Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#14

[otto]

yet, at least two former FBI agents, who surely have above average competence in "rudimentary crime scene investigation knowledge, defense tactics and police procedures", say the opposite.

can you cite one who agrees with guilt?

Is one of those retired FBI agents the one that claims Knox was tortured for 53 hours prior to falsely accusing Patrick of murder?

 

[otto]

so the name of one FBI agent who agrees with guilt is... ??

Deciding guilt or innocence is not in the job description of a retired FBI agents.

 

[otto]

Agree. Anyone who hasn't read that book or isn't familiar with the Monster of Florence case needs to read it and the related information about Magnini. jmo

I tried reading the book. It starts off really slow with a description of a seedy bar and sneaking around getting information from police that should not be made public, and then it becomes really boring.

Preston clearly has problems with a prosecutor that was involved in the case a couple of years ago. His involvement ended with the annulled appeal. Is there also a complaint against the prosecutor that argued the appeal?

 

[Linda7NJ]

so the name of one FBI agent who agrees with guilt is... ??

The jury's verdict is more important to me....and I didn't base my opinion on those either. I reached MY OWN opinion.

 

[otto]

Retired FBI Steve Moore sounds like he doesn't know anything about the case. Why does he still think that Knox was tortured for 53 hours? That myth was debunked years ago.

 

[otto]

Here's an opinion from Wendy Murphy, Mar. 2013

http://wendymurphylaw.com/amanda-knox/

 

[gitana1]

I've a feeling Knox will not be extradited. First, the excuse in both countries will be further appeals. Second, I don't think Italy will be that keen on extraditing her. It is an international embarrassment. They may go through the motions but I don't think they will push that hard.

We will see.

 

[Tugela]

Ok, I understand what you're saying. I don't think the US will view it that way, because it is the process in Italy. The entire process is not even finished...it is only finished after the Supreme Court signs off on it. So how can they say that it's Double Jeopardy? That would make sense if, after the Supreme Court had already signed off on it, meaning the process was finished, and then they decide to re-try them all over again. Starting the whole process from the beginning.

What is happening now, is still part of the process.

Article of 6 of the treaty specifically prohibits extradition if the individual had been acquitted and then charged/tried again on the same charge.

ARTICLE VI

Non Bis in Idem

Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested.

In this instance they had a trial, got a conviction, had an appeal and got an acquittal. For the US the process ends there. Whatever Italy did subsequent to that is irrelevant as far as extradition is concerned. Article 6 spells that out pretty clearly, extradition for the conviction would be illegal.

 

[redheadedgal]

"Dershowitz believes double jeopardy would not be an issue because Knox's acquittal was not a final judgment. He also doubts that the United States would want to set a precedent by refusing to extradite her if she is convicted, given that the United States makes frequent extradition requests for defendants sought by U.S. courts."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...nears-verdict-article-1.1596322#ixzz2rwfntOek

his next sentence wasn't posted (hopefully by accident)... and his meaning is clear: extradition will not be easy:

"The easiest thing for the court to do is acquit. It probably ends it there. If it is a conviction, it is just the beginning of what would be a very lengthy and difficult process," Dershowitz said.

 

[redheadedgal]

The jury's verdict is more important to me....and I didn't base my opinion on those either. I reached MY OWN opinion.

Deciding guilt or innocence is not in the job description of a retired FBI agents.

evasion noted.

 

[Tugela]

I've a feeling Knox will not be extradited. First, the excuse in both countries will be further appeals. Second, I don't think Italy will be that keen on extraditing her. It is an international embarrassment. They may go through the motions but I don't think they will push that hard.

We will see.

I doubt she will be. The treaty is pretty clear about it IMO.

In order for an extradition to happen, the requesting country has to convince the State department that it is a legitimate request that falls within the orbit of the treaty. If they succeed at that, then the State department assumes the role of prosecutor and requests an extradition order from a Federal judge. At that point Italy would have to supply a record of the evidence, the proceedings at trial and the judgement argument. The federal judge would then examine that to determine if the Italian court made a proper determination based on the evidence. But, it would be done in the context of US law and procedure, since extradition is only allowable under those circumstances.

There would be a number of problems with this. Firstly, it is clear that the rights of AK and RS were violated during the initial interrogation, both under US law and under Italian law. The Italians don't seem to have a problem with this, but a US federal judge most certainly would. any evidence gathered from that would be inadmissible under US procedures, and therefore cannot be considered.

Secondly, most of the physical evidence presented by the prosecutions forensic experts was disputed by the defence. In the first appeal trial the court appointed independent experts who rebutted most of that evidence and determined that there was significant malpractice in the collection and analysis of the evidence. A US judge looking at that evidence is going to either defer to the opinion of those court appointed experts, or appoint his/her own panel of experts who will come to the same conclusions (because they are scientifically correct). That is going to make the final verdict reached in Italy appear in error.

There will essentially be a final trial, but in a US federal court, with US attorneys having to make argument based on US standards. Other than supplying information, Italy would not be involved. With what we know about the evidence and the case, I find it hard to believe that would happen, or that it would pass muster before a federal judge.

I think what will happen is that Italy will request extradition, the State department will say no (for the reasons explained above) and that will be the end of it. I don't think that either country will want it to go to an open US court where the Italian judgement will be torn to pieces in public.

 

[sherlockh]

Article of 6 of the treaty specifically prohibits extradition if the individual had been acquitted and then charged/tried again on the same charge.

In this instance they had a trial, got a conviction, had an appeal and got an acquittal. For the US the process ends there. Whatever Italy did subsequent to that is irrelevant as far as extradition is concerned. Article 6 spells that out pretty clearly, extradition for the conviction would be illegal.

It says that Knox can not get extradited if she had already served her sentence in the United States. That is not the case here. Maybe she can choose to serve her sentence in the US later, but I doubt she will do that.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Article of 6 of the treaty specifically prohibits extradition if the individual had been acquitted and then charged/tried again on the same charge.



In this instance they had a trial, got a conviction, had an appeal and got an acquittal. For the US the process ends there. Whatever Italy did subsequent to that is irrelevant as far as extradition is concerned. Article 6 spells that out pretty clearly, extradition for the conviction would be illegal.

The "Requested Party" is the U.S.. If read in factual context of "Requested Party" being the U.S. its clear that the treaty does not read as described above in being "illegal"..

 

[Sor Juana]

If the US does grant Italy's request, Knox can fight her extradition in a US court, citing among other things international human rights law.

 

[zwiebel]

He's on the no-fly list. With or without his passport, he is not going anywhere.

According to this, he's just been stopped at the border with Slovenia. Other reports seem to be saying Austria but that can't be correct as there's no border checks in Austria that I've ever seen.

http://news.sky.com/story/1204143/kercher-killer-sollecito-stopped-at-border

 

[zwiebel]

Meredith's brother just spoke on radio and said how much the family's suffering has been prolonged because of the length of the trail.

 

[zwiebel]

In all fairness, Sollecito could just have been heading off for a vacation. Slovenia is very beautiful. But it's also fair to point out it's far easier to stay under the radar there and it's a good jumping off point for heading to places further east, where news of this case may not be so widespread.

 

[sherlockh]

In all fairness, Sollecito could just have been heading off for a vacation. Slovenia is very beautiful. But it's also fair to point out it's far easier to stay under the radar there and it's a good jumping off point for heading to places further east, where news of this case may not be so widespread.

I don't think he is allowed to leave Italy. The article says he was apprehended at the hotel. Not directly at the border, but close to the border with Slovenia as well as Austria.

 

[katydid23]

Meredith's brother just spoke on radio and said how much the family's suffering has been prolonged because of the length of the trail.

Meredith's sister just said that they are 'on the road' to discovering the truth about what happened, but may never know the truth. WHAT? How can they want these defendants jailed for decades if they do not know what happened?

 

[mangetoute]

One can argue all day and all night about the validity of the forensic evidence but all the other undisputed evidence, the defendants' lies upon lies, their inconsistencies and lack of alibi, the damning cell phone and computer records, the failure of Knox (IF you believe she was pressurized to finger Patrick Lumumba) to say a word to help release him in the days after he arrested...there is SO MUCH EVIDENCE against them aside from the forensic, that the US media never reports. This is not a case that rests entirely on the forensics. Remember, there have been plenty of valid murder convictions when there is zero forensic evidence and even no body. If the forensic evidence is flawed (I don't know) that alone does not equal innocence. If this case interests you in the name of being fully informed, get out there and read about all the other evidence and the changing stories of Knox and Sollecito. It is pretty damning.