Amanda Knox/Guilty Again

[Nutz]

So let me get this straight.
First she was found guilty ?
Then she was found innocent ?
Now she's been found guilty ?

Is this a best of seven series ?

LMAO...I really don't think she was found not guilty the second time. I may very well be wrong, but I think she was freed on a technicality then retried in absence.

It wasn't a technicality. It was what is known as a "Corte d'Assise" trail. If she were found not guilty in the first trail, the prosecution would have made an appeal to the Corte d'Assise as well. Instead she made the appeal to the Corte d'Assise. The Corte d'Assise ( Amanda's Appeal) said the DNA was BS, the witness ( who had testified for the prosecution no less than 49 times) was a liar among other things.

So it goes like this: (exactly what is happening to Amanda now)

1st; trial. Guilty.

2nd; trial is the Corte d'Assise ( known in the States as an appeal, either side can appeal in Italy)

3rd; trial ( this one we are talking about in this thread) is an appeal of the above appeal by the prosecutors since they did not agree with the Corte d'Assise.

4th trial ( when it happens) will go to the Supreme Court of Italy, then it will be done.

And she was not found 'innocent' in the Cort d'Assise.

 

[CaféAuLait]

LMAO...I really don't think she was found not guilty the second time. I may very well be wrong, but I think she was freed on a technicality then retried in absence.

It wasn't a technicality. It was what is known as a "Corte d'Assise" trail. If she were found not guilty in the first trail, the prosecution would have made an appeal to the Corte d'Assise as well. Instead she made the appeal to the Corte d'Assise. The Corte d'Assise ( Amanda's Appeal) said the DNA was BS, the witness ( who had testified for the prosecution no less than 49 times) was a liar among other things.

So it goes like this: (exactly what is happening to Amanda now)

1st; trial. Guilty.

2nd; trial is the Corte d'Assise ( known in the States as an appeal, either side can appeal in Italy)

3rd; trial ( this one we are talking about in this thread) is an appeal of the above appeal by the prosecutors since they did not agree with the Corte d'Assise.

4th trial ( when it happens) will go to the Supreme Court of Italy, then it will be done.

And she was not found 'innocent' in the Cort d'Assise.

She was "acquitted of murder" ( not guilty) by the Corte d'Assise. I have never heard of anyone in trial being found 'innocent''. "Guilty" and "Not Guilty" are the only verdicts in Italy as well. The Corte d'Assise is NOT a technicality.

The verdict in English from the Corte d'Assise:

DECLARES

Amanda Marie Knox guilty of the crime under Charge F, without the aggravating circumstance of C.P. Article 61 no. 2, and with mitigating circumstances equivalent to the aggravating circumstance under C.P. Article 368; and sentences her to three years of confinement; confirming, with regard to this charge only, the civil sanctions of the ruling under appeal, sentencing Amanda Marie Knox to the payment of court costs and attorney’s fees incurred at the present level [of appeal] by Patrick Diya Lumumba, in the total amount of 22,170 euros for rights and fees in addition to the reimbursement of general expenses and accessories of law;

ACQUITS

both of the defendants of the crimes attributed to them under Charges A,B,C, and D for not having committed the act, and of the crime under Charge E because the act did not take place; rejecting the request made against them by civil party Aldalia Tattanelli;

ORDERS

the immediate release of Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito if not detained for other cause;

[Order] | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

She was released for the guilty charge in the slander suit since she already served 4 years and was only ordered to serve 3.

 

[Nutz]

It wasn't a technicality. It was what is known as a "Corte d'Assise" trail. If she were found not guilty in the first trail, the prosecution would have made an appeal to the Corte d'Assise as well. Instead she made the appeal to the Corte d'Assise. The Corte d'Assise ( Amanda's Appeal) said the DNA was BS, the witness ( who had testified for the prosecution no less than 49 times) was a liar among other things.

So it goes like this: (exactly what is happening to Amanda now)

1st; trial. Guilty.

2nd; trial is the Corte d'Assise ( known in the States as an appeal, either side can appeal in Italy)

3rd; trial ( this one we are talking about in this thread) is an appeal of the above appeal by the prosecutors since they did not agree with the Corte d'Assise.

4th trial ( when it happens) will go to the Supreme Court of Italy, then it will be done.

And she was not found 'innocent' in the Cort d'Assise.

Ok, show me where she was found innocent. That is all I ask. Show me where an Italian court found Knox INNOCENT.

Her case went through the appeals process, she was released on a technicality, then she was retried and found guilty, once again.

Again, show me where she was found 'innocent by an Italian court. Stupid idiot!

She was "acquitted of murder" ( not guilty) by the Corte d'Assise. I have never heard of anyone in trial being found 'innocent''. "Guilty" and "Not Guilty" are the only verdicts in Italy as well. The Corte d'Assise is NOT a technicality.

The verdict in English from the Corte d'Assise:

DECLARES

Amanda Marie Knox guilty of the crime under Charge F, without the aggravating circumstance of C.P. Article 61 no. 2, and with mitigating circumstances equivalent to the aggravating circumstance under C.P. Article 368; and sentences her to three years of confinement; confirming, with regard to this charge only, the civil sanctions of the ruling under appeal, sentencing Amanda Marie Knox to the payment of court costs and attorney’s fees incurred at the present level [of appeal] by Patrick Diya Lumumba, in the total amount of 22,170 euros for rights and fees in addition to the reimbursement of general expenses and accessories of law;

ACQUITS

both of the defendants of the crimes attributed to them under Charges A,B,C, and D for not having committed the act, and of the crime under Charge E because the act did not take place; rejecting the request made against them by civil party Aldalia Tattanelli;

ORDERS

the immediate release of Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito if not detained for other cause;

[Order] | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

She was released for the guilty charge in the slander suit since she already served 4 years and was only ordered to serve 3.

I appreciate you for taking the time to clear that up. It is important to note, that being acquitted is not the same as innocent or being found not guilty. At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.

Knox was released because an Appeals court said there was an issue with the evidence. The prosecution chose to fix the issues in whatever way they did and retry Knox. In the retrial, she was found guilty. I would say this 'acquittal' in the Italian court is closer to a mistrial than anything.

 

[CaféAuLait]

And she was not found 'innocent' in the Cort d'Assise.

She was "acquitted of murder" ( not guilty) by the Corte d'Assise. I have never heard of anyone in trial being found 'innocent''. "Guilty" and "Not Guilty" are the only verdicts in Italy as well. The Corte d'Assise is NOT a technicality.

The verdict in English from the Corte d'Assise:

DECLARES

Amanda Marie Knox guilty of the crime under Charge F, without the aggravating circumstance of C.P. Article 61 no. 2, and with mitigating circumstances equivalent to the aggravating circumstance under C.P. Article 368; and sentences her to three years of confinement; confirming, with regard to this charge only, the civil sanctions of the ruling under appeal, sentencing Amanda Marie Knox to the payment of court costs and attorney’s fees incurred at the present level [of appeal] by Patrick Diya Lumumba, in the total amount of 22,170 euros for rights and fees in addition to the reimbursement of general expenses and accessories of law;

ACQUITS

both of the defendants of the crimes attributed to them under Charges A,B,C, and D for not having committed the act, and of the crime under Charge E because the act did not take place; rejecting the request made against them by civil party Aldalia Tattanelli;

ORDERS

the immediate release of Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito if not detained for other cause;

[Order] | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

She was released for the guilty charge in the slander suit since she already served 4 years and was only ordered to serve 3.

I appreciate you for taking the time to clear that up. It is important to note, that being acquitted is not the same as innocent or being found not guilty. At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.

Knox was released because an Appeals court said there was an issue with the evidence. The prosecution chose to fix the issues in whatever way they did and retry Knox. In the retrial, she was found guilty. I would say this 'acquittal' in the Italian court is closer to a mistrial than anything.

You're welcome. They did not give anymore evidence, they relied on the same DNA which had been discounted by the DNA experts hired by the Italian Courts. The only witness is a dead, a heroin addict. He had testified for the same dirty prosecutor 49 times., helping the dirty prosecutor to win many trials.

 

[bianco]

So should we demand all American prisoners in foreign nations that don't meet our standards be set free?

Yes, basically.

 

[Nutz]

She was "acquitted of murder" ( not guilty) by the Corte d'Assise. I have never heard of anyone in trial being found 'innocent''. "Guilty" and "Not Guilty" are the only verdicts in Italy as well. The Corte d'Assise is NOT a technicality.

The verdict in English from the Corte d'Assise:




[Order] | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

She was released for the guilty charge in the slander suit since she already served 4 years and was only ordered to serve 3.

I appreciate you for taking the time to clear that up. It is important to note, that being acquitted is not the same as innocent or being found not guilty. At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.

Knox was released because an Appeals court said there was an issue with the evidence. The prosecution chose to fix the issues in whatever way they did and retry Knox. In the retrial, she was found guilty. I would say this 'acquittal' in the Italian court is closer to a mistrial than anything.

You're welcome. They did not give anymore evidence, they relied on the same DNA which had been discounted by the DNA experts hired by the Italian Courts. The only witness is a dead, a heroin addict. He had testified for the same dirty prosecutor 49 times., helping the dirty prosecutor to win many trials.

And she was still found guilty! Are you saying the Italian courts are corrupt or the prosecutor (or perhaps persecutor in your eyes. )

 

[CaféAuLait]

Without following the trial many think Amanda guilty because they heard there was no way Rudy Guede could climb in the window. The video below of the flat shows the exact opposite.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JL6nIkaYLs]Amanda Knox Case: Young Man Demonstrates Climb Up to Window at Murder Cottage. - YouTube[/ame]

The other thing of interest is Rudy Guede was involved in 3 identical crimes BEFORE Meredith was murdered, the only difference is he did not kill until Meredith. All of them involved climbing into high windows and threatening his victims with long knives.

In a taped recording Rudy Guede first stated Amanda and her boyfriend were not involved. It was not until he thought he could get a reduced sentence did he implicate Amanda, a girl he had only met one time.

 

[Katzndogz]

She was found guilty, tried again and found not guilty. Under the Italian system they can have as many trials as they want. On the third trial Knox was found guilty. Of course she was tried in absentia and never put on a defense. This case has nothing to do with NATO.

Was she found not guilty the second time or was it some sort of legal loophole...not an actual trial?

It was an actual trial. Italy does not have a double jeopardy protection. She could be tried a dozen times found innocent and be tried a dozen more.

 

[CaféAuLait]

I appreciate you for taking the time to clear that up. It is important to note, that being acquitted is not the same as innocent or being found not guilty. At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.

Knox was released because an Appeals court said there was an issue with the evidence. The prosecution chose to fix the issues in whatever way they did and retry Knox. In the retrial, she was found guilty. I would say this 'acquittal' in the Italian court is closer to a mistrial than anything.

You're welcome. They did not give anymore evidence, they relied on the same DNA which had been discounted by the DNA experts hired by the Italian Courts. The only witness is a dead, a heroin addict. He had testified for the same dirty prosecutor 49 times., helping the dirty prosecutor to win many trials.

And she was still found guilty! Are you saying the Italian courts are corrupt or the prosecutor (or perhaps persecutor in your eyes. )

LOL not the entire Italian court system, I do believe the prosecutor is corrupt. He was in the middle of his own corruption trial as he was trying Amanda the first time. ( he was found guilty)

I honestly believe the media had a lot to do with her being found guilty the first time.
Reporters there are allowed to pay people for their stories. The more they paid, the juicer the stories got, to include those from the man Amanda falsely accused.

Read Giuliano Mignini story, Amanda's prosecutor. The prosecutors and police can and do write books for money while still employed. Its BS, the juicer the case, the more money.

Read about the "Monster of Florence" serial killings, its enlightening.

 

[emilynghiem]

So should we demand all American prisoners in foreign nations that don't meet our standards be set free?

Why not?

If we are serious about protecting the rights of our citizens then we should not let a foreign country violate those rights.

Okay...I don't necessarily agree with you but you are consistent with your views. I can almost agree with you, especially when American citizens are clearly deprived of due process.

In the case of Amanda Knox...I think she is guilty and should be sent back.

I also suspected she was guilty of SOMETHING because of how she changed her story, and I thought the issue of "buying bleach" had been proven.

It turned out the "bleach" rumors and receipts were not true, but propaganda.
Lies & Misinformation

Besides the reported "Skype Msgs" where Guede confides early on that neither Amanda nor Sollecito were there
http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/rudy-guede/
the most convincing argument of innocence I have heard that makes sense, is that since Meredith lost so much blood in the attack, there was no way anyone could have cleaned up all the hand/foot prints of blood and only leave DNA of Rudy Guede.

He was the only one who had his DNA inside her and his bloody handprints found, etc.
So his conviction is consistent, but why wasn't there any DNA or bloody prints from others?

The DNA of Sollecito was only reported on one area of Meredith's bra strap (and arguably inaccurate as contaminated testing); and the DNA of Amanda was reported on a knife that was argued as not related to the crime or crime scene.

Even the best professionals could not clean up a crime scene that well to remove "all other traces of any DNA whatsoever," and ONLY leave Rudy's DNA (given the amount of blood that was splattered, spilled and spread in the attack all over the place). That was it? Everything else, all blood/DNA, any trace was magically and "selectively" cleaned up?

That just seems highly improbable if not impossible.

What I think Knox and Sollecito were really convicted and punished for was their lifestyle and "drug use" that affected their memories, confidence and image, and ability to answer for themselves, convey their accountability to the public, and defend their credibility consistently when the media circus took off on every single error and rumor they could run with.

Most of the incompetent aftermath, bungling of interviews and investigations, and "public hanging in the media" running wild with character assassination, could have been prevented or at least cut short. People like me, hearing this third and fourth hand, would not have believed all that.

But once their credibility was bazooka'ed, the stories of Amanda "stretching" during breaks from long questioning turned into "doing cartwheels", then it was too easy to add it up into a general assumption they had "done something wrong" and "were acting strangely inconsistent."

I am still trying to understand how Amanda could have bungled up the accusation of the wrong man, which is what did more to make her look guilty than anything else.

It sounds like a bad mix of collective pressure and miscommunication from being interviewed in Italian while she was traumatized. With comments like "she could hear Meredith screams" I am guessing Amanda was sympathizing and imagined her roommate suffering and "envisioned it vividly" and expressed it, which was a mistake because this is hard to explain and will be taken wrong. At one point it seems she really was scared that the man she falsely accused HAD done it; and she blurted this out, feeling it was true. It could be she sensed someone they knew had done it, but guessed the wrong man instead of Guede. If so, Amanda seems overly sensitive to vibes she read by empathy, and was openly verbalizing this to other people, who took it literally and it got her in trouble.

I think Guede and the prosecution took advantage of her as an easy target to manipulate, especially after she messed up. For all I know they really believe she is guilty, so they felt completely justified in manipulating anything they could to get a conviction. She made mistakes that cost her, but not theft or murder. Guede did those crimes and said whatever it took to reduce his sentence as much as they would offer. They wanted to get Knox and Sollecito, so Guede played their game because he had nothing to lose and more to gain.

 

[emilynghiem]

And she was still found guilty! Are you saying the Italian courts are corrupt or the prosecutor (or perhaps persecutor in your eyes. )

Some injustices happen to REMIND us that our justice systems and govts are not perfect.

If we did rely on these, if we always felt the bad guys will get caught and no one else,
we would not try so hard to prevent crime and abuses, but would let "justice take care of itself." We might be content to let the system punish prisoners and not care after that.

Cases like this are a humble reminder of the responsibility we share as a society.

There is no guarantee of justice "after the fact"; we can only commit to making sure we act justly, correct problems in advance, and prevent escalation to crime, violence and murder in the first place. If we can avoid tragedies altogether, then we can further avoid the complicated aftermath that risks adding greater trauma and burden on the families.

No one should have to suffer like this.

Until gross injustice happens to the kid next door, we just assume it only happens to bad people who "must have done something wrong to deserve it." So why change anything?

 

[CaféAuLait]

And she was not found 'innocent' in the Cort d'Assise.

She was "acquitted of murder" ( not guilty) by the Corte d'Assise. I have never heard of anyone in trial being found 'innocent''. "Guilty" and "Not Guilty" are the only verdicts in Italy as well. The Corte d'Assise is NOT a technicality.

The verdict in English from the Corte d'Assise:

DECLARES

Amanda Marie Knox guilty of the crime under Charge F, without the aggravating circumstance of C.P. Article 61 no. 2, and with mitigating circumstances equivalent to the aggravating circumstance under C.P. Article 368; and sentences her to three years of confinement; confirming, with regard to this charge only, the civil sanctions of the ruling under appeal, sentencing Amanda Marie Knox to the payment of court costs and attorney’s fees incurred at the present level [of appeal] by Patrick Diya Lumumba, in the total amount of 22,170 euros for rights and fees in addition to the reimbursement of general expenses and accessories of law;

ACQUITS

both of the defendants of the crimes attributed to them under Charges A,B,C, and D for not having committed the act, and of the crime under Charge E because the act did not take place; rejecting the request made against them by civil party Aldalia Tattanelli;

ORDERS

the immediate release of Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito if not detained for other cause;

[Order] | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

She was released for the guilty charge in the slander suit since she already served 4 years and was only ordered to serve 3.

I appreciate you for taking the time to clear that up. It is important to note, that being acquitted is not the same as innocent or being found not guilty. At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.

Knox was released because an Appeals court said there was an issue with the evidence. The prosecution chose to fix the issues in whatever way they did and retry Knox. In the retrial, she was found guilty. I would say this 'acquittal' in the Italian court is closer to a mistrial than anything.

Yet, it was not a mistrial, but an appeal where she was acquitted. If Amanda had been found 'not guilty' in the first trial, the prosecutor could also appeal to the Corte d'Assise for a different verdict. So the prosecutor can also appeal any verdict he is not happy with to include a verdict of 'not guilty'.

 

[Nutz]

And she was still found guilty! Are you saying the Italian courts are corrupt or the prosecutor (or perhaps persecutor in your eyes. )

Some injustices happen to REMIND us that our justice systems and govts are not perfect.

If we did rely on these, if we always felt the bad guys will get caught and no one else,
we would not try so hard to prevent crime and abuses, but would let "justice take care of itself." We might be content to let the system punish prisoners and not care after that.

Cases like this are a humble reminder of the responsibility we share as a society.

There is no guarantee of justice "after the fact"; we can only commit to making sure we act justly, correct problems in advance, and prevent escalation to crime, violence and murder in the first place. If we can avoid tragedies altogether, then we can further avoid the complicated aftermath that risks adding greater trauma and burden on the families.

No one should have to suffer like this.

Until gross injustice happens to the kid next door, we just assume it only happens to bad people who "must have done something wrong to deserve it." So why change anything?

What again, is the motivation for the Italian court system to create an international incident over framing Amanda Knox for murder? What is the risk/reward factor?

I will admit, I did not follow this case...I just don't think invalidating a finding by the Italian court system is necessary in this case. Of course, if she were being tried in a non-allied nation or canada, my opinion would be different. But, Italy is a friend and they have given Knox every legal courtesy she deserves. My opinion, from the facts that I have seen, she is guilty...or at the very least complicit in one way or the other.

 

[Nutz]

She was "acquitted of murder" ( not guilty) by the Corte d'Assise. I have never heard of anyone in trial being found 'innocent''. "Guilty" and "Not Guilty" are the only verdicts in Italy as well. The Corte d'Assise is NOT a technicality.

The verdict in English from the Corte d'Assise:




[Order] | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

She was released for the guilty charge in the slander suit since she already served 4 years and was only ordered to serve 3.

I appreciate you for taking the time to clear that up. It is important to note, that being acquitted is not the same as innocent or being found not guilty. At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.

Knox was released because an Appeals court said there was an issue with the evidence. The prosecution chose to fix the issues in whatever way they did and retry Knox. In the retrial, she was found guilty. I would say this 'acquittal' in the Italian court is closer to a mistrial than anything.

Yet, it was not a mistrial, but an appeal where she was acquitted. If Amanda had been found 'not guilty' in the first trial, the prosecutor could also appeal to the Corte d'Assise for a different verdict. So the prosecutor can also appeal any verdict he is not happy with to include a verdict of 'not guilty'.

But, she was originally found guilty. There was still enough evidence to retry her after the acquittal/ mistrial. I'll ask you the same question I asked Emily...what is the motivation for Italy to frame Knox?

 

[CaféAuLait]

I appreciate you for taking the time to clear that up. It is important to note, that being acquitted is not the same as innocent or being found not guilty. At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.

Knox was released because an Appeals court said there was an issue with the evidence. The prosecution chose to fix the issues in whatever way they did and retry Knox. In the retrial, she was found guilty. I would say this 'acquittal' in the Italian court is closer to a mistrial than anything.

Yet, it was not a mistrial, but an appeal where she was acquitted. If Amanda had been found 'not guilty' in the first trial, the prosecutor could also appeal to the Corte d'Assise for a different verdict. So the prosecutor can also appeal any verdict he is not happy with to include a verdict of 'not guilty'.

But, she was originally found guilty. There was still enough evidence to retry her after the acquittal/ mistrial. I'll ask you the same question I asked Emily...what is the motivation for Italy to frame Knox?

It's not Italy. It is the prosecutor and the press who spread the mindset of her being some drug addict, whore, dirty piece of scum. And now, IMO, its more about saving face than it is justice.

Have you ever heard of Cynthia Sommer? Her Marine husband died after an illness. After his death she got a boob job and slept with a ton of guys. He was 23 and NCIS and the Prosecutor's ( Laura Gunn and Bonnie Dumanis) could not believe he died of natural causes, even tho the ME said just that, natural causes. They decided she was a whore who killed her husband and hunted her for years. Finally sending pieces of his autopsy off for testing.

They sent them to a military facility AFIP, there they decided that out of the 23 pieces of tissue 2 were highly contaminated with arsenic in fact 1000 times more than naturally occurring, the rest were basically clean with tiny levels which is found is all of us,, there is no way with the way arsenic works it would not have been in all of his tissue samples. AFIP had Never tested for arsenic before this case.

Prosecutor Gunn and Bonnie Dumanis interviewed and hired a ton of experts who all disagreed with her that arsenic killed Todd. She fired them all and finally found one guy who agreed with her and said it was arsenic poisoning. Even with this testimony at trial, (5 highly respected experts were hired by defense after being fired by the pros) that the tissue had been contaminated- Cynthia was found guilty, because she was a whore and had a boob job-during the trial and before the media painted her with a scarlet letter . That is all the Prosecutor had to throw at her during trial. They said she did it for the life insurance. 75 percent of Todd's life insurance was put in trust for his children as soon as she got the money after his death. She spent something like 5 grand on herself. It was also proven the chain of custody in the AFIP lab had been broken on numerous occasions.

She spent 4 years in prison when it was found out Prosecutor Gunn had a second set tissue samples. Cynthia was already appealing. The tissue samples were sent to independent lab, there was not an ounce of arsenic in any of Todd's tissue samples. Cynthia was freed immediately and is suing. Bonnie Dumanis and Laura Gunn were catty and just did not like Cynthia IMO, they had a vendetta. The ME said Todd died of natural causes, they searched and searched until they found something they thought would convict her and hid the rest of the tissue samples which would exonerate her.

The media and prosecutors have a lot of power when it comes to finding one guilty. In Italy the 'jurors' are allowed to listen all they want to the media- media who is paying for juicy stories- most of which were proven false.

Cynthia Sommer's suit against Dumanis proceeds | UTSanDiego.com

 

[Rozman]

Italian courts found her to be guilty, twice. Why shouldn't we respect the Italian judicial system? Why shouldn't we respect Italy, a respected ally and member of NATO?

And in between the 2 guilty verdicts didn't they overturn the first conviction?
If that's no so how was she able to leave that country...

So she's guilty...
Then she's not....
Then she's giulty....

I say we wait a few years and not turn her over to Italy....
Maybe they will change their mind again.

 

[Jarlaxle]

How many times are they going to try her??

Until they can burn the witch!

 

[Jarlaxle]

And she was still found guilty! Are you saying the Italian courts are corrupt or the prosecutor (or perhaps persecutor in your eyes. )

Some injustices happen to REMIND us that our justice systems and govts are not perfect.

If we did rely on these, if we always felt the bad guys will get caught and no one else,
we would not try so hard to prevent crime and abuses, but would let "justice take care of itself." We might be content to let the system punish prisoners and not care after that.

Cases like this are a humble reminder of the responsibility we share as a society.

There is no guarantee of justice "after the fact"; we can only commit to making sure we act justly, correct problems in advance, and prevent escalation to crime, violence and murder in the first place. If we can avoid tragedies altogether, then we can further avoid the complicated aftermath that risks adding greater trauma and burden on the families.

No one should have to suffer like this.

Until gross injustice happens to the kid next door, we just assume it only happens to bad people who "must have done something wrong to deserve it." So why change anything?

What again, is the motivation for the Italian court system to create an international incident over framing Amanda Knox for murder? What is the risk/reward factor?

The prosecutor is a corrupt, evil bastard who is bound and determined to railroad her. Why? Beats me, but he clearly is!

 

[Missourian]

They will put my body in the ground before I ever put it under the jurisdiction of an Italian court.

 

[Nutz]

They will put my body in the ground before I ever put it under the jurisdiction of an Italian court.

Then don't go to Italy.