1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi all! No longer will threads be closed after 1000 (ish) messages. We may close if one gets so long to cause an issue and if you would like a thread closed to start a new one after a 1000 posts then just use the "Report Post" function. Enjoy!

Amanda Knox's conviction reinstated by appeals court in Italy

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

  1. cruisin

    cruisin Banned Member

    The problem is that (as someone else said) that would have made him look guilty. And, even with a passport (which I am sure he had - as I remember him visiting Knox in Seattle) he would need a visa for an extended stay, anywhere. I don't think running would have helped him.

    As Coco already said, after hours of intense police interrogation, plenty of people have admitted to things they didn't do. They may have overtly admitted or implied guilt. But, police can ask questions in a manner that can be confusing and/or manipulative, to get an answer they want. The Italian police screwed up the crime scene, the DNA was not the only thing that was compromised. They wanted a conviction and probably didn't care how they got it. And I don't say this lightly, seeing as how everyone here knows how much I love Italy.
  2. loulou

    loulou Let It Snow

    Not quite. Knox was sentenced guilty on first degree trial, and by US standards she would not have been granted an appeal - hence, she would have been serving, period. Italian law grants second degree trial and further appeal to supreme court, after first degree trial, which is why Knox is now free in the US. US lawyers pointed that out.

    One could also speculate that in every country, given an unlimited number of tries, a verdict could change. If the lawyers change, if the experts change, if the jury changes, if the judges change, and so on.

    I think you think right. Doesn't mean it is right, though.

    You should rethink your sources: people that died in L'Aquila earthquake were told they could go home and rest reassured. That's why the scientists were sentenced guilty. No one ever sentenced them for not predictiong earthquakes.

    I've answered this once before, and got it wrong (warned though I was unsure). The correct answer would be no.

    For most crimes there's statute of limitation, which doesn't stop once the trial has begun. This is why italian trials are designed to be so long: it's a get out of jail card, that everyone with enough money to stretch things along can buy. Berlusconi's justice troubles accentuated the issue, since he wrote laws meant for this exact purpuse.

    There's no statute of limitation for murder though. So further appeals can always be asked for and granted. Only the Supreme Court can state a definitive sentence: validating, changing partially or totally the previous one; and the Supreme Court's job is only on merit and method (is the sentence legally sound? is it logically sound?), they cannot issue a trial of their own. If the Supreme Court feels like thay don't have enough to sentence they can order a further trial. In Knox case, the Supreme Court issued 14 points of the second degree trial sentence that they found not logically and legally sound, and that's what this last trial was about.

    I'll briefly write about one of those: Amanda's first false declarations.
    When the investigation still hadn't supsects or taken turns, Amanda said that Lumumba had killed Meredith, and that she was in the house and heard the whole thing, she described it in details that match what happened, and were later on confirmed by killer Guede.
    The second degree trial disregarded entirely her declarations, perahps, they said, pressured out of Know.
    Supreme Court noted that, although those declarations could be hold as substanl truth, they could not be disregarded either.
    Because Amanda told them to the police; later on, when she was alone, she wrote them down in her own hand writing and gave the papers to the police; and again later, she repeated the same things to her mother, when the two of them thought they were having a private conversation. So pressure could be seriously questioned.
    Also, she was sentenced guilty of defamation against Lumumba (definitive sentence) based on that declarations, which, evidently, were considered valid in that trial.
    So, in short and not complete, this is one of the 14 issues the Supreme Court asked for more.
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2014
    IceAlisa and (deleted member) like this.
  3. Vagabond

    Vagabond Well-Known Member


    Criminal defendants in the United States do have the right of appeal. As to convicition would have been affirmed or reversed, with a new trial to follow, or even reversed and voided for prosecutorial misconduct, we can only speculate.
  4. poths

    poths Well-Known Member

    Nothing to brag abut, surely! :confused:

    I love how most Americans are experts on this case based on some CNN reports and an Interview on [insert tripe morning show].

    I'm quite confident that the Italian courts can decipher the evidence ....It's regrettable that it took so long, but pleasing that mistakes can be acknowledged and rulings over turned accordingly.

    Amanda Knox is now a proven murderer. . .
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2014
    loulou and (deleted member) like this.
  5. IceAlisa

    IceAlisa discriminating and persnickety ballet aficionado

    Oh good, there is an end in site. Thanks.
  6. poths

    poths Well-Known Member

    I need to leave this thread. Moronic, sentimental, uninformed statements like those above, slightly enrage me.
  7. Skittl1321

    Skittl1321 Well-Known Member


    I think most Americans see value in our double jeopardy laws, something guaranteed to us by our Constitution. Certainly, I don't recall any charge to change them.
  8. Nekatiivi

    Nekatiivi Well-Known Member

    I really feel for Amanda and Rafaello. No one should be sentenced without clear evidence, ever. In this case, there are absolutely no clear evidence (if any) against Amanda and Rafaello. Guede was sentenced and his DNA was all over the murder scene with no trace of Amanda or Rafaello. The end. No sympathy for Kercher family anymore, their bitterness will not bring Meredith back. My heart goes completely out for these two young people who's lives have been ruined because of people feel need to reach some kind of sick atonement.

    I have personally felt how it feels to have your family member to be drag trough courts for something they did not do. Years after years. This happens to innocent people all the time. Living in suspicion and shame and uncertainly really breaks you down mentally. It ruins more than one persons life: the whole family is torn apart. And only because people have need to have someone to blame. All those years made me a very sick person and I don't know if I can ever get better. I hope things turn out better for Knox and Sollecito family than they did for my family.
    BaileyCatts and (deleted member) like this.
  9. taf2002

    taf2002 zexy demon

    You took the words out of my mouth. And yes, I have enough sympathy for more than one person or family. It's just that I don't know Amanda & I have no idea if she deserves my sympathy. The Kercher family clearly does.

    I have been thinking the same thing ever since I even heard of this murder, not just about Americans but about anyone who weighed in with a definite guilty or innocent verdict. Unless a person has seen & heard all evidence & unless he/she was in the courtroom or read all the transcripts, I don't see how anyone can be so convinced they know she did or did not do it.
  10. cruisin

    cruisin Banned Member

    You are correct. I am not sure what the lawyers loulou referenced were talking about.

    And she was also proven not guilty. Whether or not the Italian courts are capable is one thing. However, it is clear that the police botched this. DNA was going to be an issue, simply due to the fact that Amanda lived there. Of course her DNA would be in the rooms. However, it was the layering (if you will). There was no DNA positioned to indicate that Knox was in contact with the crime scene during or after the murder. There was nothing on Knox or Sollecito to indicate they were participants. They behaved strangely, yes. But that could have been for a number of reasons: they had been doing drugs and were afraid of getting caught for that, confusion, shock, fear. None of those things prove they killed her or were involved. We, also, were not present at the interrogation. We have no clear idea of how Knox was questioned and how her answers may or may not have been misrepresented. Interrogation is meant to confuse and get the person to loose track of their statements and admit something. It can also cause a person to admit to things they did not actually understand. Especially in a language they are not fluent in. I cannot say, with certainty, that she had nothing to do with any of it. I can say, that I don't believe she did, based on the evidence. Or rather lack of evidence.
    uyeahu and (deleted member) like this.
  11. Zemgirl

    Zemgirl Well-Known Member

    Are Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito worse off than those "bitter" Kerchers? :rolleyes: Especially Knox, who is in the US and can move on with her life?

    We don't know if Knox is innocent. We do, however, know that the Kerchers' loss is worse than anything that she has experienced, even if she was wrongfully convicted.
    *Jen* and (deleted member) like this.

    SHARPIE In through the out door... Staff Member

    What's that supposed to bloody mean?

    The only sympathy I have for Knox the convicted murderer is that she is currently sporting a pretty tragic haircut at the moment!!
  13. Vash01

    Vash01 Fan of Yuzuru, Medvedeva, T&M, Shibs, P&C

    Who is bragging? I simply asked a question because I didn't know the answer with certainty.

    About Italian courts, I am sure most of them do a good job. It does not mean they didn't botch this case (and there could be other exceptions too that we don't know about). I am not saying US courts are correct 100% of the times. Many verdicts in the USA have been questionable.

    How is Amanda a "proven murderer"? She was acquitted once for lack of evidence. She is innocent until proven beyond reasonable doubt of her guilt, unless Italian law, which I know nothing about, assumes that she is guilty until proven innocent.
  14. Skittl1321

    Skittl1321 Well-Known Member

    The latest trial convicted her- so I think her current status in Italy is "proven murderer".
  15. Vash01

    Vash01 Fan of Yuzuru, Medvedeva, T&M, Shibs, P&C

    Exactly. What happened to the Kercher family is very tragic but that does not mean sympathy is to be limited to them. Depending on their own background, people may feel different levels of sympathy. Amanda being alive, will naturally get less sympathy than her late roommate. It's only natural, but I don't see why feeling sympathy for Amanda is being interpreted as not feeling sympathy for the Kerchers.
    BaileyCatts and (deleted member) like this.
  16. zippy

    zippy Active Member

    Exactly. This isn't a US vs. Italy thing; it happens everywhere. People think the truth will win out in the end and relent under pressure if giving a statement means they can end the interrogation. Here's a good article on false confessions that also addresses the unwillingness of police and prosecutors to accept that the confession/statement was false, sometimes going to extreme lengths to explain away solid DNA evidence that exonerates the confessor. Once a case is going a certain direction, there is often institutional inertia to keep it going that way even in the face of evidence proving them wrong. People have their career and reputations at stake and are invested in being "right". Police want to secure an arrest quickly. Prosecutors want to win their case.

    In the case of Amanda, she was told that the police had hard evidence that she was at her house at the time of the murder, and also that they had proof that Patrick Lumumba was the killer. They told her that Raffaele had given incriminating evidence against her. They kept telling her to imagine what the scene was like if she was there while Patrick killed Meredith and promised she could go if she did so. They had already found hairs that showed a man of African heritage was at the crime scene, and when they saw Amanda's text messages with Patrick, they thought it must be him. Amanda didn't make that scenario up out of the blue; it was suggested to her.
  17. IceAlisa

    IceAlisa discriminating and persnickety ballet aficionado

    How do people who think Amanda and boyfriend are guilty explain the absence of their DNA at the murder scene?
  18. jeffisjeff

    jeffisjeff Well-Known Member

    Except that it apparently is US vs. Italy (or US vs. wherever) to some people on this thread. I mean, as an American, I am disgusted that the US has the death penalty and that likely innocent people have been executed. But WTH does the death penalty in the US have to do with Amanda Knox? And, really, we're going to declare the "mean low intelligence of the population" in the US because we don't like what some people in the US believe about Amanda Knox? And we're going to judge the Italian judicial system entirely based on this case? That'd be like some non-US person watching a few episodes of Dateline or 48 Hours and declaring that the US judicial system is a mess.

    I don't know what to think about Amanda Knox, whether or not she did it and whether or not the process was fair. But many of the comments in this thread make it quite clear that, for whatever reason, very few people seem to be able to view this case objectively.
    galaxygirl, mag, AliasJohnDoe and 7 others like this.
  19. OliviaPug

    OliviaPug Well-Known Member

    Thank you for your sane post.

  20. Nekatiivi

    Nekatiivi Well-Known Member

    I am sure Knox can't move on with her life at the current situation. :roll eyes:

    Of course what happened to Kerchers is extremely terrible but nothing will bring Meredith back. But their statements make it clear that they want Knox and Sollecito in jail even thought they are not sure if these two had nothing do with the murder. I have very little sympathy for that kind of mindset. Young life was lost in vain, why ruin two more for no reason?
    julieann and (deleted member) like this.
  21. julieann

    julieann Well-Known Member

    Until this conviction is overturned and she is once again found innocent of the murder .... bla bla bla...

    Italy is making a mockery of the judicial system. :rolleyes:
  22. cruisin

    cruisin Banned Member

    I can't speak for anyone else. However, for me, it is not a US/Italy issue. Whether it happened in Italy, the US, the UK, or anywhere else, the evidence is not solid and it has been shown that the police compromised the scene, interrogated her for long hours, in a language she was not fluent in, suggested things in manipulative ways, etc. Italy is not alone in this kind of practice. It goes on in the US too. Zippy's post is pretty spot on. for me, it doesn't matter that Knox is American, if she did it, she should be punished. I just don't see anything remotely compelling which proves she did. It is unfortunate that Americans would be blind to justice, if she did it. And equally unfortunate that the Kercher family would want her punished even if she is innocent. I understand the need for closure and for someone to pay, but not if the person didn't do it.

    Is there any real information on how they came to this new conclusion? I mean, when it was overturned, it was pretty straightforward, that they didn't have conclusive evidence.
  23. loulou

    loulou Let It Snow

    Is an appeal granted in the US in any case?

    Maybe my previous post took too long, but not really. Hypothetically, if the Supreme Court keeps ordering new trials, it could go on forever. It'll end, only if both parts decide to not appeal a sentence, or if the Supreme Court states a sentence.

    Funny. You're half mistaking him for a much more talented one. - Raffaele, Raffaello. And to my knowledge, no Rafaellos.
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2014
  24. cruisin

    cruisin Banned Member

    I don't know that appeals are always granted. I believe that new evidence or possibility of misconduct in the original trial need to be presented. I believe that anyone convicted has the right to ask for and have their request for an appeal evaluated. Whether or not they always get it, I can't answer with confidence.
  25. loulou

    loulou Let It Snow

    This is how I view it.

    1) It's hard enough for the educated and trained ones to navigate in trials, but surely none of us has the knowledge (of the science, of the law, of the facts) to say whether the three of them are guilty or innocent.

    2) No country likes to see one of their own on trial abroad. Big and powerful US expecially.
    This case clearly makes an audience, so the US press is bound to talk about it, and the only angle they could explore is innocence.
    Plus Knox family spent good money on PR.
    No wonder the US people are inclined to think the thing is unjust, but they should consider they only get reports from a specific angle.

    3) The angle is opposite in the UK: again press talks about what makes audience, but the only acceptable angle they can work there is guilty.
    UK people have a widely different view than US people.

    4) Italian justice.
    There is no previous episode that would suggest they went after Knox because she was american. Infact, Americans tend to be treated pretty well in Italy, justice wise.
    There's nothing that would suggest italian judges are sub par, infact, maybe it's the opposite.
    There is US pressure going on on this trial. US diplomacy attended the whole thing, and it's been reported to be very active. If I had to bet, I'd say judges will look for a way to not convict Knox, if they can find one that goes with their ethics.

    5) Both knox and Sollecito can count on excellent resources. When Sollecito was found not guilty, his lawyer was sitting in the parlament (on Berlusconi's side), she was head of the parlament justice commettee, she could have influenced the judges career, or at least make their professional life difficult, had she wanted to. I'd call that shit.
    Anyway, I'd bet that if there's so much of an evidence, a procedure, a testimony they can attack they will; they are in the position to leave no stone unturned.

    There really isn't much to add: whatever happens will be at the very least just, as just as humans can be when they make their best effort.
    Except for the Kerchers, of course.
  26. Mayra

    Mayra Well-Known Member

    Don't forget the Lifetime movie with Hayden Panettiere.

    I feel about Amanda Knox much the same way I feel about OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony and John Zimmerman in the states. Guilty as feck but benefiting from lack of forensic evidence, bungled police involvement, shitty prosecution and a good defense team.

    Having said that, I'm not an expert on any of these cases. :shuffle:
  27. Rob

    Rob Beach Bum

    I read somewhere online in that in Italy, suspects cannot be heard under oath so they cannot be guilty of perjury no matter what they say. loulou is this right?

    But defamation is another story. Amanda did falsely accuse someone else (even though this was allegedly suggested to her by police). She isn't the first or last person to confuse fantasy and reality while under duress, but that doesn't absolve her at all - she was very detailed, yet weird, in her statement. She was convicted of "calunnia" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calunnia -- and sentenced to three years (lenient if the wiki is correct about sentencing) and assessed some fines/restitution. She was in jail 4 years, but I don't think she has paid up. If she served her time on that offense, she doesn't deserve to be convicted of murder and sentenced to 25 more years just because of her calunnia. She deserves the 25 years if she helped murder Meredith Kercher.

    I once read the English translations and summaries of the court reports linked here: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Primary_Sources Based on that I had the gut feeling that the murderer (Rudy Guede) is in jail. I am not convinced of Amanda's or Raffaele's guilt or innocence. I doubt a jury would have gotten to "beyond a reasonable doubt" in the US, but this was Italy, and I am not convinced they weren't there. Ambivalent I guess. I haven't read anything from the latest trial.

    I feel worst for the Kerchers because I think they have been convinced that Amanda and Raffaele did this. No matter what happened, they will never feel justice has been done if Amanda doesn't serve her time. That has to be just horrible to live with. Debilitating.

    Apparently Raffaele did make it to Austria before the verdict, but came back to Italy and was picked up there. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/01/31/amanda-knox-ex-boyfriend-in-hotel-near-border/

    just read loulou' post - I agree with all of that post.
  28. loulou

    loulou Let It Snow

    That would make a difference. As far as I'm aware of, there was no miconduct in the first trial, and no new evidence or testimony was presented. They simply had the chance to start over, does that happen in the US? It happens in Italy, which is why Knox is now home free.

    As I said before: given the chance to change jury, judges, lawyers, labs, strategies, in any country this is bound to produce different verdicts.
    Also: when a verdict is read in Italy, all parts get are notified in the specific its motivations, which gives them a chance to correct their strategy where they failed, and makes their job the second time much easier.
  29. cruisin

    cruisin Banned Member

    That sounds pretty fair. Another thing for me is motive. In addition to inadequate evidence, lack of DNA, why? She and Raffaele have no history of violence. And Guede appears to have done it, why would they have been involved?

    Have to agree with this. And if they didn't do it, the Kerchers will never feel justice has been found.

    Loulou, I agree with your post, in general. However, I have no problem with an American being tried abroad and convicted with compelling evidence. As to a screw up. I think that happened within the first few hours/days of the investigation. And I think it would be nearly impossible for the Italian courts to really find out what happened. I believe they will do their best. But, unfortunately too much has been compromised at this point. I don't think either way, guilty or innocent, will ever feel completely comfortable for anyone.
  30. cruisin

    cruisin Banned Member

    I cannot give you an answer re: does it happen here. I could ask my husband or son, they are lawyers. I realize that they did not have to present any of that in Italy. However, I think that Americans see the DNA issue as grounds for a mistrial.

    The one significant difference, here, is that once you have been found not guilty, you cannot be retried for the same crime. Now, I do believe there are ways to get around that. If different evidence comes to light, they can be tried for a different crime.