Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#10

[Monzoo]

This may be off-topic but it does speak to the judgement of Italy's Supreme Court

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-year-old-not-abusive-Italian-court-rules.htm

Assuming this story is accurate it does not reflect well on their judgement.

Link didn't work for me. :-(

 

[SMK]

This may be off-topic but it does speak to the judgement of Italy's Supreme Court

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-year-old-not-abusive-Italian-court-rules.htm

Assuming this story is accurate it does not reflect well on their judgement.

Link did not work - are you talking about the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation overturning a conviction for a 60 year old social worker found naked in bed with an 11 year old girl, due to his feelings of love for her?

Jailed paedophile, 60, has conviction overturned after 11-year-old victim says she loves him and Italian judge rules it ‘a romantic relationship’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...turned-11-year-old-victim-says-loves-him.html

 

[Amber29]

Amber, I'm not sure if you saw my post a few pages back I'm interested to know if you agree with Crini they left Raffaele's apartment after trying to watch a cartoon at 9.26pm and arrived at the cottage by 9.31pm? Did they find Guede there and the murder sex orgy happened in 30 minutes?

What in your opinion made them want to leave Raffaele's apartment after loading a cartoon on his computer?

You have a source I can look at that isn't in Italian? I'd like to read this.

 

[Monzoo]

Under Italian law, sex is consensual unless a child aged 10 or under files a complaint. So there is nothing illegal about the Court of Cassation's ruling on this matter. They are in fact upholding Italian law. It was the same in the US in the 19th century.

I'd love to know the source for that. Not saying you are wrong, I'd just love a source. Assuming you are correct, I think this is a case where clearly the law is allowing something that, by most western standards, would be considered morally and ethically wrong if not illegal.

How will this relate to the case under discussion? Probably not at all. I could see a couple of ways it could relate, however.

1. If AK and RS are convicted, and Italy applies for extradition, this could be used to highlight the "wrongness" of the Italian legal system by her supporters and legal team and make extradition politically untenable for a US judge. It is my opinion that if it got to that point, any extradition would have more to do with politics than law.

2. If this case angers Italians to the point that there is an overhaul of the Italian legal system, specifically the working of the Supreme Court. Who knows what this could mean to future appeals.

 

[SMK]

I'd love to know the source for that. Not saying you are wrong, I'd just love a source. Assuming you are correct, I think this is a case where clearly the law is allowing something that, by most western standards, would be considered morally and ethically wrong if not illegal.

How will this relate to the case under discussion? Probably not at all. I could see a couple of ways it could relate, however.

1. If AK and RS are convicted, and Italy applies for extradition, this could be used to highlight the "wrongness" of the Italian legal system by her supporters and legal team and make extradition politically untenable for a US judge. It is my opinion that if it got to that point, any extradition would have more to do with politics than law.

2. If this case angers Italians to the point that there is an overhaul of the Italian legal system, specifically the working of the Supreme Court. Who knows what this could mean to future appeals.

It would appear that information which I gleaned from an unreferenced source is probably wrong. From wikipedia age of consent laws in Europe: (I will delete that post):

Italy[edit]

The age of consent in Italy is 14 years, with a close-in-age exception that allows those aged 13 to engage in sexual activity with partners who are less than 3 years older. The age of consent rises to 16 if one of the participants has some kind of influence on the other (e.g. teacher, tutor, adoptive parent, priest).[42] Not knowing that the victim is underage is not a legal defence, except it was unavoidable ignorance.[43] If the minor involved is under the age of 10, the crime can be punished even without a complaint and the punishment is aggravated.[44] It is also illegal to perform sexual acts in the presence of a minor aged less than 14 with the intent of allowing the minor to witness the acts, even if they do not take an active part.[45]
See also related Wikisource articles from the Italian Criminal Code (in Italian). See also more related articles from Interpol website (in French).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Italy

 

[aa9511]

I'd love to know the source for that. Not saying you are wrong, I'd just love a source. Assuming you are correct, I think this is a case where clearly the law is allowing something that, by most western standards, would be considered morally and ethically wrong if not illegal.

How will this relate to the case under discussion? Probably not at all. I could see a couple of ways it could relate, however.

1. If AK and RS are convicted, and Italy applies for extradition, this could be used to highlight the "wrongness" of the Italian legal system by her supporters and legal team and make extradition politically untenable for a US judge. It is my opinion that if it got to that point, any extradition would have more to do with politics than law.

2. If this case angers Italians to the point that there is an overhaul of the Italian legal system, specifically the working of the Supreme Court. Who knows what this could mean to future appeals.

I believe the U.S. courts have had many rulings over its lifetime that other countries would look at as "morally and ethically wrong."

On your #1 point, so basically they will try to pressure the judges? It almost seems like blackmail. "Do what I want or else I'll release this little tid-bit into the media and let's see how your career fares after that......BWAHAHAHAHA......". That does not seem right to me, does it to you? I don't know, is it judges who make the decisions on extradition?

I do believe they will put out all the stops to stop extradition, I don't have any doubts about that.

So let's see, if it even gets to that point.

 

[aa9511]

This may be off-topic but it does speak to the judgement of Italy's Supreme Court

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-year-old-not-abusive-Italian-court-rules.htm

Assuming this story is accurate it does not reflect well on their judgement.

What about that case recently by a judge, the "affluenza" defense which she granted to the defense? We can pick out one or two recent cases, I'm sure of it, in any country that are "iffy." Yes, that was not done by Supreme Court, but by a lower court, still it was a judge and a court.

Also, the US Supreme Court has its own share of decisions in the past that I'm sure they want to forget ever happened in its history.

 

[SMK]

I believe the U.S. courts have had many rulings over its lifetime that other countries would look at as "morally and ethically wrong."

On your #1 point, so basically they will try to pressure the judges? It almost seems like blackmail. "Do what I want or else I'll release this little tid-bit into the media and let's see how your career fares after that......BWAHAHAHAHA......". That does not seem right to me, does it to you? I don't know, is it judges who make the decisions on extradition?

I do believe they will put out all the stops to stop extradition, I don't have any doubts about that.

So let's see, if it even gets to that point.

Right - we have the death penalty, which is viewed as ethically wrong by Europeans and abolished in nearly all democratic nations. Our prison sentences are also 10 - 20 x longer than in other countries, and our prisons are far less humane than in Europe. So the Italians could judge us morally on many points. Why have an International Extradition Treaty with Italy at all, if one doesn't intend to honor it.

* I noticed on the flap of Amanda's book jacket Harper and Row had said that Knox was wrongfully convicted of murder, and that it was overturned by Hellmann on appeal, They failed to note that the process had not been finally signed off by the Supreme Court of Cassation. What if Jodi Arias had foreign family and supporters claiming her conviction was wrongful here?

 

[aa9511]

Right - we have the death penalty, which is viewed as ethically wrong by Europeans and abolished in nearly all democratic nations. Our prison sentences are also 10 - 20 x longer than in other countries, and our prisons are far less humane than in Europe. So the Italians could judge us morally on many points. Why have an International Extradition Treaty with Italy at all, if one doesn't intend to honor it.

[I]* I noticed on the flap of Amanda's book jacket Harper and Row had said that Knox was wrongfully convicted of murder, and that it was overturned by Hellmann on appeal, They failed to note that the process had not been finally signed off by the Supreme Court of Cassation. What if Jodi Arias had foreign family and supporters claiming her conviction was wrongful here? [/I]

bbm

It pays for Harper and Row to present it in that way - many more people will buy the book if they think she's been done a great injustice and wrongfully put through all of this - completely innocent.

They are just thinking of their own bottom line, of course. It's a business after all, not a social service or charity.

They don't care about the truth, or rather, the truth does not make a difference to them since it has no effect on its profits, and in this case actually would decrease their profits substantially. They already signed onto the Amanda bus, now it's their job to sell as many of the books as they can and market it so people will buy it.

 

[Monzoo]

I believe the U.S. courts have had many rulings over its lifetime that other countries would look at as "morally and ethically wrong."

On your #1 point, so basically they will try to pressure the judges? It almost seems like blackmail. "Do what I want or else I'll release this little tid-bit into the media and let's see how your career fares after that......BWAHAHAHAHA......". That does not seem right to me, does it to you? I don't know, is it judges who make the decisions on extradition?

I do believe they will put out all the stops to stop extradition, I don't have any doubts about that.

So let's see, if it even gets to that point.

I think you misunderstand me. In my opinion, extradition is political rather than legal. After all, look at well known extradition cases: Roman Polanski, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden to name a few. The defense against extraditing often is very political and public rather than legal. I would expect, if it came to that, that AK's team would use everything they could to prevent it. That includes using public pressure. The way I see it, this is how it works. No value judgement from me.

 

[SMK]

I think you misunderstand me. In my opinion, extradition is political rather than legal. After all, look at well known extradition cases: Roman Polanski, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden to name a few. The defense against extraditing often is very political and public rather than legal. I would expect, if it came to that, that AK's team would use everything they could to prevent it. That includes using public pressure. The way I see it, this is how it works. No value judgement from me.

Yes, because of the book and the experts who believe in her innocence, the CNN appearances by these, there would be a massive public outcry if extradition were attempted on any level.

If she is innocent, this is as it should be.

If not, then it is a carefully orchestrated strategic ploy which appears to have been extremely effective. It was said of the Ryan Ferguson case, that having massive public support turned the tide for him (pity the wrongfully convicted who are not young and white and collegiate, and don't have this).

 

[SMK]

[/B]

bbm

It pays for Harper and Row to present it in that way - many more people will buy the book if they think she's been done a great injustice and wrongfully put through all of this - completely innocent.

They are just thinking of their own bottom line, of course. It's a business after all, not a social service or charity.

They don't care about the truth, or rather, the truth does not make a difference to them since it has no effect on its profits, and in this case actually would decrease their profits substantially. They already signed onto the Amanda bus, now it's their job to sell as many of the books as they can and market it so people will buy it.

If she is not innocent, then it has served other purposes as well.

 

[aa9511]

I think you misunderstand me. In my opinion, extradition is political rather than legal. After all, look at well known extradition cases: Roman Polanski, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden to name a few. The defense against extraditing often is very political and public rather than legal. I would expect, if it came to that, that AK's team would use everything they could to prevent it. That includes using public pressure. The way I see it, this is how it works. No value judgement from me.

I see, sorry if I misunderstood. I don't know much or actually anything about extradition. Is it done by judges or is it done by politicians - I mean, the decision whether to extradite or not?

 

[SMK]

I see, sorry if I misunderstood. I don't know much or actually anything about extradition. Is it done by judges or is it done by politicians - I mean, the decision whether to extradite or not?

In the US, the State Department decides if an extradition to another country is warranted, pursuant to an international treaty (Secretary of State John Kerry).

 

[Monzoo]

I see, sorry if I misunderstood. I don't know much or actually anything about extradition. Is it done by judges or is it done by politicians - I mean, the decision whether to extradite or not?

Extradition requests come through the US state department, and if approved then go to the US attorneys -- and only then would come before a court. There are multiple places to foul up an extradition request if it is politically unpalatable. The final step is within a court of law. I do not, personally, see a big separation between politics and the law. For more info, see Wikipedia.

Extradition law in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SMK]

I have heard some who claim to have inside information say they believe the Florence court is preparing to acquit. Of course people also said prior to the Hellmann ruling that his court would uphold the convictions, so it's really anyone's guess at this point.

 

[whoanellie]

Maybe for the prosecutors, it's their job to fight to win conviction of people they see as guilty of the crime, but what about for the judges?

What about that case recently by a judge, the "affluenza" defense which she granted to the defense? We can pick out one or two recent cases, I'm sure of it, in any country that are "iffy." Yes, that was not done by Supreme Court, but by a lower court, still it was a judge and a court.

Also, the US Supreme Court has its own share of decisions in the past that I'm sure they want to forget ever happened in its history.

I believe that there are many examples of injustice in the US. The innocent who have been convicted and punished as well as the guilty who have not been held accountable.

I am not very familiar with the criminal justice system in Italy. From the little that I do know it appears that Italian justice is far from perfect also. I believe that the Italian supreme court's ruling in Amanda's case was not just. From the little that I know of the case of the 60-year old pedophile it seems that they've made another rather bizarre ruling. (Sorry for the faulty link).

Judges, be they American or Italian, are not infallible. Injustice in America does not excuse injustice in Italy.

 

[MichaelSmith]

You have a source I can look at that isn't in Italian? I'd like to read this.

http://www.amandaknox.com/2013/12/04/crinis-closing-arguments/

UPDATE – 16 Dec 2013

English translation of excerpts now available.

Page 8

 

[SMK]

http://www.amandaknox.com/2013/12/04/crinis-closing-arguments/

UPDATE – 16 Dec 2013

English translation of excerpts now available.

Page 8

Crini really rambles .... I would hope he did better in the rest of his summation.

 

[quesarita]

Seriously? That's the witness report? He thought he saw them on Halloween or maybe Nov. but Crini knows he couldn't have seen them on Halloween because they would have been wearing masks, so he MUST have seen them on the night of the murder!