Should Amanda Knox be freed, extradited, returned to the USA?
- Thread starter WillNever
- Start date
WillNever
Valued Senior Member
SAM: that allegation is unconfirmed in the eyes of all but Italy... who mean very little.
However, if Knox didn't do it and was being punished anyway, do you still think she should get what's coming to her? Because it's their jurisdiction and can do what they want to people's lives?
However, if Knox didn't do it and was being punished anyway, do you still think she should get what's coming to her? Because it's their jurisdiction and can do what they want to people's lives?
Whether it is her footprint is supposition. It's also been claimed that the police coerced her.
Bells
Staff member
The traces of DNA were minute, indicating that she may have handled the knife at some point. Not surprising if you consider how often one might use a knife when cooking and it was in her boyfriend's house.
As for smelling of bleach? What of it? It is not indicative of a crime. Bleach does not always eradicate DNA or its traces. The only thing they found was minute, very minute traces of Knox's DNA on the knife.
Contaminated. The evidence had been handled so many times and frankly, it should not have been enough to even get to trial. The evidence is inconclusive.
Nope. It does not prove in any way, shape or form that they actually committed the crime.
And that is the most perplexing thing about this whole saga.
There was not enough evidence for it to have gone to trial, let alone get to the point where she is found guilty and sentenced.
Which motive? There have been several and it kept changing through the course of the investigation and the trial.
The bias exists because she was sexually active. Lurid details of her sex life were fodder for the Italian media. She apparently even had one night stands.. so of course, she must be guilty. That has been the stance taken by the Prosecution. She killed because of sex.. sex.. sex.. And the media went for it like a pack of wild dogs. It's not because she is a girl. It is because she was a sexually active girl. In a country like Italy. You see the picture now?
That is why there was so much bias. She was found guilty before she even went to trial. The jury was horribly tainted and the evidence provided was laughable at best, tragic at the end when one considers that she was actually found guilty because of it.
The jury were given full access to the media, a very biased media before and during the trial. The prosecutor was allowed to add his own opinion to how the crime apparently happened, without any evidence to back up his claim, something that left many in the legal community completely gobsmacked. The jury got to hear all about his (prosecutor's) own imaginings and the judges did not once put a stop to it.
I mean, seriously? What the hell?
Her story changed many times during the 52 or so hours straight of police interrogation, during which she was also apparently hit in the head by her interrogators.
I would imagine she was probably very confused by that point in time, wouldn't you?
Black middle class Americans insisted OJ was innocent.
White middle class Americans are now doing the same with Amanda Knox.
Oh, she's rich and pretty, she can't be guilty.
She can't be guilty. She's one of us.
The jurors listened to evidence in this case for months and came up with a majority decision very quickly.
My verdict, guilty.
White middle class Americans are now doing the same with Amanda Knox.
Oh, she's rich and pretty, she can't be guilty.
She can't be guilty. She's one of us.
The jurors listened to evidence in this case for months and came up with a majority decision very quickly.
My verdict, guilty.
The Italian court has made sure she will never become rich through writing about this. She could be out of prison within 10 years.
They have awarded substantial damages to the victims family
They have awarded substantial damages to the victims family
There will be an appeal never fear, the case is being tried in the mass media.
Quite the reverse, it would seem. How does a "confused" person decide she was spending all night with her boyfriend [which puts her with the knife, bleach -remember her poor hygiene habits which led to frequent fights - and blood soaked sponge in her BF's home] and later when there is evidence found that she was in the home, she "remembers" that she was at home, which puts her with the body, the cleaned up evidence and the bloody footprints?
No matter which story you decide to believe, she has no rational explanation for her own actions.
She confessed to the crime.
Thats not necessarily indicative of guilt. Haven't you seen Under Suspicion? People confess to all sorts of things under interrogation.
when i go to another country I have the good sense to not break any laws or be under suspicion for breaking laws.
well maybe sex games
never have been under police interagation have you? people under high stress situations forget things and stumble all the time.
There is no doubt that she did not receive a fair trial by American standards, but when in Rome...
Quite so.
When I was in high school, I was called up to the principal's office for an infraction I did not commit. My only errors were guilt by association and other misdeeds.
He quizzed me about events that occurred *months* prior of which I had no recollection (do you remember what you were doing on September the 18th at 4pm?). I pretty much stated that I couldn't remember. However, through the use of threats of suspension and reassurance that if I said X I would be let off the hook, I 'remembered' exactly what he wanted to hear (ie. I was present at Y, and saw X occur, just enough to incriminate myself). Hell, after an hour of threats, coaxing and repetition, I started to wonder if I did see something resembling X on that day. The human memory is a pretty falliable thing, it's *very* easy to plant ideas in a person's head.
Oh, and I was suspended for a week.
The principal was like... 70 years old. He'd been in the job for decades, so I stood no chance whatsoever. I've never been interrogated by the pigs, but I strongly suspect that the same principles of interrogation apply. The suspect is afraid, powerless, confused and often unaware of their rights. Add to that the language and cultural barrier. The police are professionals at making you confused and getting the statements that *they* believe to be true.
Some people have used Knox's continually changing story as 'evidence' of her guilt. Given my own personal experience that I mentioned above, I see it is a normal human reaction to 13 hours (at the very least) of threats, lies and empty promises.
Had Knox been aware of her rights, she would have said only two words. NO COMMENT. Clam up and lawyer up. Even if you are guilty, it's their job to prove it.