Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 234
  1. #141
    snarking for AZE
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    katbert greenhouse
    Posts
    30,170
    vCash
    2068
    Rep Power
    50062
    Quote Originally Posted by jeffisjeff View Post
    Will Seattle be allowed to appeal?
    you can only have so much circumstantial evidence before you have to assume it is true
    I feel like I'm in a dream. But it can't be a dream because there are no boy dancers!

  2. #142
    Politiking for Purple
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Learning to let it be
    Posts
    4,170
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    91969
    No, in the court of fashion and style there is no appeal. It is first impression only.
    If you want to be creative, get out there and do it. It's not a waste of time" - Michael Giacchino, UP

  3. #143
    Port de bras!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ravenclaw
    Posts
    30,120
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34026
    Fashion police has already said they smell of grunge.
    "Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."

    from Speedy Death

  4. #144
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,708
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I live in the Seattle area...

  5. #145

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Refusing to perform on demand
    Posts
    14,501
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    2276
    Quote Originally Posted by ks777 View Post
    I live in the Seattle area...
    We're sorry...
    Creating drama!

  6. #146
    Bountifully Enmeshed
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    At the Christmas Bizarre
    Posts
    38,154
    vCash
    250
    Rep Power
    46687
    Quote Originally Posted by IceAlisa View Post
    Fashion police has already said they smell of grunge.
    Smells like Teen Spirit to me.
    "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."-- Albert Einstein.

  7. #147
    Port de bras!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ravenclaw
    Posts
    30,120
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34026
    Well, it's not like I live in the fashion capital of the world
    "Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."

    from Speedy Death

  8. #148
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,708
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by IceAlisa View Post
    Well, it's not like I live in the fashion capital of the world
    Is that you?

  9. #149
    Port de bras!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ravenclaw
    Posts
    30,120
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34026
    Quote Originally Posted by ks777 View Post
    Is that you?
    Hell to the no.
    "Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."

    from Speedy Death

  10. #150
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,708
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by IceAlisa View Post
    Hell to the no.
    LOL, I was gonna ask if you were Amish.

  11. #151
    Port de bras!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ravenclaw
    Posts
    30,120
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34026
    Quote Originally Posted by ks777 View Post
    LOL, I was gonna ask if you were Amish.
    That's what I see on the streets around here though. May be they are Amish? Of course, they probably think they are hip.

    My style is more of a pencil skirt, high heels yuppie variety.
    "Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."

    from Speedy Death

  12. #152

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Petaluma, CA
    Posts
    5,618
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8129
    Quote Originally Posted by numbers123 View Post
    I've said I don't know if Amanda is guilty or not. I have not seen the entire transcripts, nor would I be able to apply Italy's laws to the situation. But...
    Let's look at the scenarios:
    1. Amanda is guilty. She served 3+ years in jail, while awaiting appeals. Her conviction is overturned and she leaves Italy. If she is guilty, she has only served a portion of what the sentence would be. And is most likely not going to be sent back to Italy to face the re-trial or whatever it is called. It is Amanda who benefits from the "mistrial of justice",
    2. Amanda is not guilty, yet served 3+ years in jail. travesty of justice for Amanda.

    But the Kerchers are victim in all scenarios. And they are not able to talk to, hold their daughter no matter what. Amanda's parents are.
    The Kirchner are victims.. Of course. Just not necessarily of the Justice system. That was my point.
    DH - and that's just my opinion

  13. #153
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,707
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by zippy View Post
    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?
    I've written this before.

    When Knox made her initial statements, investigations did not have suspects and had not taken turns yet. So the police could have never indicated Lumumba as a suspect (there's proof of the proceding of the investigation).

    Knox, talking to the police, indicated Lumumba as the killer and placed herself in the house while the crime was occurring.
    The lie about Lumumba however is not an issue in her murder conviction.
    As I understand it, in placing herself in the house while (supposedly) Lumumba was killink Kercher, Knox described precisely in detail what happened to the victim: so far no one has been able to explain logically and convincingly how she could have known what she described, hadn't she been there.
    This is one of the 14 issues of the appeal trial sentence that the Supreme Court raised flags on, for not being legally and/or logically sound.

    After talking to the police, Knox, while completely alone, decided to write her statements down, in her own nice hand writing, and then proceded to give the papers to the police.

    Later on, she repeated the same statements during a conversation she had with her mother, while the two of them thought they had privacy.

    The interrogation was not recorded, but Knox hand writing is still there, and so is the conversation she had with her mother.


    There is no doubt the italian justice system is a mess (more so the civil part than the criminal part): it is designed to stretch time further than human decency, it's filled with burocracy, and many offences that would normally considered small to no relevance are considered crimal.

    There's a good reason for that: in a country heavily corrupted and allergic to rules, statute of limitation together with long procedures and overloaded courts, keep out of jail anyone with money. It's legalized anarchy.

    This case is taking too long? Probably.

    But please note the difference between burocracy and judging skills.

    Italian judges are very good at their job; writer Saviano (author of Gomorra) said more than once that they are asked for their expertise from all over the world, for their experience and their skills.

    Also, this happens to be a case that, for its relevance (young victim, young possible offenders, media attention, US diplomacy attention, money, lawyers involved) will not result in a light conviction, nor a conviction that comes from incompetence.

    On the contrary, if anything, the overall scenario (for reasons I've already pointed out) suggests that if there's a way to let the two of them go without breaking work ethics, judges will gladly take it.

  14. #154
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,707
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by numbers123 View Post
    2. Amanda is not guilty, yet served 3+ years in jail. travesty of justice for Amanda.
    Amanda was convicted (definitive sentence) for defamation against Lumumba. I'm lazy and not checking right now, but I seem to remember she was sentenced to two plus years. Immediately released, of course, since she had already served more.

    I believe that people in italian jails awaiting her sentences are more than a third of the entire jail population. It's orrible, but they mean it to be that way.
    Every so often, they cry jail overpopulation (completely true), but instead of acting on the causes of the problem, they decide to release a number of people listing a number of crimes that will benefit grace. Each time, crimes in the list include white collar ones, and simply delete any justice trouble for important and wealthy people (from politicians to bankers), that have never served a day.

    There should be international awareness about the italian justice huge problems, and there should be international pressure to solve them. There isn't much, go figure.

    In any case, none of the travesties above will inflence Knox sentence: judges, as I said, are generally good, and will pay extra attention to this case.

  15. #155
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17,231
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Loulou, do you think that we will ever, really, feel that justice has been served? It seems that the Italian court has an impossible situation, in this case. There is so much contradiction. First a wild drug and sex party gone wrong. Now, an escalated argument over housework and toilet flushing. The crime scene, itself, was badly botched. There is no DNA to prove Knox or Sollecito were there during the murder. Knox'x behavior, after the murder, was bizarre, at best. The cartwheels, etc. She came across as a spoiled, out of control American. Even many americans saw her that way. She was judged, by many, on her perceived personality, rather than facts. They have DNA proof that Guede did it. What would be the motive for two kids, with no prior acts of violence, to participate? I realize that you are saying that she gave up Lumumba before multiple interrogations occurred. But, did they have her cell phone? It is my understanding that Lumumba's name came up due to texts on her cell phone. Was she really there? That is a huge question. And if she was there, was she involved? She admitted that she had been doing drugs that night, the police asked her to imagine what happened. Could her story be simply that, a fabrication, asked for by the police? I don't recall reading anything about her describing, in detail, exactly what happened to Kercher. But, rather, what she imagined happened. Was she accurate? If she was not in the room, but was there and covered her ears to the screams, how could she know what happened in the room? I do not question the competence of the Italian criminal courts. But, the back and forth, the changes in the story, the lack of real evidence all suggest that they really don't know what to do with this one. If the conviction is held up, there will be people who will never believe she did it. If she is exonerated, there will be people who think she got away with murder. As has already been said, no one wins, either way.

  16. #156
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    624
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Fashion police has already said they smell of grunge.
    Grunge was the first and only time I ever was fashionable. Bring it on.

  17. #157
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,707
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MacMadame View Post
    I should hope people would feel free to point out injustice when they see it. Just because something happens according the rules doesn't mean it can't be unjust. The very rules may be unjust.
    Of course, once you've been instructed on italian law, on the science that is involved, on every piece of paper ever written on this case by expertises, prosecutors, lawyers and judges, every testimony (word by word), the complete timeline, and also juridical science - pro and cons of the rules, how and why they might work best, in what country.
    Then you can decide if the rules (as a whole) are unjust, and/or if they weren't followed.

    Did you know that in italian trials, defendants can take the stand, make free statements and then refuse cross examination?
    Sollecito did so in this last appeal.

    You can rest reassured though: a troup of lawyers and diplomats is looking over Knox best interest.


    Quote Originally Posted by cruisin View Post
    Loulou, do you think that we will ever, really, feel that justice has been served? It seems that the Italian court has an impossible situation, in this case. There is so much contradiction.
    I have good reason to believe Italy is heavily corrupted, and that usually the people denying it are ready to contribute to it or have already.
    I have reason to believe human rights are shaky ground in Russia or China.
    I have reason to believe kids in some parts of Africa are dying even if they could be saved.
    I have reson to believe having lobbies outside of politician rooms aren't helping the best interest of a country.

    I have, however, no good reason to believe that Knox sentence will not be just, as I said: as just as humanly possible.
    Because nothing in the scenario suggests it.
    I have no reason to believe the judges are incompetent. No reason to believe they'll convict her if the science represents that scenario as impossible, no reason to believe they'll convict her if there's doubt, no reason to believe Knox is not well represented, no reason to believe she'll exploit every possible defense line and no reason to believe she'll be carefully heard.

    I think it's pointless and harmuful to get into details. We'll never have the full picture, or the expertise to understand it, much less form an opinion.
    Details are used to drive opinions, because you can stress some and conviniently ignore others. And while judges probably work best without a ton of pressure on their shoulders, rather than their compelling work ethics, Knox's best interest is to inflame the US people as much as possible, so that political and diplomatical actions will have to take it into account.
    Last edited by loulou; 02-02-2014 at 07:30 PM.

  18. #158
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17,231
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    ^^ I agree with you, loulou. But, what I meant was do you think that people will ever really believe that justice was done? As I said, whichever way it goes, there will be large groups who feel the decision was unjust. We see it right here, in this thread. I feel confident that there are many, here who will feel she was unjustly convicted if the conviction holds. And I feel confident that there are those who will feel it unjust if she is exonerated. In that sense, it is a no win situation, for Kerchers, Knox, Sollecito, and the Italian courts. That is part of what I meant when I said the court is in an impossible situation. I believe the courts and judges are capable of evaluating evidence. But, the evidence seems so screwed up, and public opinion, so strong, can the court come out of this with people believing they were just?

    And, if she is held to guilty, what does the US do? We do have extradition agreements with Italy. Because of the original guilty verdict, the US double jeopardy law will not apply. The US will have no legal reason not to extradite. When the US wants criminals extradited to the US, for punishment of crimes, we are loud and insistent. I don't see how the US could not comply and extradite.

  19. #159
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Katellorizo
    Posts
    3,487
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Innocent people make false confessions while undergoing custodial investigations, especially when the investigation is prolonged and certain basic principles of human rights (such as access to an attorney and, if a foreigner, access to consular assistance) are not followed.

    A few good examples of when this has happened are the Salem Witch Trials (which inspired The Crucible) and the cases of the Guildford Four and the Maguire Seven (which inspired In the Name of the Father. One of the reasons why the U.S. was criticized for waterboarding was that the people subjected to it said things that weren't true simply to stop the torture.

    I don't think Amanda Knox should be blamed for having lied in custody. Who knows how each of us would have done under the circumstances? I am, however, appalled by the fact that the Italians prosecuted and convicted her for, essentially, being a victim of human rights abuses. What justification could there be for it, other than to discredit her and distract attention from their own actions?

  20. #160
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17,231
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Vagabond, I think a lot of this goes to the prosecutor, himself. Hadn't he been indicted for something, prior to the Knox trial? I don't condemn the entire Italian judicial system. But, something is very wrong here, for reasons you and many others have stated.

    I wonder why Knox's interrogations were not recorded. Deliberate?

Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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