Amanda Knox New Motivation Report RE: Meredith Kercher Murder #1 *new trial ordered*

[keeponsearching]

I think there would be evidence of three people in Meridiths room. And on her. Really sad situation. Rudy should of gotten a lot more time in prison. The family really thinks that others were involved. If all media was removed from our minds would people really think that Amanda and Raf were involved. I am not one to convict someone from the medias point of views.


Could someone explain to me the cell phones that were found?

 

[Gardenlady]

Maybe we all need to take a step back from Nancy Grace and her crowd.

There is no evidence that Amanda Knox ever stabbed Meredith Kercher, even if you do think Knox was somehow involved.

Arias admits she stabbed TA 28 times, slit his throat and shot him. (Even at her most foolish, Knox only admitted to being in the next room.)

I don't think the U.S. is superior to other countries. I think the U.S. and Italy are too much alike and often we convict the innocent while letting the guilty go free.

Okay, I can take just about any criticism or accusation, but having myself lumped in with La Nancy and friends is just going too far :crazy:

I think Arias' overkill was due to rage and being pushed to the edge by a society and finally a specific man whose ideals she attempted meet but but was ultimately rejected anyway when it was decided she wasn't up to snuff. It is a case of *advertiser censored*-shaming to the worst degree (which is why I don't even post on the thread), combined with religious and societal hypocrisy about women. I can understand how it came about, though of course not approve it.

In Amanda's case, we have someone involved in what, to me, looks like a night of thievery and mayhem, ending in a murder. Guede, prior to the murder, was nothing more than perhaps a petty thief. if everyone asks how can Amanda, with no real prior violence in her history, suddenly snap, we shoukd also ask why Guede, with no prior real violence, suddenly commit a brutal murder on his own?

And Amanda, being the typical American with racial hangups, blames the nearest black guy, poor Lumumba, who had to sit in jail waiting to be cleared. And the American public, with racial hangups, of course, has no problem believing that Guede, a black man, was responsible for it all, while the innocent, white Amanda, the poor naive American girl alone abroad, is being persecuted for being American. And oh, those awful Italians...mafia, corruption, Berlusconi, all the stereotypical things come to mind for many, I'm sure. Not to mention the crowd that believes the world revolves around the US, and we are the bestest, and Europe is full of corrupt socialists who no doubt love to railroad Americans every chance they get. :crazy:

To be clear, I know you enough from your postings to know that you don't fall into either of those crowds, Nova. but I do believe that these are reasons why Amanda has gotten such a pass from a large part of the American public, who just eat this type of thing up.

FWIW, I do think the guilty verdicts will be reinstated (upheld? Found guilty again? Not sure the terminology to use here, in re Italian law), but that Italy will wisely not insist on extradition.

 

[Gardenlady]

I think a lot of people jump on the 'Amanda is innocent' bandwagon if for no other reason that they see an American being subjected to the rules and laws of a foreign country and those rules and laws are unfair/biased because she is a foreigner. Add in the fact that Knox has a pretty innocent look to her and you can see why many view her in a different light than your average accused.

I have wondered if she would still be looked at in a favorable light if she was accused of the exact same crime in this country (US).

:goodpost:

 

[nursebeeme]

http://abcnews.go.com/International....tsrc=sun?date=50450505?vm=r&s=1#.UVLtzHB9FZ8

moved this over to the currently awaiting trial section.

wow.. I am very surprised at the ruling.

 

[otto]

i believe amanda stated she'd overheard paramedics or police talking at the scene...

She didn't speak or understand the Italian language.

 

[nursebeeme]

I am combining this thread with the other one on the case (we are shifting over to the currently awaiting trial forum)

 

[otto]

She would be a fool to return for this joke. jmo

Italian law cannot compel Knox to return for the new trial, and one of her lawyers, Carlo Dalla Vedova, said she had no plans to do so.

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020645788_knoxappealxml.html

Dalla Vedova dismissed the “double jeopardy” concern, insisting the high court’s ruling on Tuesday hadn’t decided anything about the defendants’ guilt or innocence, but merely ordered a fresh appeals trial.

Knox and Sollecito were found guilty. The verdict was appealed and the result was that evidence that was used to convict Guede, Knox and Sollecito was determined to be contaminated when related to Knox and Sollecito but not contaminated when related to Guede.

That appeal decision has been thrown out because it was illogical, so at this point, Knox and Sollecito are still considered guilty. A new appeal will be heard in the next year or two.

If the original verdict is confirmed, and the appeal is unsuccessful, then Italy will probably seek extradiction of Knox. She may be protected by the US and she may well be free to do as she pleases in the US, but she will be arrested by Interpol if she leaves the US. She is already restricted in travel because of her conviction for falsely accusing an innocent man of murder ... most countries don't allow convicted criminals that have spent time in jail to visit.

 

[otto]

Dershowitz can be great on issues of constitutional law, but I seriously doubt he knows anything about this case.

According to the Harvard Law professor, this is true:

"And the extradition treaty's reference to double jeopardy may not be binding in some cases, he said. "In the United States, generally, when you appeal a conviction, you waive your double jeopardy rights, and we permit retrials of people who have had their convictions reversed, at least on procedural grounds," he said."

Is there any reason to doubt this?

 

[otto]

Not only that. The SC also crushed the part where the appeal court concluded that there was no link between the accusation and the murder. Of course there is a link. The next appeal court will realize this and this makes it an uphill battle for the defense team. IMO Knox has to fear for an increased sentence this time. I expect that her ex-bf won't take the fall by himself if Knox tries to stay in the US but that is still far away. For now I am very pleased for the Kercher family and there will be justice for their murdered daughter, Meredith Kercher.

Do you think that the Kercher family will pursue financial compensation from Knox or Sollecito now that the murder convictions still stand?

 

[Boytwnmom]

According to the Harvard Law professor, this is true:

"And the extradition treaty's reference to double jeopardy may not be binding in some cases, he said. "In the United States, generally, when you appeal a conviction, you waive your double jeopardy rights, and we permit retrials of people who have had their convictions reversed, at least on procedural grounds," he said."

Is there any reason to doubt this?

Yes. It's misleading.

In the US only the convicted criminal can appeal. So, they are essentially "waiving" double jeopardy by having a court consider the same case. Of course they "waive" it they want to appeal and have their conviction be overturned. Once that happens they are free and the state has no right to appeal. Since Knox's appeal found her to be actually innocent, under US law that's it and would be it regardless of the reason for
the conviction being overturned. That case against her is over and I can't imagine the US cooperating in any way to subject her to trial or punishment that would be unconstitutional in the US.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[SusieD]

I think a lot of people jump on the 'Amanda is innocent' bandwagon if for no other reason that they see an American being subjected to the rules and laws of a foreign country and those rules and laws are unfair/biased because she is a foreigner. Add in the fact that Knox has a pretty innocent look to her and you can see why many view her in a different light than your average accused.

I have wondered if she would still be looked at in a favorable light if she was accused of the exact same crime in this country (US).

I read everything I could get ahold of on Knox and base my opinion on that.

And to your second question, the idea that she would be charged and tried for 1st degree murder with zero evidence (except some alleged description of her behavior at the police station) after someone else, someone whose DNA was in the dead woman and all over the place and had no ties to Knox was already convicted.....well that's just laughable. We never would have heard of Amanda Knox except as roommate of a woman who was killed.

 

[dgfred]

Where do you get the 'zero evidence' part?

 

[Gardenlady]

I read everything I could get ahold of on Knox and base my opinion on that.

And to your second question, the idea that she would be charged and tried for 1st degree murder with zero evidence (except some alleged description of her behavior at the police station) after someone else, someone whose DNA was in the dead woman and all over the place and had no ties to Knox was already convicted.....well that's just laughable. We never would have heard of Amanda Knox except as roommate of a woman who was killed.

Yes, because we all know that NEVER happens in the US.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Amanda Knox book, interview go on as planned

16 hours ago

SEATTLE (AP) — Amanda Knox's memoir and interview with ABC's Diane Sawyer will go on as planned, despite an Italian court overturning her 2011 murder acquittal...

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/entertainment/20130326/US--Knox-Book/

 

[dgfred]

Amanda Knox is nothing like Jody Arias. Nor are the crimes of which they are accused in any way similar. One has to carefully cherry-pick evidence to make them seem at all alike.

Jody Arias first said she was not there. AK did too.

JA then said someone else killed Travis. AK next said Patrick killed Meredith after RS dropped her alibi.

After some time... JA now said she had to kill Travis. Maybe that is how AK lives with herself.

Travis had his throat cut. So did Meredith.

Travis had additional stab wounds and bruising. So did Meredith.

Jody did a headstand... AK did a cartwheel. :floorlaugh:

Jody called Travis' phone after killing him. AK briefly called both Meredith's phones after she was dead (not while standing outside Meredith's door btw).

Jody had memory problems regarding the time period of the murder. AK did too.

A intelligent male likely doesn't really want either for a girlfriend these days.

They have the same birthday! :shush:

 

[otto]

If there are no bare prints leading to the bloody bare print on the bathmat... there WAS a clean-up.

That is not even close to zero.

There is no question that there was a clean up. We have Guede's shoe prints going directly from Meredith's bedroom out the front door. Then we have a bloody bare foot print on the bathmat, but no bare foot prints leading to and from the bathmat. The only people that were in the flat between the murder and the arrival of police are Knox and Sollecito. Someone with a hammer toe (Sollecito) stepped in blood with bare feet and then stepped on the bathmat. That person seems to have cleaned up the scene, especially the bare foot prints leading from Meredith's bedroom to the bathroom.

 

[SusieD]

Yes, because we all know that NEVER happens in the US.

Find me a case where someone has been convicted on very strong DNA and circumstantial evidence (and admitted he raped and killed the woman to0, don't forget that) and AFTER that conviction someone unconnected to the convicted killer was put on trial.

<modsnip>.

 

[otto]

Yes. It's misleading.

In the US only the convicted criminal can appeal. So, they are essentially "waiving" double jeopardy by having a court consider the same case. Of course they "waive" it they want to appeal and have their conviction be overturned. Once that happens they are free and the state has no right to appeal. Since Knox's appeal found her to be actually innocent, under US law that's it and would be it regardless of the reason for
the conviction being overturned. That case against her is over and I can't imagine the US cooperating in any way to subject her to trial or punishment that would be unconstitutional in the US.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Are you thinking that the US would never extradite a US citizen to a country where the judicial process allows for both the defense and the prosecution to appeal a verdict?

 

[SusieD]

Where do you get the 'zero evidence' part?

I mis-spoke, it should have been

"zero credible or believable" evidence

 

[otto]

I read everything I could get ahold of on Knox and base my opinion on that.

And to your second question, the idea that she would be charged and tried for 1st degree murder with zero evidence (except some alleged description of her behavior at the police station) after someone else, someone whose DNA was in the dead woman and all over the place and had no ties to Knox was already convicted.....well that's just laughable. We never would have heard of Amanda Knox except as roommate of a woman who was killed.

If three people are convicted of murder during two separate trials, is it true that two of the murderers must be innocent because the first murderer has had his conviction confirmed?