Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 221 to 234 of 234
  1. #221
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    11,020
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by cruisin View Post
    They will extradite if the original verdict was guilty. Don't forget Knox was acquitted on appeal, not the original trial.
    Can you give an example of when that happened?

  2. #222
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,714
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MacMadame View Post
    Then why has it been widely reported that there were demonstrations in the street and outrage by a large portion of the populace when the guilty verdict was overturned?
    Reported where?

    It was asked to me in what direction is the italian public opinion leaning.

    Perugia is a small town, with teeny tiny streets.
    I can hardly imagine a large portion of the italian population fitting in there.
    Did they travel by train, by bus, to be there just in case the appeal would overturn the sentence?
    It must have been an organizational nightmare.
    Did anyone statistically study the crowd to check if it was representative of the italian population?
    Maybe people from the UK were there, in the demonstrations that were reported to you?

  3. #223
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,714
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vagabond View Post
    Don't bother.

    The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment

    The U.S. won't extradite someone to be tried for an offense for which she has already been acquitted.

    The fact that Italy doesn't regard the acquittal as final doesn't alter the fact that the U.S. does. End of story.
    Did the US make it clear that unless the Fifth Amendment was applied, even if the first degree sentences guilty, they would not extradite?

    -- But they won't extradite, you sure have that part right.


    Why would italian judges convict without solide evidence, and against science?

    Please, bother.
    Last edited by loulou; 02-04-2014 at 10:44 PM.

  4. #224
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,714
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by cruisin View Post
    They will extradite if the original verdict was guilty. Don't forget Knox was acquitted on appeal, not the original trial.
    After Supreme Court sentence, I posted an interview to a Harvard Law lawyer, who said just that.

    Vagabond should tell him, or alert the School their people need further preparation. - End of story, like he/she kindly posted, because that helps the discussion.


    Link to interview.

    Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School, March 27 2013, interview by Alessandra Farkas

    "All the lawyers and the judges I know have a very different opinion on this case, than the opinion of the average american, who only sees Amanda's pretty face and believes the superficial and biased US tv pieces on the matter".

    Why are you so convinced Amanda is guilty?

    "I am convinced because I carefully examined the whole case. Circustantial evidences are enough to prove she's guilty and I believe the Italian Supreme Court did a an amazing job. The only issues of the first trial were the investigators' sloppyness and the state attorney's revengefulness".

    The US justice system would have convicted Amanda?

    "There's proof beyond any reasonable doubt which comes from her initial false confession, where she tried to implicate an innocent man. All the other proves have to be seen through the lense of that lie".

    Media wrote that the double jeopardy law prevents from getting a defendant on trial for the same crime twice.

    "That's not the case: Amanda was found not guilty at the end of her appeal, not at the end of her first trial. There's however another law, that prevents convicted people from making money out of their crimes, and states that any earnings should go the the family of the victim of the crime. The Kerchers will sue to get the millions Amanda is about to make".
    Last edited by loulou; 02-04-2014 at 10:53 PM.

  5. #225
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Skittl1321 View Post
    Can you give an example of when that happened?
    I don't have an example. I am not going to look for one. I have it from 3 lawyers, that the US would be legally obliged to extradite based on the original ruling. Whether or not they do is a different story. However, the law is that they extradite on the original trial ruling.

    I am to saying that I feel that Knox and Sollecito should be convicted. I am simply stating law.

  6. #226
    Internet Beyotch
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    15,831
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    24804
    Quote Originally Posted by Sk8ngCat View Post
    We only have Knox's and her ex-boyfriend's words that they were high on pot anyway.
    Their behavior on record supports their word more than not. In fact, that part of their story doesn't seem to be in dispute by anyone including Italian authorities.

    Quote Originally Posted by loulou View Post
    Abu Omar

    Italian judges requested extradition for american citizens (26 CIA agents, I believe) and trasmitted the request to Italian Minister of Justice, Castelli. Castelli has always refused to pass the extradition request to the US, starting a conflict with judges in Milan.
    Amanda Knox is not a CIA agent. These reports are irrelevant as what happens to her is not a matter of national security.

    Quote Originally Posted by loulou View Post
    Since the US public opinion feels so strongly about this case that US politics cannot ignore it, since the US diplomacy in Italy is reported to be very active, Knox is very likely to have a strong ally in the italian government, rather than the other way around.
    That is your opinion. My opinion is that the US government will cooperate with Italy and not put pressure on them at all. Knox is a private citizen and it doesn't really impact the government what happens to her. Sure, some people will be upset and write angry words on Twitter and Facebook and some might even write to their government officials. But that's about it. The reality is that it has no real impact on the US government's day-to-day running and the US government has no dog in this fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vagabond View Post
    Don't bother.

    The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment

    The U.S. won't extradite someone to be tried for an offense for which she has already been acquitted.

    The fact that Italy doesn't regard the acquittal as final doesn't alter the fact that the U.S. does. End of story.
    In your opinion. In other people's opinion this doesn't count as double jeopardy and they will extradite.

    Quote Originally Posted by loulou View Post
    Reported where?
    Major news outlets all over the world.

    Quote Originally Posted by loulou View Post
    It was asked to me in what direction is the italian public opinion leaning.
    And your answer revealed your extreme bias.

    Not to mention, Allan Dersowitz is a publicity hound and a douchebag. If you want to find a credible source to support your POV, he ain't it.
    Actual bumper sticker series: Jesus is my co-pilot. Satan is my financial advisor. Budha is my therapist. L. Ron Hubbard owes me $50.

  7. #227

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    I'm turning what????
    Age
    44
    Posts
    9,317
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    1143
    I have a couple of thoughts.

    Regarding Knox accusing the wrong man, I seem to recall somewhere that while the police didn't know about Guede, they had found a hair that they realized came from someone of African descent at the crime scene. Is that something that Knox was told during interrogation? If so, it might explain why she implicated Patrick Lumumba. She knew the killer was African. As I also understand it, the police found a text from Knox to Lumumba where she said "See you later" in response to his telling her she didn't need to come to work and they interpreted it as meaning she intended to meet up with him that night. If she was confronted by the police during her interrogation with the fact that Meredith was killed by an African and the police pointed to evidence linking to Lumumba, it would help explain why she accused the wrong man.

    The second thing has to do with the new motive. Guede was convicted on the theory that Meredith was killed during a sex game gone wrong while she was being held down by Knox and Sollecito. Now, the prosecutor has convicted Knox and Sollecito using a completely different scenario -- a fight over cleanliness. So which is it? It seems fundamentally wrong to me to allow a prosecutor to pursue inconsistent theories against different defendants, because both theories cannot be true. The prosecutor should have some duty to the public to seek the truth; his responsibilities should go beyond just getting a conviction by whatever means is possible.

  8. #228
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by reckless View Post
    I have a couple of thoughts.

    Regarding Knox accusing the wrong man, I seem to recall somewhere that while the police didn't know about Guede, they had found a hair that they realized came from someone of African descent at the crime scene. Is that something that Knox was told during interrogation? If so, it might explain why she implicated Patrick Lumumba. She knew the killer was African. As I also understand it, the police found a text from Knox to Lumumba where she said "See you later" in response to his telling her she didn't need to come to work and they interpreted it as meaning she intended to meet up with him that night. If she was confronted by the police during her interrogation with the fact that Meredith was killed by an African and the police pointed to evidence linking to Lumumba, it would help explain why she accused the wrong man.

    The second thing has to do with the new motive. Guede was convicted on the theory that Meredith was killed during a sex game gone wrong while she was being held down by Knox and Sollecito. Now, the prosecutor has convicted Knox and Sollecito using a completely different scenario -- a fight over cleanliness. So which is it? It seems fundamentally wrong to me to allow a prosecutor to pursue inconsistent theories against different defendants, because both theories cannot be true. The prosecutor should have some duty to the public to seek the truth; his responsibilities should go beyond just getting a conviction by whatever means is possible.
    I think most of us agree with you. Hearsay, unrecorded interrogation (in a language the defendant was not fluent in), inadequate, inconsistent evidence/scenario, a desire to get a conviction, sloppy crime scene investigation - pretty much sums it up.

  9. #229
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    565
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by reckless View Post
    The second thing has to do with the new motive. Guede was convicted on the theory that Meredith was killed during a sex game gone wrong while she was being held down by Knox and Sollecito. Now, the prosecutor has convicted Knox and Sollecito using a completely different scenario -- a fight over cleanliness. So which is it? It seems fundamentally wrong to me to allow a prosecutor to pursue inconsistent theories against different defendants, because both theories cannot be true. The prosecutor should have some duty to the public to seek the truth; his responsibilities should go beyond just getting a conviction by whatever means is possible.
    This. It's one of several red flags about the prosecution/investigation of this case, like when Sollecito's computer hard drive was accidentally (?) destroyed during the investigation, which might have had exonerating evidence of computer usage during the night of the murder, and yet the prosecution was able to get a lack of computer activity accepted as evidence anyway. Another good one was that a security camera positioned near the apartment was checked for evidence of Knox/Sollecito passing by on the way to her apartment that night (it was on the route between Sollecito's apt and hers, and did catch Guede and Kercher as they headed to the apartment). They were never seen - so the investigators handed the tape back to the company to record over instead of holding it as evidence. Then the witnesses - from a homeless man who admitted to using heroin that night and could only give garbled testimony, to a man who claimed Knox, Sollecito and Guede leaped out of a garbage bag in the middle of the road, pulled a knife on him, and he managed to get away by throwing olives at them!

    The question of extradition will be interesting, if it comes to that. I've heard some speculate Italy may not want to drag this out anymore and just won't bother with a request, perhaps cutting some kind of deal. If they do, I tend to agree the US would cooperate unless Knox's defense team could build some rock solid case about this violating her constitutional rights. They could point out that at her acquittal, she wasn't just found not guilty for lack of evidence, but actually found innocent for not having done the crime. Then there are some other aspects of the decision to overturn the acquittal they might be able to bring up, such as the fact that on several points it was based on the reasoning of the acquittal not being in line with evidence accepted at the trial of Rudy Guede - a trial at which Knox and Sollecito had no representation, and at which the defense had a vested interest in forwarding the theory of multiple attackers. Guede got his sentence reduced almost in half for implicating Knox and Sollecito - and that has a lot to do with why the case went to trial again after the acquittal.

    ETA: An interesting discussion on the 14 points the Supreme Court made in the ruling to overturn the acquittal, as I believe loulou was looking for. Some interesting stuff in the comment section too.
    Last edited by zippy; 02-07-2014 at 12:56 AM.

  10. #230

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Petaluma, CA
    Posts
    5,623
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8475
    This thread prompted me to buy her book in audio format, and read by Amanda. Anyone else read it?

    First off, let me say that I don't think the Italians had evidence enough to put her at the scene of the crime at the time of the crime, let alone to convict her.

    Having said that....she is one weird duck! I wonder if she sits somewhere on the high functioning end of the Autism spectrum.
    DH - and that's just my opinion

  11. #231

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Top Secret FSU Witness Protection Location
    Age
    32
    Posts
    20,724
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    35102
    I can't help but find her boyfriend's comments interesting. He mentioned how aggravated she was when she came back from the house and said it looked like someone broke in and there was blood in the bathroom. Then he said she seemed to be gone a long time for someone who just went to take a shower.

    I have been adamant about her innocence and I still am but this is interesting coming from him. I have a feeling he is just trying to distance himself from her and I can't blame him. It may be his only shot of not going to prison. He can throw her under the bus and know it won't matter for her, she will hardly stand a chance of being extradited.
    -Brian
    "Michelle would never be caught with sausage grease staining her Vera Wang." - rfisher

  12. #232

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    2,496
    vCash
    483
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AxelAnnie View Post
    This thread prompted me to buy her book in audio format, and read by Amanda. Anyone else read it?

    First off, let me say that I don't think the Italians had evidence enough to put her at the scene of the crime at the time of the crime, let alone to convict her.

    Having said that....she is one weird duck! I wonder if she sits somewhere on the high functioning end of the Autism spectrum.
    I have also read (well - listened) to her story. And yes - she is one weird duck. There are aspects of her thought process that are ... lets say interesting.

    She has avoided some of the things in her book that had later been presented against her and I am yet to read Solleccito's book in Italian.

    The other day I was talking to 5 of students from my University who spent a semester or more in Perugia and asked them about the students life. 4 of them were there for Erasmus, while one came back with a degree, but all 5 of them say the same thing about pot being easily available and is used with ease, casually and often by locals (i think they meant local students at Perugia Unviersity) and foreign exchange students. So it is interesting how the prosecutor in the original trial and the press painted the American student as a druggie...
    As of March 2013 - no longer scared of TAHbKA or Andrey aka Pushkin

  13. #233

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,950
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    91872
    Quote Originally Posted by AxelAnnie View Post
    This thread prompted me to buy her book in audio format, and read by Amanda. Anyone else read it?

    First off, let me say that I don't think the Italians had evidence enough to put her at the scene of the crime at the time of the crime, let alone to convict her.

    Having said that....she is one weird duck! I wonder if she sits somewhere on the high functioning end of the Autism spectrum.
    As a side thought- does the audio (listening to her voice) make the story more convincing than reading her book? I am more into reading than listening. Based on the sloppy work by the prosecution/police, I am inclined to believe that Amada did not commit the murder. The full truth may never come out, but I don't want an innocent person punished if there is a grain of doubt about Guilt.

  14. #234

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Petaluma, CA
    Posts
    5,623
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8475
    ^^ I think hearing Amanda's voice added a whole dimension to the information.
    DH - and that's just my opinion

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •