Amanda Knox's conviction reinstated by appeals court in Italy

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by Vash01, Jan 30, 2014.

  1. agalisgv

    agalisgv Well-Known Member

    24,044
    4,414
    113
    Just to clarify, an appeal in the US is a review of a csse--not another trial. So while a review may take place, that doesn't mean the case may be retried by another court.

    IIUC, there appears to be a guaranteed second trial in Italy, no?
     
  2. Prancer

    Prancer Jawwalking Staff Member

    39,043
    6,791
    113
    Well, perhaps those who think Knox is guilty could explain what part of the evidence they find more compelling than the lack of DNA, since apparently those people find the case against her quite strong.
     
  3. IceAlisa

    IceAlisa Épaulement!!!

    31,178
    4,415
    113
    Yes, please. I am all ears (and eyes).
     
  4. duane

    duane New Member

    2,173
    177
    0
    LET the door hit you on your way out. Maybe it'll knock some common sense in you.
     
  5. ks777

    ks777 Well-Known Member

    1,768
    160
    63
    ITA. Also Amanda's parents are said to be broke after spending all of their savings.
     
  6. *Jen*

    *Jen* Well-Known Member

    11,609
    1,368
    113
    I believe the book deal alone was $4 million, no idea about other appearances.

    AS fr the double standard: it isn't. I just think it's pretty unfair if Sollecito ends up in prison and she doesn't, but they're both convicted. She's also ended up with a source of income that he hasn't. I guess basically, I think he is worse off than she is.

    I pretty much agree with this. I was surprised they were found guilty again, and astounded that so much weight has been placed on the evidence of a self-confessed and convicted murderer who had his sentence reduced for implicating others. That rings loud alarms bells for me.
     
  7. Prancer

    Prancer Jawwalking Staff Member

    39,043
    6,791
    113
    Considering her legal fees, I have no trouble believing that she isn't rolling in money at this point.

    What happened to his book?

    Hmm, I don't think it is because I wonder why the prosecution's theory changed. Did Guede change his story (again)? I just find it bizarre that the first time, they were all having sex and now it's that they were having an argument that escalated. That's a real switch; what was it based on?

    Also, the appeals court seemed to think it was significant that the court did not consider the issue of Guede being convicted of murder committed along with others. That's not a sentence I'm familiar with; how was the conclusion reached? I read that the prosecutor said that it was impossible for one person to have committed the murder. Why was that?
     
  8. poths

    poths Well-Known Member

    18,076
    3,218
    113
    I'm a lawyer, quotes Wikipedia, :lol:

     
  9. Dr.Siouxs

    Dr.Siouxs Well-Known Member

    8,515
    1,719
    113
    A lot of lawyers contribute to Wiki. :p
     
  10. poths

    poths Well-Known Member

    18,076
    3,218
    113
    With all due respect, Prancer, the issue is not that I can interpret the evidence differently but rather, that my own ego is not so inflated that I believe myself to be more informed, intelligent or competent than the Italian legal system.
     
    *Jen* and (deleted member) like this.
  11. poths

    poths Well-Known Member

    18,076
    3,218
    113
    ANYONE can....

    Legal synopsis of a 5 year case in 500 words...yes, that's informed? Here lies my point. No one outside of the court is remotely informed and the arrogance/ignorance to claim otherwise is, well, typically American.
     
  12. Dr.Siouxs

    Dr.Siouxs Well-Known Member

    8,515
    1,719
    113
    :lol:
     
  13. *Jen*

    *Jen* Well-Known Member

    11,609
    1,368
    113
    That question may also be the answer :lol:

    The nature of her injuries were such that police don't believe one person alone could have done it, as per this article:

    This article is interesting, but I saw that press conference and I think the assertion that the family believe Amanda and Rafaele are guilty is an assumption because they didn't say it. They never said it. Her sister said something about how they may never know what happened that night, how they aren't judges or jury or detectives. Her brother explained why the police and courts believe they were involved, but neither ever said "we think they did it". It's been inferred.

    I really think they're just putting their faith in the justice system and hoping for the best, because if you read what they said, word for word, they don't know what happened or what to believe.
     
  14. Prancer

    Prancer Jawwalking Staff Member

    39,043
    6,791
    113
    I can certainly understand your reticence, given that opinions expressed on this board carry the full weight of the law and therefore we must all exercise full caution in what we say here, else justice not be served.

    I hadn't actually thought to solicit an opinion from you, as you had announced that you were leaving this thread, but thank you for returning and adding your always constructive comments.
     
    uyeahu, pollyanna, IceAlisa and 5 others like this.
  15. Prancer

    Prancer Jawwalking Staff Member

    39,043
    6,791
    113
    I looked it up, He did publish it. I couldn't find anything about how well it sold or didn't, however.

    I don't understand why anyone would think the Kerchers are the bad guys in all this, even if they did believe that Knox and Sollecito were involved. This has got to be deadly for them, dragging on as it has and still will, and they probably never will get an answer.
     
  16. poths

    poths Well-Known Member

    18,076
    3,218
    113
    Colloquial English will do, Prancer, note the forum :lol:
     
  17. allezfred

    allezfred Old and Immature Admin Staff Member

    44,050
    10,573
    113
    I have a lot more sympathy for a family whose loved one was murdered than for a liar who was happy to implicate an innocent man in a murder.
     
  18. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    17,561
    1,170
    113
    Well, one would hope that the convicted person would have grounds. But, whether or not they do, they have the right for appeal in a criminal case. The appeal is only the decision whether to overturn the original conviction, not a retrial. So, with no grounds, the appeal would likely affirm the original decision.

    I think this whole thing has been mishandled from day one. And this new claim that it wasn't a sex orgy gone wrong and that it was over housekeeping, just confirms it for me. How could they be that wrong and have any credibility?

    Just an FYI, According to my expert (husband) double jeopardy would not apply here, as Knox was originally found guilty. So, if the new guilty verdict holds up, Knox can be extradited in accordance with US law.
     
  19. loulou

    loulou Well-Known Member

    1,797
    162
    63
    This is very true. Different country, different rules (some might be worse, some might be better), different judges, different lawyers, different juries. And yet, people still feel free to call it unjust.


    You should have been consulting for this last trial, being so concise and effective.
    The president of the Appeal Cout was just saying it was challenging for them to navigate throughout all the legal papers and the 30 expertise testimonies that were produced, plus instruct the jury on how to fully understand the above. Apparently, documents take up a room.


    I'll be back to that in a sec.

    ETA: see below.

    Confusing enough for me.
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2014
  20. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    17,561
    1,170
    113
    I have more sympathy for a family who lost their precious daughter, as well. But, we don't really know how the "lie" was exacted from Knox. Was she led into it? And just because she appears to have lied, doesn't make her a killer or participant. Should she spend her life in jail for a crime she may not have committed, because she lied? Understanding she may have been manipulated and/or coerced into the lie?
     
  21. loulou

    loulou Well-Known Member

    1,797
    162
    63
    You have more sympathy for the Knox than for the Kerchers?


    This has been discussed before (I believe after the Supreme Court verdict). Knox is not and will never be convicted of murder because she lied.
     
  22. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    17,561
    1,170
    113
    No, I was agreeing with Allezfred, that I have more sympathy for the Kerchers (the family who lost their precious daughter), as well. The Knox family did not lose their daughter, they still have her. Knox has suffered, her family has suffered, but not as much as the Kerchers. Sorry, if I wasn't clear.

    My other point was to Allezfred, that she may have lied, but that doesn't make her a killer.
     
  23. Vagabond

    Vagabond Well-Known Member

    3,802
    950
    113
    You must have a very low opinion of yourself.

    Insight: Overloaded justice system ties Italy in knots

    Edmond Arapi wins payout from Italian court for wrongful murder conviction

    Italian court awards record damages

     
    IceAlisa and (deleted member) like this.
  24. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    17,561
    1,170
    113
    Yes, I thought you meant my post was confusing within itself. I was unsure with my first post. I then asked my husband who has been a trial lawyer for 40 years. Also spoke to my son and his girlfriend, recent law school graduates. Son, a new associate in a law firm, GF is clerking for a Judge. It was explained to me, I now understand the law. So, I provided it for you in my later post.
     
    loulou and (deleted member) like this.
  25. zippy

    zippy Active Member

    575
    99
    28
    Maybe we just find the part of the Italian legal system that declared Knox not guilty due to having not committed the crime to be really extra informed, intelligent, and competent? :p

    And not only that, but is it even a lie if she's innocent of the murder? How could it be a lie if she wasn't there, and didn't know whether or not Mr. Lumumba committed the crime? If we take her version as fact for a minute (since the interrogation wasn't recorded), the police told her they had proof that Lumumba was the killer and wanted her to imagine what it was like if she was at the apartment while he did it. How would she know she was pointing her finger at an innocent man if she herself wasn't there and didn't know what happened?
     
  26. AxelAnnie

    AxelAnnie Well-Known Member

    6,127
    1,040
    113
    Sorry. Have to take issue with that assertion. If it a botched legal system then both sides are victims.... Not just the people with whom you agree. We'll never know what happened. I haven't seen any postings by anyone who had access to the trial or transcripts.

    From an American justice prospective... Which is scewed to the defendant the last decision is nuts. It was my understanding that the first appeal was granted and won on the basis of evidence regarding do a that was not allowed in to the first trial.
    We, the CSI generation expect a neat package of truth or the video of the crime.. Hence we get Casey Anthony.

    The parents want someone to blame... Shoot everyone does. It seems to me, standing in my California home, wondering about it, that the Italian courts are messy silliness. But I have no clue who is not a victim.
     
  27. VIETgrlTerifa

    VIETgrlTerifa Well-Known Member

    10,285
    2,203
    113
    Wikipedia can actually be a reliable source because there are usually footnotes provided for the assertions and facts stated in the article that you can look up for yourself and determine how reliable the original/primary sources are. I would never cite to wikipedia itself for a paper I am writing, but I have found it useful for a basic breakdown of a subject and the sources provided in the footnotes are usually great for much more specific information (if I find the link provided to be a valid source). Anyway, I find that a lot more useful than blindly believing in the Italian Justice system (or any system). Maybe it's because I'm a cynic, but I don't automatically assume justice was served just because a jury decided one way. If all the Amanda Knox is guilty people maybe provided some more compelling reasons than calling Americans moronic and arrogant, then I'd be more willing to accept those theories, but I haven't really heard any compelling arguments from that side. Instead, all I see is anti-American bitterness or some people stretching to make small statements a valid point but the subtext is quite clear.

    Anyway, I understand the sensitivity and I'm not here to make sweeping generalizations about the Italian legal system and about how flawed it is. I'm just interested in this specific case because I've never seen someone convicted, retried then found not guilty, then have that overturned and then found guilty again and now going through an appeals process.
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2014
    meggonzo, galaxygirl, Kasey and 5 others like this.
  28. orbitz

    orbitz Well-Known Member

    9,969
    750
    113
    cnn article.

    Reading the article, I don't think there's enough evidence to convincingly link Knox and the boyfriend to the murder.
     
  29. michiruwater

    michiruwater Well-Known Member

    9,258
    1,946
    113
    Surely this would apply to you as well, yes?
     
  30. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    17,561
    1,170
    113
    Well said.