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

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I've stated that I have no opinion on her guilt or innocence:



Read all. Then comment. Don't make things up in your head and pretend people said them - which is both the issue with your original post where you accuse people of saying she looks guilty and in this one. Particularly don't do it when there has already been a discussion about the same comment - one carried out more intelligently - and a conclusion reached.



Italian.

Was the first trial fair? The one where she was found guilty.



I'll take your word for it - I don't read newspapers and am on record in this forum stating that also.

You made up a paraphrase ("I know nothing about the case nor care...but she looks guilty to me") and said it was disappointing that you'd seen "alot" (sic) of it in this thread. I have seen none of it in this thread. You haven't reacted similarly to people who have been saying that she is too cute to have committed murder. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander - if you're going to complain that people are making facile comments about her guilt (which no-one did) you should also complain that people are making facile comments about her innocence (which some did).



Let's just be clear, my original two objections to your original post were that it was inaccurate and one-sided. It claimed something that didn't exist and only complained about it for people in one camp (claiming people in the "Knox got away with it" group said she "looks guilty"). These are both things you actually said - "conspiracy" has nothing to do with it - and I brought this up in my first response to your first comment. Your response was to quote three posts - including one of mine - that didn't say what you were claiming they said.

And now you are making up a mindset and ascribing it to me in direct contradiction of what I've actually said in this thread - that I think Knox is guilty, when I have no opinion on the matter and have stated that she has no level of guilt, having been found not guilty in an Italian court.

You are simply not reading what has been typed before you comment. If you had, you wouldn't have made your first post, you wouldn't have quoted three posts that did not support your claim and you wouldn't be claiming that I think Knox is guilty.


Intelligent discussion is hard enough when you stick with words on the screen. When one side invents half a discussion in their head and makes posts attacking that, it's nigh-on impossible.


Edit: Well, at least no-one had said it until Mazerati did. So now, at least, you have one instance of it

No I have more before that I gave you my reason why I said it in the first place when you brought it up in a disagreement with me. I said in plain wording that at that time when I posted those were three reason why I thought that. When defending myself I wasn't saying I still believe that but giving you the reason why I said that. If you would stop and read or maybe ask me correctly you'd understand, like seriously your quite vexing right now. I'm trying to explain myself and you keep acting as if I'm the bad guy that was all I was doing when you first asked.

Once again! my reason for posting that original comment you didn't agree with is because I saw people commenting in here and saying they didn't know anything about the trial. That is what made me not understand why comment if you don't know the case. That what disappointed me that I was wanting to see those who knew about the case commenting. No I didn't think the Italian police handling of the case was fair to begin with, I'm talking about the second trial so sorry for not being descriptive.

I told you why I didn't react to the people with the "cute" comments, because most are making a joke out of it, but like I've said I think that the view point is wrong and doesn't show much about knowing the case either. Also my view point is the same as touring as it is with any case when the evidence doesn't clearly point at the defendant. Your sauce the goose comment is what made me think you wanted me to give you an answer as to why I said what I said, hence why I was trying to explain to you my reasoning. However, I took that term the wrong way I guess. This all seems to be one me not understanding you then be perpatuated by you not understanding me and trying to paint me as a bad guy.

Quit with your hang up on the one post of yours I've said sorry and said I should have looked at it better, but if you want to keep making rounds about it then maybe we should do that in a pm instead, solely your choice. I'm not making stuff up I told you once already I should you people who said they know nothing about the case and are posting which is what really disappoints me. The paraphrase was extreme from my original post and was me painting how I feel people are looking at it by posting a comment on here without knowing the story. That is all I was trying to say.

I don't need any evidence. All the evidence is there, on her smug, evil face.

You killed me dog!!! You know how I know...well I don't know exactly but I know you did it and I don't need evidence to prove it!

 

[Mrs. Famine]

Mr. Corvette... with all due respect arguing with Famine is like trying to put a nail into a wall with a chocolate hammer, futile.

I actually have followed the case in a fashion, I know the general jist of what happened and I am unsurprised she was acquitted. The court have found her not guilty of murder (although she remains guilty of slander) and therefore that is what she is, not guilty of murder. It doesn't matter what we think, it doesn't matter whether she actually did it or not, she has been found to be not guilty of that particular crime.

I do think that you need to be actually reading what is being typed before jumping in with your responses though and I can't help but think you're going in circles now. I like a nice debate but this thread is getting boring now. Move on!

 

[Keef]

I don't need any evidence. All the evidence is there, on her smug, evil face.

You think she looks smug and evil? Pah! Obviously you've never been to a strip club.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Mr. Corvette... with all due respect arguing with Famine is like trying to put a nail into a wall with a chocolate hammer, futile.

I actually have followed the case in a fashion, I know the general jist of what happened and I am unsurprised she was acquitted. The court have found her not guilty of murder (although she remains guilty of slander) and therefore that is what she is, not guilty of murder. It doesn't matter what we think, it doesn't matter whether she actually did it or not, she has been found to be not guilty of that particular crime.

I do think that you need to be actually reading what is being typed before jumping in with your responses though and I can't help but think you're going in circles now. I like a nice debate but this thread is getting boring now. Move on!

Exactly it doesn't matter at all what we think, cause at this point the courts have acquitted her and no amount of "her final closing statement make her sound like a liar" or "I don't need evidence to know she is guilty" is ever going to get her put in jail. Well I told famine I should have read it closer before responding and apologized but that's not enough and I plan to move on to more interesting matters. Sorry and thanks for your advice

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Bumping this thread because the Italians have reinstated the guilty verdict for both Knox and Sollecito. The court accepted that DNA evidence linking them to the crime was not admitted at the original trial when it should have been. There is no word on whether or not the Italians will request Knox's extradition or how the United States will respond to such a request, but Knox has said that she intends to appeal the new verdict.

As for Sollecito, he was apparently caught at the Austrian border.

 

[Touring Mars]

Good luck getting Amanda Knox back to Italy... that ain't going to happen any time soon. As for Sollecito, I can understand why he tried to flee the country, but it looks very bad and it was almost certainly a big mistake.

For what it's worth, I think this case has become a complete farce. The Italian police and justice system are a laughing stock - except nobody is laughing. I'm still wholly unconvinced that the prosecution's case is anywhere close to being convincing, and I won't be surprised if there is another acquittal further down the line.

 

[Famine]

At this point it barely even matters whether Knox/Sollecito killed Kercher or not - which must be utterly galling for Kercher's parents that her actual murder is the smallest part of the story around the prosecution for it.

No matter what the verdict eventually "ends" up being, no-one will care (except the individuals directly involved) because conclusions have already been drawn and they have verdict after verdict to support what they think, however factual it is.


How many Italian courts does it take to get to the truth? Fill in your own punchlines.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

For what it's worth, I think this case has become a complete farce. The Italian police and justice system are a laughing stock - except nobody is laughing. I'm still wholly unconvinced that the prosecution's case is anywhere close to being convincing, and I won't be surprised if there is another acquittal further down the line.

I strongly recommend that you (or anyone reading this post) get your hands on The Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi. It's a true story about Preston, a thriller writer, who moves to Italy to research a novel. By sheer coincidence, the villa he rents was the scene of one of Italy's most notorious unsolved crimes, committed by the Monster of Florence. He gets interested and starts investigating with the help of Spezi, a journalist who made a name for himself investigating the Sicilian mafia. But they quickly run afoul of Gianluigi Mingini, the prosecutor in the original Monster of Florence case - and the man who took the lead in the Knox case and floated the "sex game gone wrong" and "Satanic ritual" theories of the crime. I won't reveal what happens, but even though Preston and Spezi only briefly touch on the Knox case, it puts a lot of stuff in perspective.

 

[Touring Mars]

As if to illustrate @Famine's point perfectly, the Daily Fail are leading today with the headline "Foxy Knoxy Guilty - Again" Meredith Kercher's family reacted to the news as one might expect them to - the guilty verdicts are no cause for celebration, and from what they are saying, they are still no further forward in finding out what really happened to Meredith.

 

[Liquid]

Aargh the Daily Fail makes my blood boil, it truly does.

But still, I fully echo Famine's point about how the actual murder is a minor point in this media farce.

 

[Sanji Himura]

I strongly recommend that you (or anyone reading this post) get your hands on The Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi. It's a true story about Preston, a thriller writer, who moves to Italy to research a novel. By sheer coincidence, the villa he rents was the scene of one of Italy's most notorious unsolved crimes, committed by the Monster of Florence. He gets interested and starts investigating with the help of Spezi, a journalist who made a name for himself investigating the Sicilian mafia. But they quickly run afoul of Gianluigi Mingini, the prosecutor in the original Monster of Florence case - and the man who took the lead in the Knox case and floated the "sex game gone wrong" and "Satanic ritual" theories of the crime. I won't reveal what happens, but even though Preston and Spezi only briefly touch on the Knox case, it puts a lot of stuff in perspective.

So basically, from what you are telling me, the Italians are butthurt over the fact that a big name prosecutor embarrassed himself at the appeal and the High court reinstated the guilty verdicts on this prosecutor's say so? I don't know what's worse, the group of people who say that they are not corrupt, but everyone knows that they are, or the group that says that they are openly corrupt (the mob).

 

[Keef]

How many Italian courts does it take to get to the truth? Fill in your own punchlines.

You mean they haven't asked the Pope yet? They should ask him. He's the Pope.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

So basically, from what you are telling me, the Italians are butthurt over the fact that a big name prosecutor embarrassed himself at the appeal and the High court reinstated the guilty verdicts on this prosecutor's say so? I don't know what's worse, the group of people who say that they are not corrupt, but everyone knows that they are, or the group that says that they are openly corrupt (the mob).

From what I understand, there is a case for Knox to answer to. Her whereabouts during the time of the murder were unaccounted for, and the DNA evidence puts her at the scene.

The problem is that the case was being run by a man Preston and Spezi characterise as incompetent, willfully ignorant, and prone to abusing his position. He became convinced that the Monster of Florence case was the work of a Satanic cult, and that there was a conspiracy among high-ranking Freemasons to cover the crimes up. In one of the book's most bizarre scenes, the police carry out a raid on this Satanic covern, only to discover that it is a Halloween party at a local retirement home. Meanwhile, Preston and Spezi theorise that the Monster case was made up of two separate crimes, a revenge killing and serial murder, with the same gun used. They find a police report of a break-in at the home of the suspect in the original case, and though the suspect claimed nothing was stolen, they suggest the gun was taken, but the man was unable to admit ownership because of its history, and so claimed nothing was taken as a way of distancing himself from the gun. They suggest that if the first case is treated separately, the Monster killings become easier to solve. It is a very convincing theory, but when they approach the prosecutor, he locks Spezi up on suspicion of being the Monster and forces Preston to flee the country.

From the looks of things, the same sort of thing happened in the Knox case. The early investigation focused on her for the crime, with the prosecution claiming that a text message she signed off with "see you later" was a case for pre-meditation. Meanwhile, there were supposedly eyewitness reports of a man washing blood off his hands in the local fountain that were completely ignored.

Whatever case Knox has to answer, the entire investigation was bungled by an idiot for a prosecutor who appears to have formulated his theory of the crime on the idea that an American exchange student and her Italian lover murdered Meredith Kercher during a bizarre sex game that was a part of a Satanic ritual makes for a better story than any other - like Knox's claim that her employer, Patrice Lumumba, was infatuated with Kercher, but his attentions were unwanted.

 

[Touring Mars]

DNA evidence puts (Knox) at the scene.

Well, she did live there...

 

[Omnis]

Don't the Italians have the concept of double jeopardy?

"Eh, we'll submit the evidence later. Let's have lunch now."

 

[Vic Reign93]

Don't the Italians have the concept of double jeopardy?

"Eh, we'll submit the evidence later. Let's have lunch now."

That was one thing that stood out for me, I'm no law expert by any means but technically double jeopardy means Knox can't be retried for the same crime so while she MIGHT have a case to answer for, legally she can't be arrested in regards to this paticular case. just out curiosity, what would happen IF the US breaks double jeopardy and sends Knox to Italy? I'm guessing it won't go down well in the states.

 

[Touring Mars]

I don't think double jeopardy applies since this latest verdict was the result of an appeal by the prosecution against the original verdict (guilty) being overturned after an appeal by the defense. The result was that the original conviction has now been upheld/reinstated, and the sentence increased. The defense will now appeal again...

 

[Vic Reign93]

I don't think double jeopardy applies since this latest verdict was the result of an appeal by the prosecution against the original verdict (guilty) being overturned after an appeal by the defense. The result was that the original conviction has now been upheld/reinstated, and the sentence increased. The defense will now appeal again...

If thats the case, then she's definitely got a problem, although I'm sure this whole thing is going to throw up alot of curve balls for both sides before it all ends.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Well, she did live there...

It was supposedly on the murder weapon, and fresh enough to have been from around the time of the murder.

 

[kikie]

Doesn't this look a little bit like a psychopath gaze?

 

[sumbrownkid]

Looks like a woman on her monthly flow.

And I'm going to Hell for that joke in poor taste.

 

[Vic Reign93]

Looks like a woman on her monthly flow.

And I'm going to Hell for that joke in poor taste.

I'll keep a seat warm for ya.

 

[Touring Mars]

Doesn't this look a little bit like a psychopath gaze?

Yes, because accused murderers go on television shows to show off their psychopathic gazing skills... how about this scary old woman doing her best 'Jack Nicholson in The Shining' look?

It was supposedly on the murder weapon, and fresh enough to have been from around the time of the murder.

Except the alleged murder weapon was not found at the scene. Knox's DNA was apparently found on the handle of a knife found at her boyfriend's house. That might prove that Knox had used the knife, but it doesn't 'put Knox at the scene'.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Italy's High Court to rule on Knox's case in a matter of hours. In over 7 years of legal wrangling, Italy's highest court will formally rule on Amanda Knox's murder trial, and that of her ex-boyfriend. In 2009, Knox, now 27, of Seattle was convicted of murder of British woman Meredith Kercher. Her boyfriend at the time, Raffaele Sollecito, was found guilty, too.

Both were acquitted in 2011 on appeal, and Knox returned home to Seattle, where she stayed since. In 2013, she was convicted in absentia and sentenced to 28 1/2 years in prison, her boyfriend serving 25. The high Court case would mark the fourth time that the facts of the case are argued before a judge.

Why was that important?

The United States and Italy have signed an extradition treaty. In it there is a double-jeopardy clause that goes something like this:

Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the requested party for the same acts for which extradition is requested

"Whatever the interpretation of article VI may be ... Amanda Knox would not be extraditable to Italy should Italy seek her extradition because she was retried for the same acts, the same facts, and the same conduct," M. Cherif Bassiouni, a former U.N. lawyer and international extradition law expert wrote in a blog post for Oxford University Press, "Her case was reviewed three times with different outcomes even though she was not actually tried three times."

Italy has up to twice the sentence to request extradition for Knox (or 57 years) under Italian law.

 

[Sanji Himura]

"Finished," came the word of Amanda Knox's Italian attorneys as Italy's Court of Cassation in Rome struck down her 2009 conviction once and for all. Her Italian ex-boyfriend also walks free thanks to the high court as well on Friday.

The court will provide its reasoning within 90 days, as required by Italian law.

 

[Robin]

Basically not enough evidence, we will never really know what happened.

 

[Vic Reign93]

If that's the case, then the victims family is not going to be too happy about it as the closure they had will be no longer there.

For all we know, they did do it, but wasn't able to be proven due to lack of evidence and/or mistakes by police and prosecutors.

Also likely that they never did do it in the first place and that the real killer is out there feeling quite smug with him/herself.

But its likely we'll probably never know who really did murder Meridith Kercher.

 

[Sanji Himura]

If that's the case, then the victims family is not going to be too happy about it as the closure they had will be no longer there.

For all we know, they did do it, but wasn't able to be proven due to lack of evidence and/or mistakes by police and prosecutors.

Also likely that they never did do it in the first place and that the real killer is out there feeling quite smug with him/herself.

But its likely we'll probably never know who really did murder Meridith Kercher.

When you have the prosecutor in jail over abuse of power charges, something must be wrong.

Besides, I think that they did get the right man, he was sitting in prison for the last 6 years for this exact same crime. The two ex-lovers were just caught in the crossfire by vindictive prosecutor who really wanted to put America on trial.

 

[Vic Reign93]

When you have the prosecutor in jail over abuse of power charges, something must be wrong.

Besides, I think that they did get the right man, he was sitting in prison for the last 6 years for this exact same crime. The two ex-lovers were just caught in the crossfire by vindictive prosecutor who really wanted to put America on trial.

Yikes, talk about ambitious.

Well I think the ex-lovers should be okay to try and have normal lives now because I assume there's some form of double jeopardy in place.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The two ex-lovers were just caught in the crossfire by vindictive prosecutor who really wanted to put America on trial.

Going by some of the accounts that I have heard about him, I think it is more likely that he was grandstanding, trying to take a high-profile case and bend it to suit himself.