first came home and the door was open. I would find that and a very quiet house a bit disconcerting. I know* I'd be looking in every room and if I found a locked bedroom door and no response I think I would call the cops and have them come and take a look. Her reaction after looking around and calling out her roommate's name and not getting a response (I don't think she had tried or found the bedroom door locked at this point) was I guess I'll take a shower? Then after seeing blood on the bathmat she calls her boyfriend? I'd think most girls would have called him at finding the open door and nobody around? I get we all do things differently I just found this odd.


*I actually had something similar happen about 30 years ago. Came home, door unlocked (always locked if I or the wife was not home) desktop phone off hook and receiver laying on the floor, wtf? House is dead silent, wife's car is parked on the street. Call out her name, no response. Look in all rooms on first level nothing else is out of place. Look upstairs and in basement, same all looks normal. Getting ready to call cops and the front door opens and my wife and a friend of hers come in. The friend has a 3 yr old. Turns out he must have been playing with the phone while they were in the kitchen. They decided to go somewhere and the wife simply forgot to lock the door