Amanda Knox

[davjohns 1]

All over the news today. I haven't kept up. Need help.

The wiki explanation of the facts doesn't add up.

It says

1) Her behavior was squirrely and her story changed. It also says she claimed duress, exhaustion, coercion, etc. to explain changing stories.

2) Apparently she had no motive?

3) Nothing placed her at the scene (no DNA, fingerprints, anything on her or boyfriend; no blood, etc. on her) The prosecution claims she wiped everything up, but somehow managed to leave DNA, fingerprints, footprints, bloody fingerprints, blood, etc. of the guy who raped and killed the victim.

4) The guy who raped and killed the girl claims he saw Knox when he returned from the bathroom and Knox must have killed the girl.

I don't get it. Surely there are alleged facts that got left out of the wiki description?

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[weekender 0]

I get it. she is a cute white American. so obviously, she could not have done anything bad. or so the US media believes. pick up a foreign paper for the real story. you will find among many facts not discussed on the Today show:

murder weapon was bleached, in the apartment of her boyfriend with the victim's DNA on the blade and Amanda's on the handle.

She lied to police, claimed she was at her boyfriends house all night. after her boyfriend cooperated with police she changed her story.

she falsely accused another man who was cleared when witness's could place him elsewhere.

she staged a fake break in at her home.

her only witness to where she was for the night is her co defendant.

I have no idea why the media loves her so much and ignores the facts. kidding of course i do. pretty white girls bring in the ratings when you feel sorry for them. no so much when they are horrible murderers.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[DJL 235]

The Italian legal system is a circus of the likes we haven't seen since the 15th century.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[kallend 2,106]

DJL

The Italian legal system is a circus of the likes we haven't seen since the 15th century OJ Simpson trial.

FIFY

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[weekender 0]

DJL

The Italian legal system is a circus of the likes we haven't seen since the 15th century.

the Italian civil courts are a mess. they have so many cases to reference that civil cases can take generations for a family to get a verdict. its humorous in a way.

i do not agree that their police and criminal courts are not first world. especially, Rome and above. Perhaps Naples and parts of southern Italy are less reputable but i think you are being unfair and a bit prejudice.

i am biased, admittedly. full disclosure. my family is from Rome and most of my cousins are in law enforcement. i have spent a fair amount of time with them over the years. so its fair to say my opinion is based on real world experience but probably biased.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Andy9o8 2]

Knox, knox.

Who's there?

Double.

Double who?

Double jeopardy.

[lawrocket 3]

The Italian system just seems off to me and my American sensibilities. For example, it looks like they tried her a second time in a situation that was not a remand.

The fact that the Italian courts found seismologists guilty of manslaughter after an earthquake leaves me shaking my head. Really, I cannot take the place seriously after that. I understand, the seismologists tried to calm people down, but it was a fucking earthquake!

It leads me to question everything about the justice system there.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[normiss 851]

That's extradition knocking.
Fuck you extradition, we're not answering.

[Andy9o8 2]

Could be worse; could be the Sicilian justice system. There, they have two levels; left barrel and right barrel.

[davjohns 1]

weekender

I get it. she is a cute white American. so obviously, she could not have done anything bad. or so the US media believes. pick up a foreign paper for the real story. you will find among many facts not discussed on the Today show:

murder weapon was bleached, in the apartment of her boyfriend with the victim's DNA on the blade and Amanda's on the handle.

She lied to police, claimed she was at her boyfriends house all night. after her boyfriend cooperated with police she changed her story.

she falsely accused another man who was cleared when witness's could place him elsewhere.

she staged a fake break in at her home.

her only witness to where she was for the night is her co defendant.

I have no idea why the media loves her so much and ignores the facts. kidding of course i do. pretty white girls bring in the ratings when you feel sorry for them. no so much when they are horrible murderers.

Most of what you say was in the facts, but there were other facts that made things plenty questionable.

I'm not saying she didn't do it. I'm saying the evidence doesn't prove it to any level I am familiar with.

Was there ever a motive thrown out there?

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[weekender 0]

lawrocket

The Italian system just seems off to me and my American sensibilities. For example, it looks like they tried her a second time in a situation that was not a remand.

The fact that the Italian courts found seismologists guilty of manslaughter after an earthquake leaves me shaking my head. Really, I cannot take the place seriously after that. I understand, the seismologists tried to calm people down, but it was a fucking earthquake!


It leads me to question everything about the justice system there.

i am not a lawyer so in way over my head. ive also disclosed my bias. so feel free to stop reading the rest, hah.

The Italian court felt that the seismologist purposely lied to the public downplaying the risk. 300 people where killed and many family members testified that their love ones only stayed home because of their fraudulent announcements. many people would have fled and lived had the scientist been honest and shown the true predictions. the Italian state felt the scientist should be punished for their fraud.

i am NOT arguing either way but showing more color on the case that makes Italy look a little less 3 world than your description.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[weekender 0]

davjohns

***I get it. she is a cute white American. so obviously, she could not have done anything bad. or so the US media believes. pick up a foreign paper for the real story. you will find among many facts not discussed on the Today show:

murder weapon was bleached, in the apartment of her boyfriend with the victim's DNA on the blade and Amanda's on the handle.

She lied to police, claimed she was at her boyfriends house all night. after her boyfriend cooperated with police she changed her story.

she falsely accused another man who was cleared when witness's could place him elsewhere.

she staged a fake break in at her home.

her only witness to where she was for the night is her co defendant.

I have no idea why the media loves her so much and ignores the facts. kidding of course i do. pretty white girls bring in the ratings when you feel sorry for them. no so much when they are horrible murderers.

Most of what you say was in the facts, but there were other facts that made things plenty questionable.

I'm not saying she didn't do it. I'm saying the evidence doesn't prove it to any level I am familiar with.

Was there ever a motive thrown out there?

the motive according to the prosecutors was drugs, alcohol, money and sex being argued over.

im not an expert. i just hate the American media and their ability to ignore all the facts of this case. they play into our prejudice of Italians and love of pretty white girls to get ratings.

Its all on the interweb. my point isnt to argue the case. it was a suggestion to research it AWAY from the Today show and NYT.

-edited material typo

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[normiss 851]

Alcohol and drugs means the people being interrogated were high.
Means to me the interrogation and answers aren't reliable.
Add to it that she spoke very little Italian at the time, and an hours long interrogation on top....meh.

There was no physical evidence linking her to the murder from what I saw.
Poor investigative techniques could have easily contaminated evidence.
The only DNA found as I understand was in a common area of the house.

What was the initial prosecutor charged with after the first trial?

[weekender 0]

normiss

Alcohol and drugs means the people being interrogated were high.
Means to me the interrogation and answers aren't reliable.
Add to it that she spoke very little Italian at the time, and an hours long interrogation on top....meh.

There was no physical evidence linking her to the murder from what I saw.
Poor investigative techniques could have easily contaminated evidence.
The only DNA found as I understand was in a common area of the house.

What was the initial prosecutor charged with after the first trial?

ive already stated im not arguing the case so we will just have to agree to disagree.

i am more trusting of the facts from the foreign press. i also, believe Italy has a competent first world legal system and have admitted my obvious biases. so feel free to ignore me.

my purpose for being here this morning is to encourage research away from the American media and to point out the obvious love of pretty white girls by them to get ratings.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[normiss 851]

There's a real possibility that some of us have.

[tigra 0]

The initial prosecutor was charged with misconduct relating to a different case. He has an interesting history.

None of it makes sense to me.
How do you charge and convict 3 people for rape and murder with 2 completely different versions of the crime and solid physical evidence against only one of them?

If I was the victim's parents, I would be wondering how the guy who raped and murdered my daughter got such a light sentence. 15-16 years? For all we know, they will still be arguing appeals when he is released.

[turtlespeed 226]

tigra

The initial prosecutor was charged with misconduct relating to a different case. He has an interesting history.

None of it makes sense to me.
How do you charge and convict 3 people for rape and murder with 2 completely different versions of the crime and solid physical evidence against only one of them?

If I was the victim's parents, I would be wondering how the guy who raped and murdered my daughter got such a light sentence. 15-16 years? For all we know, they will still be arguing appeals when he is released.

Something about this math doesn't make sense.

Quote

Amanda Marie Knox is an American woman who, in 2009, was convicted of the murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Umbria, Italy. She served four years of a 26-year sentence before the murder conviction was overturned on October 3, 2011.

convicted in 2009, served 4 years, but 2 years later was overturned and released.

How do you get a retrial after a conviction AND after the conviction was overturned?

How do you reinstate a guilty verdict?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

My hard thing is finding fraud in predicting earthquakes. Fraud out here necessitates knowing falsity - I know it's a lie and I'm telling you a lie so that you act in your own peril.

[Reply]300 people where killed and many family members testified that their love ones only stayed home because of their fraudulent announcements

[rehmwa 2]

weekender

I get it. she is a cute white American. so obviously,

she must be guilty of anything we could imagine




crappy PC nationalistic and racial bias is really showing strong

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[weekender 0]

lawrocket

My hard thing is finding fraud in predicting earthquakes. Fraud out here necessitates knowing falsity - I know it's a lie and I'm telling you a lie so that you act in your own peril.

[Reply]300 people where killed and many family members testified that their love ones only stayed home because of their fraudulent announcements

Right. And it seems that the scientists failed to incite the necessary panic to cause people to flee the city over a period of months. It was a 6.3 earthquake - not small but not huge. I've ridden a few that were stronger than that. But what happened was people died and there has to be blame pinned somewhere (and not on people like building inspectors or legislators who allow people to live in ramshackle structures in seismic zones.)

That's my distrust. They call it fraud. You call it fraud.

Amanda Knox? If scientists not correctly predicting that a 6.3 earthquake will devastate an area within a few months is criminal, then I view other prosecutions with distrust. I know your bias. I have mine.

Thanks for the open and honest discussion.

[normiss 851]

How are the Prime Minister's parties going these days?

[davjohns 1]

tigra

The initial prosecutor was charged with misconduct relating to a different case. He has an interesting history.

None of it makes sense to me.
How do you charge and convict 3 people for rape and murder with 2 completely different versions of the crime and solid physical evidence against only one of them?

If I was the victim's parents, I would be wondering how the guy who raped and murdered my daughter got such a light sentence. 15-16 years? For all we know, they will still be arguing appeals when he is released.

My understanding is that the rapist implicated Knox and his sentence was reduced from 30 years. He'll be eligible for parole this year. Seems suspicious.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[davjohns 1]

I think they are including her pre-trial confinement to come up with four years served.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[normiss 851]

Was that not a "waiver of speedy trial" type prosecution?
I think I remember hearing something like that.
Maybe it was just a plea deal?

[turtlespeed 226]

davjohns

I think they are including her pre-trial confinement to come up with four years served.

That's what I assume, but it obviously doesn't look correct.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun