[Grenader]

American student Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend have been found guilty by an Italian court of the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.


Knox was heard loudly sobbing as she was led out of court

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8394750.stm

[Xodvbooj]

26 years is quite a sentence.

Her ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito was given 25 years

[antipenq]

A travesty of justice, a sham; more in that vein in these articles. Unbelievably absurd: especially given the facts in connection with the type/quantity of DNA evidence found at the crime scene.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/41279...ml?source=mypi

http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/

excerpt:
The trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito has ended the way it began, as a sad joke at the expense of everyone who cares about justice. Let's go back and summarize the main points of the crime for which Amanda and Raffaele have now been convicted. The story, per Mignini, runs like this:

Seething with resentment over household chores, Amanda recruited two love-sick puppies to restrain Meredith and plunged a huge kitchen knife into her neck, causing her death. Puppy number one ran away leaving a great deal of physical evidence at the crime scene; puppy number two stayed with Amanda to clean the place up and therefore left almost no physical evidence.

[cxddfrxc]

I'd love to nail Amanda Knox.

[MpbY5dkR]

^ if you want a balanced take on this, those are not the best sources.

It's a complex story. The NYTimes:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/05/wo...ef=global-home

Newsweek:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/206765

CNN:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11...nts/index.html

[career-builder]

I'd love to nail Amanda Knox.

You're one sick puppy.

[Forexampleee]

I know!

[downtowndude]

Another sober, well informed article that tries for balance:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/216903

[2puO4Rhf]

V My main contention here has, as stated in my first post, has to do with the particular standards of evidence required in a criminal trial: ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ – that is a heavy burdon that the prosecution failed to meet.

There was no physical evidence that linked Amanda to the crime scene, she was found guilty purely on circumstantial evidence. "Psychosomatic observations" and/or "investigators instinctints" as they were stated be applied in the trial are valid, but not conclusive.

What was that line from the O.J. trial: “if the glove does not fit – you must acquit”.

She may be guilty, but from what little I know about jurisprudence there was no legal basis for the final verdict.

Pardon me, got to go now. Arsenal vs. Stoke City on right now: great game.

Cheers Mate!

[olivelappers]

....
Pardon me, got to go now. Arsenal vs. Stoke City on right now: great game.

Cheers Mate!

Are you English?

[Soulofpostar]

What was that line from the O.J. trial: “if the glove does not fit – you must acquit”.

Oh yes, the OJ trail... an excellent example of justice.

[Fededorbprago]

I'd love to nail Amanda Knox.

I usually get a kick out of your sexualized puns and posts, but not this time, sorry. This is about murder, destroyed lives, and a great deal of misery. Save it for another thread, and another story,s please.

[dmoiknlasd]

Oh yes, the OJ trail... an excellent example of justice.

In the interest of having a "meaningful discussion", try to elaborate on the matter regarding the "standards of evidence" required in a criminal trial - and how you personally believe they were met in this case.

Sorry Fab: but with you it always comes down to - BLAH BLAH BLAH.

Back to Arsenal.

[Aztegjpl]

"Sorry Fab: but with you it always comes down to - BLAH BLAH BLAH."

And with you it always comes down to personal attacks... which no one else has done here but you.

"In the interest of having a "meaningful discussion"" indeed.

And you are a moderator?

---

You want a meaningful discussion about the trail and I post articles from the NYTimes and Newsweek about the case in articles that try to present both sides of the story. Meanwhile you post stuff from a blog with the title:

"A BLOG LOOKING AT THE RIDICULOUS CASE IN ITALY AGAINST TWO INNOCENT SUSPECTS: AMANDA KNOX AND RAFFAELE SOLLECITO"

Case closed.

---

[invest7manager]

The case does seem half-baked, Fabrizio.

26 years is a lot of time to serve if it's undeserved, and both sides seem to have pretty definitively dropped the ball.

Can a mistrial be declared in Italy?




PS They sure make a nice-looking couple. Might that have counted against them?

[hieklyintinee]

If you notice I have not taken sides on this issue.

Read the thread.

[tobia]

From what I understand, a mistrial -- which usually pertains only to improper acts / judicial orders within the court room or jury room -- would have to be declared during the course of the trial. Since the trial is now over it would seem that's not an option.

However, as stated in the NY Times article:

In Italy, it is common for sentences to be reduced in two potential rounds of appeals.

[ferelrossi]

Maybe it was wearing that green coat in court ?


Definitely a mistake.

[ruforumczspam]

This should raise una piuma del collo -- o due ...

An American in the Italian Wheels of Justice

NY TIMES
By LIZ ROBBINS
December 5, 2009

The trial took nearly a year. But now that an Italian jury has determined that Amanda Knox, a 22-year-old American student, is guilty of murdering her British housemate in Perugia, Italy, in 2007, the legal wrangling has in some ways just begun.

The verdict was delivered at the unusual hour of midnight local time, with little explanation but a sentence. From that odd timing that capped a drawn-out trial, to the circumstantial evidence introduced, to the jury — made up of two judges and six civilians — that was not sequestered, the proceedings were so distinct from the American justice system. And so confounding to some.

“It’s a strange case to American ears,” said Alan M. Dershowitz, a prominent criminal defense attorney and Harvard University law professor.

And yet, Mr. Dershowitz called the verdict “totally predictable,” saying that the trial was just a “confirmation of the investigation.”

He added: “This is not the end of the line.”

Ms. Knox and her Italian boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, 25, had been accused of slitting the throat of Ms. Knox’s housemate, Meredith Kercher, 21, of Surrey, England, in November 2007 after a scuffle escalated into their coercing her into a sexual game. Ms. Knox was sentenced to 26 years in prison, and Mr. Sollecito, 25 years. They were tried together. Ms. Knox was also convicted of defamation, as she originally accused her boss, Patrick Lumumba, of the crime before changing her story.

In an earlier trial, a third defendant, Rudy Guede, 22, was sentenced to 30 years for sexual assault and murder, as the judge ruled that he was one of three assailants.

The case, played out in the international media, provoked polarized reactions throughout Italy. But throughout this trial peppered with such unlikely antics by Ms. Knox as cartwheels and grins, her parents complained that the anti-American sentiment was palpable. They claimed the prosecution’s attacks on their daughter’s character were appalling and irrelevant, and based on evidence that was circumstantial. Not surprisingly, they said they would appeal the verdict.

Defense lawyers insisted that prosecutors failed to provide a motive for why Ms. Knox would murder Ms. Kercher.

One leading scholar on international law said that in the context of Italy’s complicated judicial system, and its stark differences with the legal process in the United States, this case could have important international ramifications.

“I think this is a scandal of the first order,” said George P. Fletcher, Columbia University’s Cardozo professor of jurisprudence. “I don’t think this is an expression of anti-Americanism.”

Rather, Professor Fletcher said, this verdict came about because the Italian judicial system has not “adapted correctly” the American judicial system.

“We are the only country in the world that has a real jury system,” Mr. Dershowitz said.

In Italian criminal cases, the jury includes two professional judges, one of whom is the presiding judge in the case. “Many of the European countries have this mixture,” Mr. Dershowitz said. “In general, the lay jurors don’t have as much lay influence as the professional judges.”

Also, the jury is not sequestered until deliberations, opening them to the inflated media coverage of a trial. And in the case of Ms. Knox, there seemed to be leeway about how much inflammatory prejudicial evidence was allowed.

Prosecutors linked Ms. Knox to the murder with forensic evidence that included a D.N.A. sample that was found on the handle of a kitchen knife, although one that was wiped clean and, according to defense attorneys, not the same size as Ms. Kercher’s wounds. In their concluding arguments, the prosecution showed an animated version of how they believe the crime was committed.

And in a sharp departure from American jurisprudence, the prosecutors portrayed Ms. Knox as promiscuous and wanton.

“In the United States, character evidence does not come to play in the trial unless the defendant puts it in play,” Mr. Fletcher said. “The prosecution can’t come into court and say my guy is a bad guy. In this case, even if there a sexual motive, so what if, say, she had a dozen boyfriends? That is not relevant here.”

For his part, Mr. Dershowitz explained in a telephone interview, there is at least one difference between the Italian and the American system that could actually work in Ms. Knox’s favor. “The best chance of getting a fair assessment comes at the appellate stage,” he said, explaining that trial is “more probing.”

As Rachel Donadio writes in The Times:

Unlike in the American system, where appeals center on issues of law, not fact, in the Italian system, defendants can ask to retry the entire case from scratch in the first round of appeals.This is known as a de novo review.

“The chance of getting a reasonable review of the case is fairly high,” Mr. Dershowitz said. “It is a highly circumstantial case. Everybody has to at least acknowledge that there is a plausible claim of innocence.”

Prosecutors had argued for a life sentence for Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito.

“Life sentences are usually reserved for hitmen and mafia murders,” Mr. Dershowitz said. “In Italy at least, the sentence reflects a division. It could be that there are some doubts.”

Moreover, in Italy a jury does not need to be unanimous but only needs a majority to convict on murder. The entire jury deliberates on the verdict, while the judge decides the sentence and awards the damages. How the jury in this case voted has not yet been released, nor has a longer explanation of the verdict. That could take up to 90 days.

In another departure from American law, in addition to the verdict and sentence, Ms. Knox was ordered to pay punitive damages to the Kercher family — about $4.24 million (2.8 million euros) — which happens in the United States only in a civil trial. But those damages are still pending a separate civil trial.

“I think we have to have the courage to condemn this proceeding because we do not want international courts paying attention to this kind of interaction between the common law and the civil law systems,” Mr. Fletcher said.

Ms. Donadio described the Italian court proceedings as “Kafka-esque.”

Or as Mr. Dershowitz acknowledged, the Italian legal system “is not among Europe’s most distinguished.”

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

[Pashtet]

What is funny about this is that I pointed out over and over again in the Berlusconi thread that our justice system, our courts and our judges are beyond screwy. Luca mentioned the same. But we were derided. We even had Midtown posting articles by no-nothing American journalists claiming that the judiciary is the most trusted branch of government in Italy.

I tried to explain otherwise.

The above article also does not mention the importance of the press here in influencing outcomes and our activist journalists.

I also think the article too readily pushes aside anti-Americanism. Our courts (again I mentioned a million times in the Berlusconi thread) are highly politicized. And the Italian left despices the US... so I can just imagine the thrill of being able to send an American to jail.

And in Italy, if you are charged with something, you are guilty until proven innocent.

BUT: I also don't want to give the impression that our courts are particularly harsh... actually in most cases they are probably the most lenient in the world. (Luca also mentioned this).

Be that as it may: IMHO Amanda Fox is guilty. She may not have been the one who actually killed the girl, but IMHO she was involved in the murder. The evidence in the case points to that without a doubt.

And while our system is disfunctional and we have Americans pointing fingers and calling ours “Kafka-esque”, let's remember that just last week a retarded man with an IQ of 68 was executed by the State of Texas. But since it is unlawful to execute a retarded person, the Texas court decided to revert to a childhood IQ score of 86 as a basis to reject an appeal. A scandal. And the man was executed by lethal injection.

But while all Americans know of the trial of this pretty white girl in Italy, there is ZERO interest in this Texas story.

Why is that?

--