Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox Conviction Overturned #22

[Allusonz]

Selectively choosing which jury and which court got it right is certainly one way to decide if justice was done. The Anthony jury got it wrong, the OJ jury got it wrong, the Knox jury got it wrong and then they got it right ... and so it goes. Personally, I don't view the judge as getting things right or wrong, I see it as the court getting it right or wrong. Many people on both sides of the pond are outraged that the verdict was overturned on appeal and, given the controversy, Knox should be as careful as Anthony and OJ regarding how much she wants to put herself in the spotlight. The *advertiser censored* company offer should be enough for Knox to realize that celebrity status may not be an easy ride - even if the money seems appealing.

Conversely, many people on both sides of the pond are relieved that this was overturned

 

[SMK]

Knox juror says prosecution's case just conjecture
ROME (AP) - One of the jurors who overturned Amanda Knox's murder conviction said Friday he was never convinced by the "conjecture" of the prosecution's case and that he believed the U.S. student and her co-defendant simply didn't kill her British roommate.

Mauro Chialli was one of eight jurors who on Monday ordered Knox and her ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito freed after acquitting them of charges they sexually assaulted and murdered Meredith Kercher in 2007. Knox returned home to Seattle on Tuesday, and Sollecito to his home in southern Italy.

In an interview Friday with Italy's state-run RAI television, Chialli said he had spent a lot of time during the 10-month appeals trial reading the faces of Knox and Sollecito and determined they were telling the truth in insisting on their innocence.

"I saw the faces of these two kids, and they couldn't bluff. They didn't bluff. My point of view is that these kids weren't guilty. They weren't there," he said.

http://mynorthwest.com/174/442784/Knox-juror-says-prosecutions-case-just-conjecture

 

[Allusonz]

"He said it was the best day of his life to have his daughter back on US soil. He also confirmed that she had not yet signed a big money interview deal, and no counselling has been lined up. "She's a strong person," he said.

Mr Knox added: "You won't find her."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...Perugia-after-Meredith-Kercher-acquittal.html

He said his daughter was staying indoors to keep her location secret. He said: “At this stage of the game it’s a different version of jail.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ok-and-TV-deal-money-to-Meredith-Kercher.html

He also stated that they were watching her very closely and that if they felt she needed help she would get it. For the most part since her release, she has been in the air flying. Often things don't become apparent right at the moment but maybe weeks down the road. I would suspect that she will receive some type of therapy at some point. At least allow her the opportunity to spend a few days with her family.

 

[flourish]

He also stated that they were watching her very closely and that if they felt she needed help she would get it. For the most part since her release, she has been in the air flying. Often things don't become apparent right at the moment but maybe weeks down the road. I would suspect that she will receive some type of therapy at some point. At least allow her the opportunity to spend a few days with her family.

MRRBBM
I would certainly hope so!

 

[Allusonz]

MRRBBM
I would certainly hope so!

So do I and I think after fighting for her release for 4 years they will seek it for her. This does not strike me as a family that does not care. It does seem to me that they are allowing her to simply adjust a bit first before pushing too much on her

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

http://mynorthwest.com/174/442784/Knox-juror-says-prosecutions-case-just-conjecture

He determined his vote by reading their faces? That doesn't speak well of this juror.

 

[Allusonz]

That's my point. In court, Knox said that she just wanted to go home. Dr Sollecito has recognized the importance of taking his son home to familiar surroundings and experiences. The Knox family first propped Knox in front of the media and then whisked her off to their "secet" location. I think that Sollecito will recover better and faster under the care of Dr Sollecito, who is providing a familiar home environment to his son rather than keeping him away from home.

The difference being is that she has a horde of journalists et al trying to get to her. Just like RS was pretty much ignored throughout this entire process, the media reacted quite the opposite for AK. That is an unfair comparison IMO

 

[flourish]

So do I and I think after fighting for her release for 4 years they will seek it for her. This does not strike me as a family that does not care. It does seem to me that they are allowing her to simply adjust a bit first before pushing too much on her

LOL, sure I think it's reasonable to let her at least get over the jet lag before taking her to therapy, and I agree this is a caring family...I just would guess that she's going to need plenty of therapy, and hope she gets it sooner, not later.

(Part of my concern stems from the Elizabeth Smart case, where her family chose a...non-traditional (imo) approach to her therapy. I sometimes worry that families might try so hard to make everything "back to normal" that they'll somehow not end up seeking appropriate treatment...and no, I'm not implying that the Smarts, the Knox/Mellas's, nor anyone else would, could, will, or will not seek appropriate help for their children, just saying I have concerns, well-founded or not ).

 

[SMK]

LOL, sure I think it's reasonable to let her at least get over the jet lag before taking her to therapy, and I agree this is a caring family...I just would guess that she's going to need plenty of therapy, and hope she gets it sooner, not later.

(Part of my concern stems from the Elizabeth Smart case, where her family chose a...non-traditional (imo) approach to her therapy. I sometimes worry that families might try so hard to make everything "back to normal" that they'll somehow not end up seeking appropriate treatment...and no, I'm not implying that the Smarts, the Knox/Mellas's, nor anyone else would, could, will, or will not seek appropriate help for their children, just saying I have concerns, well-founded or not ).

I think they are well founded.

 

[Allusonz]

I'd like to see how the Marriott PR machine could manipulate the verdict in the Michelle Young murder. I doubt it would take much to convince the public and the media that he is being framed by the police.

Once again this case does not have the same dynamics as the Young case.

This PR campaign I will once again state is a fallacy

 

[Allusonz]

Yes, that was interesting, I agree. That being said, I just don't want to jump to any conclusions as to the veracity of the accusations.

Interestingly enough things are being said by RS as well not simply by AK

 

[flourish]

Can we just agree to disagree about the motivations behind hiring a PR team? There's no way to prove either way what the intent was...leaving it up to interpretation and opinion.

:angel:

 

[otto]

The PR firm was hired in 2008 to help the parents of AK handle the media requests. There is no PR campaign, never was, except in the minds of a few

"The effort to shape Knox's image began after her arrest in 2007. Her father, Curt Knox, was put in touch with Gogerty Marriott, a Seattle public affairs firm, by a colleague at Macy's, where he was a vice president at the time. The family wanted help dealing with the barrage of media calls, but at first it was constrained in what it could say.

"It was because, primarily, Amanda's lawyers in Italy really did not want them doing interviews initially," said David Marriott, a veteran public affairs man who handled the case.

In the beginning, he said, he asked some of Knox's college friends to give interviews to testify about her character.

But some family, friends and neighbors were growing concerned that her image was being shaped by British tabloids and Italian prosecutors. A group of volunteers called Friends of Amanda formed, and a few months later they had put up their website. It countered the lurid portrayal of Knox with pictures of her in a hat at her 7th birthday party and, more recently, playing with her dog, Ralphy. "

http://www.twincities.com/ci_19041911

 

[Allusonz]

That's true. Knox not only accused an innocent man of rape and murder, but she was identified as the ringleader - which certainly placed more responsibility on her for the murder.

Which has now been overturned and rejected by the appeals court thus she is a victim

 

[Allusonz]

"The effort to shape Knox's image began after her arrest in 2007. Her father, Curt Knox, was put in touch with Gogerty Marriott, a Seattle public affairs firm, by a colleague at Macy's, where he was a vice president at the time. The family wanted help dealing with the barrage of media calls, but at first it was constrained in what it could say.

"It was because, primarily, Amanda's lawyers in Italy really did not want them doing interviews initially," said David Marriott, a veteran public affairs man who handled the case.

In the beginning, he said, he asked some of Knox's college friends to give interviews to testify about her character.

But some family, friends and neighbors were growing concerned that her image was being shaped by British tabloids and Italian prosecutors. A group of volunteers called Friends of Amanda formed, and a few months later they had put up their website. It countered the lurid portrayal of Knox with pictures of her in a hat at her 7th birthday party and, more recently, playing with her dog, Ralphy. "

http://www.twincities.com/ci_19041911

It is right on the Marriott site. There is a section there which states when their services were retained and what said services were for

 

[SMK]

"The effort to shape Knox's image began after her arrest in 2007. Her father, Curt Knox, was put in touch with Gogerty Marriott, a Seattle public affairs firm, by a colleague at Macy's, where he was a vice president at the time. The family wanted help dealing with the barrage of media calls, but at first it was constrained in what it could say.

"It was because, primarily, Amanda's lawyers in Italy really did not want them doing interviews initially," said David Marriott, a veteran public affairs man who handled the case.

In the beginning, he said, he asked some of Knox's college friends to give interviews to testify about her character.

But some family, friends and neighbors were growing concerned that her image was being shaped by British tabloids and Italian prosecutors. A group of volunteers called Friends of Amanda formed, and a few months later they had put up their website. It countered the lurid portrayal of Knox with pictures of her in a hat at her 7th birthday party and, more recently, playing with her dog, Ralphy. "

http://www.twincities.com/ci_19041911

I think it is reasonable to counter fallacies being spread about one's daughter in the British and Italian press, with images and anecdotes depicting the true girl that she is. I am glad they did so. I think Curt Knox is a very intelligent man, and I would love to have had a father as loyal and courageous as he has been regarding his eldest daughter.

 

[otto]

Which has now been overturned and rejected by the appeals court thus she is a victim

Nothing was overturned in Knox's accusations against Patrick. She is a convicted felon, sentenced to three years in jail and ordered to pay Patrick thousands of euros in compensation. As a convicted felon, her opportunities to travel anywhere will be severely restricted and she is no victim in terms of accusing Patrick Lumumba of rape and murder.

 

[otto]

It is right on the Marriott site. There is a section there which states when their services were retained and what said services were for

Curt and Marriott should get their story straight.

 

[Allusonz]

Nothing was overturned in Knox's accusations against Patrick. She is a convicted felon, sentenced to three years in jail and ordered to pay Patrick thousands of euros in compensation. As a convicted felon, her opportunities to travel anywhere will be severely restricted and she is no victim in terms of accusing Patrick Lumumba of rape and murder.

This was my post and thoughts from a few pages back with respect to the slander charges

I am going to approach the slander conviction from a different perspective. I believe that Hellmann ruled in a way that allowed AK's lawyers to appeal to the ISC based on point of law rather than publicly humiliate Massei in front of the world or his peers within the Italian Judicial system. It was the ISC that originally ruled they were inadmissible and I feel he has sent it back to them to rule on (very smart move by Hellman). I don't believe the ISC will uphold the slander conviction and in fact I believe that there is a good chance they will reverse it.

Two interesting rulings were made by Massei. One that allowed the civil trial to run concurrent with the criminal component. As well he ruled contrary to the ISC and allowed the statements signed by AK for the civil trial. Essentially what Massei did was overrule the ISC

The Italian Supreme Court found that AK's rights were violated as she was not informed of her legal rights, did not appoint her a lawyer, and did not provide her with a proper interpreter thus they ruled that the signed statements were not admissible.

What the ISC is stating in essence is that there was misconduct on behalf of the police and/or prosecutor.

From AK's appeal:

"Amanda was also convicted of the crime of libel under Article 368 c.p.p. against Patrick Lumumba. The defense argues that the mental element of intent is lacking, therefore the charge of libel is not warranted.

The defense repeats the fact that this trial running concurrently with the murder trial made it necessary to discuss the signed statement that was ruled inadmissible by the Italian Supreme Court. This statement should not have been allowed in any form at any time during the murder trial. The court ignored the Italian Supreme Court’s ruling regarding this statement.

Amanda’s written document describing her interrogation shows an act of desperation of a girl that was distressed. Amanda did not know her constitutional rights in Italy. She did not make a free decision and yet the defense had no choice but to refer to the document because of the charge of libel. Amanda was only trying to help the authorities in their search for truth. A complete reading of the document indicates the absolute uncertainty and improbability of the facts mentioned previously by Amanda. She says several times she doubts it is reality and thinks it is a dream. The doubts, hesitation and anxiety are evident throughout the document. This shows then the lack of the mental element of intent to award the specific offense against her. The specific details of the accused of a violation of a crime by the accused are essential for slander. This particular document appears as an elaboration of a fantastic experience and repudiated reality.

There is a lack of explicit intent when Amanda says:

“I have serious doubts about the truth of my statements because they were made under the pressure of stress, shock and because I was exhausted.”

She was threatened with 30 years in prison and struck on the head when she did not recall events correctly. Amanda states repeatedly, even to her mother in an intercepted conversation of her awareness of her innocence. The intent to slander is missing because she is not convinced of the guilt or innocence of the person she accuses. Amanda had no way of knowing that Patrick was innocent. The police were telling her that Patrick was involved. To be guilty of slander one must have certainty and full knowledge of the innocence of the person accused. Amanda was not trying to slander Patrick. She was attempting to help the police and was following their guidance. It was the responsibility of the investigators to determine Patrick’s guilt or innocence"

 

[Allusonz]

Can we just agree to disagree about the motivations behind hiring a PR team? There's no way to prove either way what the intent was...leaving it up to interpretation and opinion.

:angel:

Sorry no. Mariott himself has stated what the purpose of his firm was. This is from the horses mouth so to speak. Instead it has spread into a fallacy and the wings grow longer each time it is stated as a PR campaign