Should Amanda Knox be freed, extradited, returned to the USA?

[mordea]

Quite the reverse, it would seem. How does a "confused" person decide she was spending all night with her boyfriend [which puts her with the knife, bleach -remember her poor hygiene habits which led to frequent fights - and blood soaked sponge in her BF's home] and later when there is evidence found that she was in the home, she "remembers" that she was at home, which puts her with the body, the cleaned up evidence and the bloody footprints?

Very easily, if the interrogator is good at his job. As I said earlier, coax, threaten and reassure a vulnerable and ignorant suspect enough, and they will say whatever you want to hear if they think it will get them off the hook. Indeed, in the scenario I mentioned earlier, I started off stating that I could not remember where I was on that day. After being interrogated (ie. badgered) for an hour, I 'remembered' precisely what the principal wanted, because he stated in a reassuring voice that simply being in the vicinity and witnessing what might have been the infraction was not against school policy, and that to continue denying that I was there would lead to a suspension.

I'd love to see the transcript of the interview with Knox.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

In any proper legal system, all the interviews would have been recorded and available to the defence. If you can show me indication that the Italian system does not have such basic rights, I may begin to agree with you.

The experience with your school supervisor explains exactly why such documentation is essential.
Also, he sounds like a bit of a sneaky shit.

Yes, it would have been bad if they bullied the accused. Did they?
The calibre of interviewer at this level was probably pretty good. I doubt it.

 

[Cowboy]

No, but it does mean that, despite her citizenship, she is subject to the laws of the country she's visiting. The USA (amongst others) has sworn to respect those laws. Italy is an ally, it's laws--while we might find them off--have to be respected and your subjective judgment doesn't really mean a whole lot beyond speculation. Moreover, it doesn't justify some armed extraction force invading Italy to bring her home (hell, we didn't do if for the CIA operatives who are being tried there and undoubtedly they mean a lot more to the USA than her). She crossed into Italy and assumed the risk of being subject to convoluted Italian laws. If the thought of having to tolerate the ridiculously corrupt Italian legal system was too much, then she should have stayed home. If she didn't know what she was getting in to, then it's her fault for not doing the proper research.

This whole thing smacks of Michael Fay-syndrome, from which most Americans--apparently you included--are afflicted. This notion that as an American she's protected by American jurisprudence even while going to other countries is both embarrassing to me, and American and a dark mark on every citizen of this country. Being an American doesn't mean shit when you go to another country. While I'm sure that State will do whatever it can to help her (as it should), American people need to come to terms that Americans aren't God's children, don't have special rights in other countries and, most importantly, should just try to behave while overseas.

~String

I understand your point, but people don't seem to be upset about Knox being subject to Italian laws against murder. People are up in arms because it appears that the trial was a bunch of bullshit.

 

[John99]

In any proper legal system, all the interviews would have been recorded and available to the defence. If you can show me indication that the Italian system does not have such basic rights, I may begin to agree with you.

The experience with your school supervisor explains exactly why such documentation is essential.
Also, he sounds like a bit of a sneaky shit.

Yes, it would have been bad if they bullied the accused. Did they?
The calibre of interviewer at this level was probably pretty good. I doubt it.

Given the evidence and the way things unfolded the outcome wouldnt have been good for her (them) in any court.

 

[Grim_Reaper]

It really sucks ass when you travel that is why you need to be careful.

 

[Syzygys]

She doesn't seem to think that there was a trial error:

"Though she is appealing her conviction for the murder of Meredith Kercher, Amanda Knox has said she believes her trial was "correct," expressing faith in the Italian legal system. The trial did not turn out as Knox expected, however: "I thought I would be home for Christmas. But instead I have to wait," she said. Luciano Ghirga, one of Knox's lawyers, also rejected criticism of the Italian legal system. "Amanda's rights were respected during the trial," said Ghirga. "I rule out the fact that the jury could have been influenced by the media in a negative sense."

 

[Asguard]

I understand your point, but people don't seem to be upset about Knox being subject to Italian laws against murder. People are up in arms because it appears that the trial was a bunch of bullshit.

i bet you anyone of them could name a trial in the US that was as bad but were any of them up in arms about those trials? saying that the person should be rescued by force of arms? Hell i rember a case in the US when the governor was presented evidenced that a person was INNOCENT (not just "not guilty") and he STILL concidered putting them to death

 

[mordea]

In any proper legal system, all the interviews would have been recorded and available to the defence. If you can show me indication that the Italian system does not have such basic rights, I may begin to agree with you.

What would you agree with in regards to?

The experience with your school supervisor explains exactly why such documentation is essential.

Why? Even if the interview is documented, how would that change anything? The tactics I described are legitimate!

Also, he sounds like a bit of a sneaky shit.

Of course. But that's part and parcel of being an interrogator, just like making incisions is part and parcel of being a surgeon.

Yes, it would have been bad if they bullied the accused. Did they?

I haven't seen the transcript, but everyone agrees that Knox was interrogated for *at least* 13 hours (and possibly more than 22 hours!). I doubt that they were playing Scrabble with her during that time.

The calibre of interviewer at this level was probably pretty good.

I'm sure that it was, which is precisely why they extracted a confession and multiple stories. A good interrogator will confuse, bamboozle, coax and threaten a 'confession' out of a suspect in record time.

 

[mordea]

She doesn't seem to think that there was a trial error:

"Though she is appealing her conviction for the murder of Meredith Kercher, Amanda Knox has said she believes her trial was "correct," expressing faith in the Italian legal system. The trial did not turn out as Knox expected, however: "I thought I would be home for Christmas. But instead I have to wait," she said. Luciano Ghirga, one of Knox's lawyers, also rejected criticism of the Italian legal system. "Amanda's rights were respected during the trial," said Ghirga. "I rule out the fact that the jury could have been influenced by the media in a negative sense."

And?

 

[Captain Kremmen]

What would you agree with in regards to?

I'm beginning to change my mind.

There is disagreement about the length of interview, but it seems to have been unrecorded and took place without a defence lawyer present. It was after the undocumented interview that she gave her statement.

Bad practise.
Could be some rough justice here.

 

[Bells]

Quite the reverse, it would seem. How does a "confused" person decide she was spending all night with her boyfriend [which puts her with the knife, bleach -remember her poor hygiene habits which led to frequent fights - and blood soaked sponge in her BF's home] and later when there is evidence found that she was in the home, she "remembers" that she was at home, which puts her with the body, the cleaned up evidence and the bloody footprints?

What blood soaked sponge? Was that used in her trial?

The evidence I heard about was the knife with minute traces of her DNA on it, a bra clip that was handled repeatedly prior to its discovery and the elusive footprint, which is dodgy at best. Hell, all of it is dodgy.

What poor hygiene habits? What fights?

You are using what we call mere speculation, which is basically what she has been found guilty under.

Her trial was a show trial. It was treated as such by the media and by the prosecutor. It astounds me that the jury were allowed to have access to the ongoing media speculation about her sex life and how it meant she was obviously guilty. It is pathetic that they interrogated her for 52 hours straight and used her behaviour when she was being questioned and brought into the police station as being evidence of her guilt. When people are accused of murder, they will often do stupid or weird things, none of what she did is directly indicative of her guilt.

Had she been accused of terrorism, interrogated, tried and convicted with the paltry evidence she was convicted with, you'd have been passing a lung from ranting about the unfairness of it all.

As for the supposed murder weapon.. The blade did not fit the stab wounds, the traces of DNA indicate that she had handled the knife at some point but those traces were so minute that they couldn't even get a proper sample off it..

The footprint has also raised eyebrows. The bloodied footprint..

Experts for both sides, however, said the print was not a positive identification because it lacked the actual rings of a finger or toe print that are specific to an individual

Geez...

No matter which story you decide to believe, she has no rational explanation for her own actions.

You try to be interrogated for 52 hours straight, include being whacked in the head a few times by your interrogators and you tell me whether your responses would have been rational.

 

[phlogistician]

So Knox went out first thing in the morning to buy bleach and cleaning products to clean up the crime scene, and was hitting herself in the head post arrest at the Police station, and the guy previously found guilty said she was present during the murder.

So, she's guilty of a fair few things for sure. Murder? Who knows, but she's clearly a liar, and conspirator, and she's in jail where she belongs. I don't feel like there has been a miscarriage of justice at all, therefore.

I do think however, that Willnever is just displaying xenophobia.

 

[Cowboy]

i bet you anyone of them could name a trial in the US that was as bad but were any of them up in arms about those trials? saying that the person should be rescued by force of arms? Hell i rember a case in the US when the governor was presented evidenced that a person was INNOCENT (not just "not guilty") and he STILL concidered putting them to death

There's always more uproar when a citizen of one country is being tried for a crime in another country.

 

[pjdude1219]

So Knox went out first thing in the morning to buy bleach and cleaning products to clean up the crime scene, and was hitting herself in the head post arrest at the Police station, and the guy previously found guilty said she was present during the murder.

So, she's guilty of a fair few things for sure. Murder? Who knows, but she's clearly a liar, and conspirator, and she's in jail where she belongs. I don't feel like there has been a miscarriage of justice at all, therefore.

I do think however, that Willnever is just displaying xenophobia.

so it doesn't matter what they tried and sentenced her for so long she is in jail? that's not a very respectful view of the law.

 

[kira]

What blood soaked sponge? Was that used in her trial?

The evidence I heard about was the knife with minute traces of her DNA on it, a bra clip that was handled repeatedly prior to its discovery and the elusive footprint, which is dodgy at best. Hell, all of it is dodgy.

What poor hygiene habits? What fights?

You are using what we call mere speculation, which is basically what she has been found guilty under.

Her trial was a show trial. It was treated as such by the media and by the prosecutor. It astounds me that the jury were allowed to have access to the ongoing media speculation about her sex life and how it meant she was obviously guilty. It is pathetic that they interrogated her for 52 hours straight and used her behaviour when she was being questioned and brought into the police station as being evidence of her guilt. When people are accused of murder, they will often do stupid or weird things, none of what she did is directly indicative of her guilt.

Had she been accused of terrorism, interrogated, tried and convicted with the paltry evidence she was convicted with, you'd have been passing a lung from ranting about the unfairness of it all.

As for the supposed murder weapon.. The blade did not fit the stab wounds, the traces of DNA indicate that she had handled the knife at some point but those traces were so minute that they couldn't even get a proper sample off it..

The footprint has also raised eyebrows. The bloodied footprint..



Geez...


You try to be interrogated for 52 hours straight, include being whacked in the head a few times by your interrogators and you tell me whether your responses would have been rational.

If she is not guilty, she can appeal to higher court, can't she? And surely American lawyers can also offering help for her (by going there & work with local lawyers to help her case)?

 

[Syzygys]

And?

and kind of throws this whole thread out of the window. If the sentenced herself doesn't seem there was a legal misscarriage of justice, why would anyone here think so???

 

[phlogistician]

so it doesn't matter what they tried and sentenced her for so long she is in jail? that's not a very respectful view of the law.

Well, maybe if she told the truth, she'd have gotten a more lenient sentence.

But she's a liar, and a conspirator to murder, so quite frankly, she deserves what's she got.

Don't forget a girl is dead. Justice HAS been done, and her killers are in jail, let's not bleat over the minutiae.

 

[Syzygys]

I kind of agree with Phlogo, we probably not going to know the exact details or who did what, but the guilty parties seems to be punished, although it is questionable if the punishment fits the crime. I have a feeling they might not even know what was going on due to druguse and such.

Anyhow, interesting read at:

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/young/amanda_knox_trial_update/1.html

"Knox is a confident young lady. When prosecutor Giuliano Mignini interrupted her several times during her testimony, she chastised him—in fluent Italian, no less.
Mignini himself is currently on trial in Florence for professional misconduct in other cases and abuse of office, including wiretapping journalists. He could see a 10-month prison sentence of his own if he's convicted."

Yay!

"A wiretapped jailhouse conversation between Knox and her mother showed that Amanda felt bad about fingering an innocent man. Yet she didn't retract the statement. She claimed during testimony that she trusted police so little by then that she hadn't felt comfortable talking to them. "

 

[Asguard]

um bells, even if there was no direct evidence tying her to the murder i have herd of circumstantial cases before. For instance the trail against the man and his 2 sons who were found guilty in Adelaide of killing his x wife (a paranoid schizophrenic which made it hard for the procutor to argue that her claims against her x husband were justifide rather than part of her illness, sorry i cant rember the names of the victom or the accused).

further more you yourself have told about procutors running ridiculas cases which shouldnt even have been tried rather than having lead to convictions in Australia.

 

[pjdude1219]

Well, maybe if she told the truth, she'd have gotten a more lenient sentence.

But she's a liar, and a conspirator to murder, so quite frankly, she deserves what's she got.

Don't forget a girl is dead. Justice HAS been done, and her killers are in jail, let's not bleat over the minutiae.

no one deserves to be caged due to allowing the mob the influence their fate.