Amanda Knox - Acquited of all charges! ^_^ Y

[Omnis]

School of hard Knox.

 

[Keef]

I'd give her a hard Knox alright.

 

[CodeRedR51]

So the classic black guy is guilty because he's black?

I'm sorry but I didn't get that from his post at all. How did you?

And yes, she is cute.

 

[bass264]

I'd give her a hard Knox alright.

 

[Omnis]

I'd give her a hard Knox alright.

She's sealed tight like Fort Knox.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I simply can't imagine someone so ... beautiful, committing such heinous crimes.

So, only ugly people are capable of violence?

That's a rather disturbing attitude to take.

From what I've heard it's another case of idiot prosecutors. Supposedly most of their evidence wouldn't have been admissible in US or UK courts and their main witness was also the main witness in 2 other non-related murder cases.

I did notice a few similarities between Knox and Casey Anthony - namely, that the prosecution went in for a grand slam when a lesser charge probably would have stuck. Possibly because both cases got massive coverage in the media.

 

[Spacegoat]

I'd give her a hard Knox alright.

 

[CSLACR]

But their case was based mostly on circumstantial evidence. The validity of the main forensic evidence, microscopic amounts of DNA on the murder weapon and on a bra clasp, was thrown into doubt this summer by a report from independent experts that was highly critical of the police’s handling and analysis of the materials.

The decision overturns the December 2009 ruling that sentenced Ms. Knox to 26 years in prison and Mr. Sollecito to 25 for the murder of the 21-year-old Ms. Kercher, a Briton who shared an apartment with Ms. Knox. Ms. Kercher was found stabbed in her room on Nov. 2, 2007, in what prosecutors described as a game of rough sex involving Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito that went horribly wrong. Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito were arrested a few days later.

A third defendant, Rudy Guede, 24, was also convicted of Miss Kercher’s murder in a separate trial and was sentenced to 30 years in prison. His conviction was upheld on appeal, but his sentence was shortened to 16 years. Defense lawyers in this trial tried to convince the court that Mr. Guede had been the sole perpetrator of the crime.

The appeal, which began last November, was dominated by the re-examination of the DNA evidence.

Court-appointed experts said that the DNA had been collected in a way that could have allowed for contamination, and that the genetic information on two main pieces of evidence could not be matched to the defendants with certainty.

In their closing arguments, prosecutors dismissed the work of the experts, calling them inept and inexperienced.

Looks like Italy's justice system is just as bad as the USA's.

I'd really like to know how three people did it, two got the same trial, and one was separated though.
It's all looking to idiotic to form a stable opinion though.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The defence lawyers in the entry you highligted in bold were Knox's defence lawyers, not Guede's. Knox claimed she was never actually in the flat at the time of the murder, and that the only person responsible was Rudy Guede.

 

[CSLACR]

The defence lawyers in the entry you highligted in bold were Knox's defence lawyers, not Guede's. Knox claimed she was never actually in the flat at the time of the murder, and that the only person responsible was Rudy Guede.

I understand this.
But why separate trials if they were all there? (Which they'd have to be to all three kill the girl)
How do you separately convict three people of the same crime? This girl was stabbed to death, so unless they took turns stabbing, it's impossible.

And finally, I haven't heard much, but wasn't Knox's original claim that she was there?

My main point though, was just to show how out of order everything seems to have been.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Don't quote me on this (I'm not a lawyer) but if you convict one person of a crime, and then find new evidence that someone else was involved - particularly as an accessory before or after the fact - couldn't you hold a second trial for the second defendant? You can't just add a defendant into the first trial halfway through.

 

[Tired Tyres]

I'd give her a hard Knox alright.

I'd make very sure there are no knives in the room first!

I understand this.
But why separate trials if they were all there? (Which they'd have to be to all three kill the girl)
How do you separately convict three people of the same crime? This girl was stabbed to death, so unless they took turns stabbing, it's impossible.

And finally, I haven't heard much, but wasn't Knox's original claim that she was there?

My main point though, was just to show how out of order everything seems to have been.

I'm not entirely sure but I think it goes like this.

She claimed she was not there, but with her boyfriend. When they were interviewed independently of each other their stories did not match. That is what made them suspect number 1.

Lying to officers in a murder investigation is one of the most stupid things you can do. It screams I'M GUILTY to them.

Then she changed her mind and said she was there, but not involved. That's a good one. Think of it like this, you have just murdered a woman and the people with you in the room are your accomplices. They are in on it so you can trust them to an extent. Then there is this other woman, Knox, in another room - A witness no less. What murderer is his un-right mind would have let her live?

Then she changes her mind again and well, it's getting very silly by now. Maybe she's been smoking too much pot.

She's certainly guilty of something, but whether it's murder or gross stupidity I can't say.

 

[Touring Mars]

Acquitted by media. Guilty as sin.

Not at all. The media involvement was predictable, but ultimately it didn't help Knox one bit. If anything it was trial by media - but they were acquitted by the (lack of) evidence. Innocent until proven guilty... The jurors were visibly shocked when they saw the police's own video footage of their handling of the forensic evidence... and so they should have been. It was a botched investigation, and the forensic evidence was so deeply flawed and weak that the jury/judges had no choice but to acquit. Anything else would have been a travesty and a gross miscarriage of justice.

The fact that the freedom of two innocent people hinged on such a farce of an investigation is staggering. Thankfully, the Italian system (although far from perfect) has seen justice prevail in this instance.

I have no idea of the details of the case, why she was convicted in the first place nor why she was acquitted today, but she looked like a straight-up liar in that performance.

That's as bad as saying 'she's so pretty, she couldn't have done it'...

I wonder how any of us would have spoken (in perfect Italian) when put in the same situation - deprived of her freedom for four years after being convicted on (extremely) flimsy grounds... I watched her entire testimony, and that of Sollecito, and at times she did stumble and was clearly having difficulty continuing at times... hardly surprising what she has gone through. Either way, according to analysts far more knowledgable about the case/system than we are, the personal statements probably had no bearing on the outcome of the appeal anyway, as the decision had likely already been made at that point.

She's been lying all the way through it. First she wasn't there, then she was, but it was the black guy who did it, then she's back to claiming she wasn't there again.

Don't forget that Knox was denied a lawyer and was subjected to many hours of interviews under extreme stress and, if Knox is to be believed, subjected to threats and violence at the hands of the Italian police as well. I don't find that very hard to believe at all. Sufficient doubt can be cast upon any of Knox's apparent confessions because of the simple fact that the Italian police ignored the law and did not follow the required procedures. As such, Knox's apparently contradictory and self-incriminating statements can not be given any creedence at all.

It's amazing to me that it has taken so long for these massive weaknesses in the prosecution to be exposed, but thankfully they now have. Put it this way - as soon as the prosecution resorted to calling Knox a "witch" and describing her as 'demonic', I lost all patience with them.

My thoughts are with the Kercher family as they will no doubt find this decision hard to accept - but what good does jailing two innocent people do them? In time, they will come to accept that it was the Italian police and the prosecuting lawyers who screwed them over.

 

[TheCracker]

My thoughts are with the Kercher family as they will no doubt find this decision hard to accept - but what good does jailing two innocent people do them? In time, they will come to accept that it was the Italian police and the prosecuting lawyers who screwed them over.

Not forgetting that there already is another guy in prison for her murder, Rudy Guede. The evidence to his conviction was much more compelling.

 

[Famine]

That's as bad as saying 'she's so pretty, she couldn't have done it'...

Not at all. In fact I haven't speculated on her guilt or lack of it in any way!

What I did say was how surprisingly stage-managed her performance looked, going from a weeping, stumbling statement to a confident orator (in perfect Italian, I might add) once in her stride and back to a weeping, stumbling statement at the end again.

I know nothing about the case at all, but the woman who stood up and delivered that statement looked and acted like she was lying.

 

[Touring Mars]

Not at all. In fact I haven't speculated on her guilt or lack of it in any way!

Just a tad disingenious there... You're saying that she appears to you as a liar, as she defends herself in a court of law where she stands accused and convicted of murder, and that's not meant to be a comment on her guilt in any way?

 

[Famine]

Just a tad disingenious there... You're saying that she appears to you as a liar, as she defends herself in a court of law where she stands accused and convicted of murder, and that's not meant to be a comment on her guilt in any way?

Correct, sort of. I'm stating that, in the instance of that single statement she gave, she behaved as if she was lying.

There's a bit of a gulf between "She looked like a liar giving that statement" and "She's guilty of raping and murdering her best friend and flatmate".

 

[Jondot]

Not at all. In fact I haven't speculated on her guilt or lack of it in any way!

What I did say was how surprisingly stage-managed her performance looked, going from a weeping, stumbling statement to a confident orator (in perfect Italian, I might add) once in her stride and back to a weeping, stumbling statement at the end again.

I know nothing about the case at all, but the woman who stood up and delivered that statement looked and acted like she was lying.

I think that's half the problem with Knox - as I understand it, she behaved rather peculiarly when she was questioned by the police originally. By rather peculiarly, I mean gymnastics in the station peculiarly. If I had to guess I'd say she's got some sort of personality disorder, but of course it all comes down to a jury at the end of the day, and unfortunately her behaviour screams guilty - whether or not that's by her very nature remains to be seen.

 

[Robin]

I don't agree with the verdict at all, I also feel there was a wider political agenda to this case's decision.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I also feel there was a wider political agenda to this case's decision.

... Like?

 

[Robin]

... Like?

Ties between Italy and the US, not wanting to scare foreign students away from studying there, etc...

 

[Touring Mars]

There's a bit of a gulf between "She looked like a liar giving that statement" and "She's guilty of raping and murdering her best friend and flatmate".

True, although there is an even more spectacular leap of the imagination required to equate doing a cartwheel in a police station with the vicious murder of a friend and flatmate. Given that this was one of the stronger pieces of 'evidence' against Knox, it's hardly surprising that the prosecution's case has collapsed.

 

[daspianist]

Not at all. In fact I haven't speculated on her guilt or lack of it in any way!

What I did say was how surprisingly stage-managed her performance looked, going from a weeping, stumbling statement to a confident orator (in perfect Italian, I might add) once in her stride and back to a weeping, stumbling statement at the end again.

I know nothing about the case at all, but the woman who stood up and delivered that statement looked and acted like she was lying.

I can't understand why anyone wouldn't rehearse their statements if they had a say to a decision that could effectively result in 1/3 of their life spent behind bars. Amanda Knox may have metamorphosed from an inexperienced and overemotional exchange student spewing Italian salmagundi to a collected and, perhaps .. self-assured, defendant speaking perfect Italian at the conclusion of her trail, but I think this transformation isn't indicative of factors that would suggest malice behind the scenes, or a criminal "learning the ropes" to play the system.

This aside, compare her reaction to the acquittal charges, seen here:

To that of someone who's actually committed the crime, but was acquitted:

Note the smile seen in in OJ and Anthony's cases, at the fact that they've escaped justice, is not seen Amanda Knox's case. While this comparison is only minor, I think it does give some background indication to the psychological profile of Knox, and the person she is.


And did I mention that she's cute as a button and couldn't possibly murder anyone? I mean, look at her:

 

[Famine]

I can't understand why anyone wouldn't rehearse their statements if they had a say to a decision that could effectively result in 1/3 of their life spent behind bars. Amanda Knox may have metamorphosed from an inexperienced and overemotional exchange student spewing Italian salmagundi to a collected and, perhaps .. self-assured, defendant speaking perfect Italian at the conclusion of her trail, but I think this transformation isn't indicative of factors that would suggest malice behind the scenes, or a criminal "learning the ropes" to play the system.

It wasn't over the course of the trial - I've already said I paid no attention to any of the trials. It was over the course of a single statement she made yesterday. It started off with a bit of a sob, a bit of a wobble, her solicitor asking if she'd like to sit down (to which she answered, very scriptedly, that sitting down wouldn't change the situation) to a full on, ranting Italian scene-of-a-car-crash, right back to the snuffling, poor-me at the end in what seemed a realisation that she's supposed to be playing the innocent.

It seemed very cold, very planned and very false. That statement alone, nothing else.

This aside, compare her reaction to the acquittal charges, seen here:

To that of someone who's actually committed the crime, but was acquitted:

Knox and OJ both have the same level of guilt - none. They were both found not guilty of the crimes of which they were accused in a criminal court. The only difference is that Knox was found guilty first.

About the best you can say is that the US courts might have got it wrong, but the Italian courts have definitely got it wrong on one of the two occasions it judged Knox.

 

[DK]

So, have the British tabloids started foaming at the mouth yet?

 

[Moglet]

So, have the British tabloids started foaming at the mouth yet?

Not at all, they've actually been reporting it as it is, simply telling the story of the trial and explaining that she was 'beaming' as she left to fly home.

 

[Robin]

I'm curious as to how the US media have portrayed her because reading comments here its like your talking about another person to the way she has been represented here.

Obviously because the girl that was killed was British the press over the last few years have made her look like the devil. The TV coverage also has mostly been from the 'how is Italy going to get her back if it goes to the high court' angle rather than the 'happy ending' angle.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Ties between Italy and the US, not wanting to scare foreign students away from studying there, etc...

I don't think either would be a problem. If Knox were found guilty, then I seriously doubt America would take issue with it.

Likewise, it wouldn't scare foreign students away because Knox was the foreign student accused of committing the crime. If an American student had been murdered by an Italian national, then it would be a problem - but here, an American student was accused of murdering an American student.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

She looks only slightly above average to me.

I agree

Also Nancy Grace told me she was guilty so she must be

EDIT:
Another dissapointing thing I see in this thread is alot of "I know nothing about the case nor care...but she looks guilty to me" or better yet "I've heard from others" are others lawyers that have analyzed this case from both sides that aren't tv pundits looking for their face on the air? Really these comments only make you look a bit ignorant, as if someone else must do homework for you.

 

[Jay]

I saw a big deal made about it on the news yesterday, I asked whats going on (missing most the details). I asked

Is she Australian? No
Is she Famous or special? No
Is this related to us in anyway? No

...Then why is our local 30 minute TV news making such a big deal of it.. I also don't find her that cute.