| 0 |
Subject: Railroading a college student for murder in Italy?
Posted by: Perm Dude
- [154552311] Thu, Jun 11, 2009, 23:28
The "case" against Amanda Knox
Interesting how perspective can change everything about a case.
MBJ, have you heard about this case? |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 85 | beastiemiked
ID: 67181118
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 14:23
|
Claiming she is innocent is going to far. By all accounts there's a ton of questions surrounding her story the night of the murder. Her story of that night just reeks of someone that is hiding something. Some of her reasons for doing things are just plain ridiculous.
|
| 86 | bibA
ID: 48627713
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 15:15
|
All you guys who KNOW she is in fact innocent ought to let the Kercher family, who apparently still believe Amanda to be guilty, in on just who is responsible for the murder. Many would say they and Meredith Kercher were the victims in this case instead of Amanda.
I know for certain that I don't know who is actually guilty of the murder, and I don't think beastiemiked is saying he does, it just seems that so many seem to have all the knowledge necessary to proclaim Amanda innocent for sure. There was some evidence besides the DNA samples in this case, and who around here is willing to say for sure that the DNA evidence they did have wasn't actually from the suspects that the police and prosecution allege?
|
| 87 | Boldwin
ID: 35615181
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 15:34
|
I've been meaning to ask what the innocent version of that night was. I'm agnostic on this story until I hear a believable version where she and her boyfriend are innocent. What is the status of the boyfriend? Still in prison? Sorry I really haven't been reading every link on this one.
|
| 88 | biliruben
ID: 59551120
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 15:39
|
They were both acquitted I believe.
Evidence was circumstantial. Prosecutor was an ahole. Who the heck knows if she was innocent, but they couldn't reasonably prove she was guilty.
Fly, be free.
|
| 89 | Tree
ID: 41512710
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 15:44
|
the prosecutor had no business being the one to try the Knox case, as he was under investigation for a myriad of charges related to abusing his position, charges he was eventually convicted of.
in fact, in the US, he wouldn't have been trying a case while facing indictment himself.
|
| 90 | Boldwin
ID: 35615181
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 15:49
|
If you care enuff to give me the Cliff's Notes version, what was the strongest thing that convinced the jury and what's the strongest argument for their innocence?
|
| 91 | Boldwin
ID: 35615181
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 15:51
|
I'm from Illinois. I totally understand there are prosecutors who don't belong in court. It doesn't make her innocent, necessarily.
|
| 92 | Great One
ID: 574139
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 15:52
|
The amount of DNA on the knife they tried to pin on them was minuscule and below accepted standards for DNA. The person who used the knife could have touched anything in the house that had Knox's DNA on it i.e. a door knob and that trace amount was transferred to the knife. So it has to be thrown out.
|
| 93 | Great One
ID: 574139
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 15:57
|
From what I understand, the (fraudulent) DNA was main connection and what they used to convict.
Then the Italian media tried to paint her as a criminal - i.e. photos of her out buying underwear the next day was supposed to be scandalous and she was unremorseful cause she was out shopping, but what they didn't mention was that the house was on lockdown and she didn't have any clothes.
|
| 94 | Boldwin
ID: 35615181
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 16:05
|
Very helpful. I buy that as far as those go.
|
| 95 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 16:05
|
From all accounts being pushed in the American media she is not guilty. This was a big story in Europe, especially in the UK, way before it reached American and things are not always what they appear.
re 87: which one, she has told like 15 different accounts, I would say she did not kill the girl but she had a hand in it.
|
| 96 | Perm Dude
ID: 420241913
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 16:08
|
No one even came close to proving she did it. She doesn't have to prove she's innocent. She doesn't have to act innocent, and she doesn't have to keep to a single story to remain, in fact, innocent.
|
| 97 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 16:10
|
I find this story bonusly interesting because everyone is convinced she was innocent while most of the world was convince Casey Anthony was guilty, though both cases were based on circumstantial evidence. Oh how the media spins people.
|
| 98 | Boldwin
ID: 35615181
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 16:12
|
I get that the burden of proof in a capitol case is on the state and it has to be robust, but where does the passionate conviction she was totally innocent come from?
|
| 99 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 16:23
|
I am going to assume that is from what the media has told them. Either you are guilty of murder or you are not guilty of murder, not you are guilty of murder or you just let the guy in to kill your roommate.
|
| 100 | beastiemiked
ID: 67181118
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 17:05
|
Very brief summary on the case. If you start researching further you'll see a bunch more holes in her story. Not only that but she pointed the finger at someone that was actually innoncent, Lumumba. Stay class Amanda.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/8803077/Amanda-Knox-Guilty-or-innocent-five-reasons-why.html
|
| 101 | Seattle Zen
ID: 10732616
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 17:43
|
Reason #285 that being wrongly accused of murder really sucks: Even after you are exonerated, when an appellate panel rules not that the Prosecution did not act properly or didn't meet it's burden of proof, but that you were ACTUALLY innocent, there will still be millions of people who are only barely reading a story or two who will never believe you didn't kill someone.
The difference between Casey Anthony's case and hers is the difference between night and day. In Anthony's case, she was the only plausible suspect and no one will ever been convicted of that crime. We already know who killed Meredith Kercher, his name is Rudy Guede and he was convicted of this crime in 2007. The only place where Knox and boyfriend acted in concert with Guede was in the sick, twisted mind of the megalomaniac prosecutor.
There is a chasm a mile wide between proving a crime where one acted alone and proving that someone or multiple people were "also there" and acted in concert. Be very weary of charges of conspiracy without solid evidence.
|
| 102 | Seattle Zen
ID: 10732616
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 17:45
|
Hey beastiemike - Until you have been accused of murder and questioned for 11 straight hours in a language foreign to you, you don't have the faintest idea of what you would say.
Stay classy, indeed.
|
| 103 | beastiemiked
ID: 67181118
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 17:55
|
I will. Go ahead and stay blinded by the Amanda Knox press machine.
|
| 104 | Tosh
Leader
ID: 057721710
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 18:34
|
The Knox grandparents live on the same street as me in my small town. Great people. See them regularly while we are walking dogs. I am glad this situation is over for them.
|
| 105 | Perm Dude
ID: 420241913
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 19:54
|
Boldwin, this wasn't a capital case because Italy has no death penalty.
|
| 106 | sarge33rd
ID: 38947410
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 20:19
|
re 90...you seem to think it necessary to prove innocence. You have it bassackwards (as usual) The State must prove Guilt. Lacking such proof, innocence is assumed.
|
| 107 | bibA
ID: 48627713
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 20:52
|
jeez sarge, he was only asking for the strong points from both sides.
|
| 108 | sarge33rd
ID: 38947410
Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 22:03
|
Point is bibA, there need not be ANYTHING from the defense. Nothing at all. If the State fails to meet it's burden, trial over...everyone go home. The state, is the only "side" with a burden of proof to be met.
|
| 109 | Khahan
ID: 373143013
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 08:25
|
To be honest, none of us know what happened that night to Meredith Kercher. We don't know if Amanda Knox is guilty or innocent. There has been so much information and misinformation about this case its nearly impossible to weed thru it all.
We don't know who is truly to blame for Meredith Kercher's murder. But we do know who is to blame for the mess that this trial became - the prosecuting attorney. He botched this whole thing, plain and simple. If Amanda Knox is guilty, then the prosecutor did such a poor job of handling evidence, examining evidence and getting hard proof that he just let her walk free.
And if Amanda Knox is innocent, then that poor girl just 4years of her life because of an incompetent DA who can't properly prosecute a case based on its facts instead of on his image.
That prosecutor should be disbarred (or whatever the Italian equivalent is).
|
| 110 | weykool
ID: 58814232
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 11:21
|
Sarge:
For most of us we are savvy enough to recognize the difference between being found not guilty in a court of law and being actually not guilty.
OJ Simpson was found not guilty but he was guilty as sin.
Boldwin's questions are entirely valid.
As Khahan has pointed out it looks like we will be unlikely to draw a conclusion one way or another.
|
| 111 | Razor
ID: 33520166
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 11:29
|
When no conclusion can be drawn, we should be happy that a potentially innocent person was not thrown in jail to rot, which is a bigger worry than letting a potentially innocent person walk free.
|
| 112 | sarge33rd
ID: 37922510
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 11:37
|
We dont have to draw any conclusions WK. The Italian Court, found IN FACT that neither Knowx or her boyfriend committed the crime,. the ocurt did not merely fiond them "Not Guilty" as in unproven, but "Not Guilty" as in DID NOT DO THE CRIME., In point of fact, innocent.
link
The jury had two options to acquit: determining there wasn't enough evidence to uphold the conviction or that the pair simply didn't commit the crime. The jury determined the latter, clearing Knox and Sollecito completely.
Now, this should lay it to rest. Knox, is not only not guilty as in unproven...she is not guilty as in...I didnt commit the crime, and neither did she.
|
| 113 | Perm Dude
ID: 4992510
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 11:38
|
As in Rudy Guede, who is in jail right now, did the crime.
|
| 114 | bibA
ID: 48627713
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 11:59
|
PD, you sure about that? Maybe Diya "Patrick" Lumumba committed the murder. Isn't that what Amanda maintained?
|
| 115 | beastiemiked
ID: 67181118
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 12:42
|
So one jury finds them guilty and the other jury that has less information presented to them finds them not guilty. Just because one happens after the other one doesn't make it the "truth". There's a ton of evidence against Knox and her bf. A lot of it circumstantial that could be dismissed if it was just 1 or 2 pieces but put the 20 or so pieces together and it's pretty damn hard to argue that they are "innocent".
Why was Amanda so concerned about the knife before it was even tested for DNA? She was concerned Raf might've planted her fingerprints on it before it was even tested.
What about the staged break in? I'm assuming most of free Amanda Knox people think it wasn't staged. However, look at the location of the window, the fact the shutter had to be open before it needed to be broke,how Rudy somehow climbed into the window and left zero DNA evidence in the room, how the room was ransacked yet nothing was taken, how glass was found on top of all the clothes that were ransacked. How is that explained?
What about the duvet over the body or the bra that was taken off after the murder? Why the hell would Rudy stick around to take her bra off and put a duvet over her after she had been dead for a few hours.
What about Raf's blood footprint on the bath mat?
Why was Meredith's door locked and the key gone? Do people really believe that Rudy decided to leave a crap in the toilet but decided he better lock Meredith's door and take the key?
What about all the crime scene experts that claim that the murder had to be done by more than 1 person?
I won't even go into the lies that Amanda and Raf told the police and how both their stories changed a few times.
|
| 116 | sarge33rd
ID: 37922510
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 12:51
|
A crooked prosecutor...nuff said.
|
| 117 | beastiemiked
ID: 67181118
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 13:26
|
I'm sure Meredith's family loves that excuse.
|
| 118 | weykool
ID: 343561414
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 16:28
|
Now, this should lay it to rest. Knox, is not only not guilty as in unproven...she is not guilty as in...I didnt commit the crime, and neither did she.
The jury verdict does nothing of the sort.
In their opinion there wasnt enogh evidence to convict her.
Or do you maintain that the police didnt beat Rodney King because a jury found the officers innocent?
Confusing a jury opinion with fact is an all too common mistake.
Like the time you stole that cookie and your mom knew you took it, but didnt catch you in the act or have enough evidence that you took it so she decided not to send you to your room.
It doesnt change the FACT that you took the cookie.
|
| 119 | sarge33rd
ID: 37922510
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 16:36
|
WK, the Italian Courts and American courts are not the same, the Italian court found; That Amanda Knox did not commit the crime.
The link in my 112, and the quoted portion of that article; are sufficiently clear. The Italian court had 2 possible findings as it pertained to "Not Guilty". (1) Not sufficient evidence to support the conviction or (2) That she did not commit the crime. The court found, that she did not commit the crime.
You, beastie and anyone else who cares to...is free to argue amongst yourselves all you want. The court findings are in, she did not commit the crime and tomorrow is still another day ending in 'y'.
|
| 120 | Seattle Zen
ID: 10732616
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 17:50
|
sarge - don't bother responding to weykool, he has never shown the ability to read an article on the internet and comprehend it. Of course he doesn't know the difference between the Italian judicial system and ours and no amount of explaining it to him will change his mind.
It's all black-n-white for weykool: Once you have been charged with a crime, you are guilty. Sure, some people may walk, but we all know you did it.
|
| 121 | sarge33rd
ID: 37922510
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 18:46
|
I am reminded by some, of an instructor of mine when I went thru MP Investigator School. He cautioned us, that almost all the guilty people will maintain their innocence; so dont believe it for one second.
I then raised my hand and asked a question "And what do the innocent people maintain?"
|
| 122 | bibA
ID: 48627713
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 19:53
|
er, the innocent people make up stories and accuse another innocent person of doing it?
|
| 123 | sarge33rd
ID: 37922510
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 20:16
|
You are/were in LE right bibA? Then y9ou know, the stress any individual is put under, during interrogation. The lies told to try and trick the subject into incriminating themselves. The time, dragging on and on and on and on. The fatigue, the duress. Now, imagine that in a foreign country,m a foreign language, and foreign customs. Then, ignore the fact that YOU are a trained professional and imagine yourself a scared sh*tless 20 yr old (or so) college student.
The court found her in FACT, not guilty of committing any crime.
I'm content with that. Had they found her guilty, I'd be satisfied with that too. THEY saw the evidence, and THEY must make the decision. And its done.
|
| 124 | Perm Dude
ID: 420241913
Wed, Oct 05, 2011, 20:16
|
Sure, when faced with an agressive prosecutor seemingly intent on pinning this on one.
|
| 125 | bibA
ID: 48627713
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 09:57
|
link
It appears to me that the Italian court found that there was insufficient evidence to convict, not that they were unequivocally saying that the defendants were in fact innocent.
I certainly do not know whether they committed the crime, it's just that I find it curious that persons who normally are open minded are so adamant that Amanda Knox is in fact innocent. I sometimes wonder if her beauty has a lot to do with the strong opinions supporting her.
|
| 126 | bibA
ID: 48627713
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 10:00
|
From the above link: Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellmann said in a state TV interview that "maybe" the two defendants know what happened in the 2007 slaying of Meredith Kercher in the flat the two women shared in Perugia, the Umbrian town where they were student.
Hellmann, who was also one of the eight jurors, said "the real truth could be different." But based on trial evidence, the jury acquitted them, he said. In Italy, the presiding judge is part of the jury, along with another judge, and six civilians.
In his first public comments since Knox and her Italian co-defendant, Raffaele Sollecito, were acquitted Monday night, the judge stressed on state TV that the verdict was the fruit of the "the truth that was created in the trial."
"But the real truth could be different," Pratillo Hellmann added. "They could also be responsible, but the proof isn't there."
|
| 127 | beastiemiked
ID: 67181118
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 10:44
|
The facts of the case don't lie. Maybe she deserved to get off in the eyes of the law because of an overzealous prosecutor. I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. However, if you look at the facts objectively you'll begin to see just how many coincidences had to line up for her to be not involved. It's a astronomical number. Maybe she's the million to 1 that had all these crazy coincidences happen and still not be involved.
|
| 128 | Seattle Zen
Leader
ID: 055343019
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 11:10
|
A series of "unanswered questions" is not a "ton of evidence" beastie. We get it, you have read a bunch of salacious articles from the UK who are hell bent on continuing the lie that the proclamations of one prosecutor equals the truth. You ought to introduce yourself to Building 7 and Nerveclinic because I'm sure you would gobble up their WTC conspiracies, plenty of unanswered questions there.
To me, however, you sound an awful lot like the donkey who maintains that he was right to go all in on his one outer and nothing will change his mind.
I'm done with this thread.
|
| 129 | beastiemiked
ID: 67181118
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 11:54
|
Those unanswered questions are all forms of evidence. Individually they could be dismissed but together they point a pretty big finger directly at Amanda and Raf.
I'm not maintaining that I'm right. I've read a lot about the case and everything that wasn't on pro amanda website points to her being involved. This includes independent sources that have no pony in the race. If you can't be objective and argue the finer points of the evidence then I'm glad you are done with the thread.
|
| 130 | bibA
ID: 48627713
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 12:43
|
Nancy Grace has proclaimed that Amanda is guilty......which tells me that she is actually innocent.
|
| 131 | Boldwin
ID: 35615181
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 13:01
|
That would be my first inclination.
|
| 132 | sarge33rd
ID: 52922613
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 14:22
|
No beastie...unanswered questions most certainly are NOT evidence. Like SZ.....I'm done here.
|
| 133 | sarge33rd
ID: 52922613
Thu, Oct 06, 2011, 14:45
|
one last comment, as for Nancy Grace...she has never met an accused, she wouldnt gleefully have executed.
|
| 134 | Tree
ID: 321401618
Thu, Feb 16, 2012, 19:42
|
don't want to start another thread, but here's another American apparently being railroaded.
Since last summer, a former Peace Corps volunteer from Washington state has been wasting away in a Nicaraguan prison, wrongfully convicted of international drug trafficking, money laundering and organized crime, his supporters say.
lots of head-scratching stuff in there...
|
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: Railroading a college student for murder in Italy?
|