- Joined
- May 20, 2010
- Messages
- 14,077
- Reaction score
- 6,198
I don't see the Italian courts backing down, admitting the truth or apologising, and only expect the worse. I do not expect Amanda to leave the USA either.
I am from Nebraska. If I go to Colorado and buy pot and bring it back to Nebraska to smoke, can I insist I be tried by Colorado law since I purchased the pot legally?
It's my belief that when you are charged with a crime, you are held to the law of the jurisdiction a crime occurred.
That is not the same thing at all. The states are not sovereign. I do believe there are places where there is no justice in this world, Where people are killed for things like driving and going to school. Not all justice systems are the same. What I believe is that had they not let her go when they acquitted her and kept her in custody, They would have a say. If they choose to find her guilty again and want her back, that is too bad. I know it is not popular and I am okay with that.
I have been sitting here going over the evidence and again I come to the same conclusion. RG did this and the police wanted to make it look like AK and RS did.
The evidence would suggest otherwise. MOO
That is not the same thing at all. The states are not sovereign. I do believe there are places where there is no justice in this world, Where people are killed for things like driving and going to school. Not all justice systems are the same. What I believe is that had they not let her go when they acquitted her and kept her in custody, They would have a say. If they choose to find her guilty again and want her back, that is too bad. I know it is not popular and I am okay with that.
I have been sitting here going over the evidence and again I come to the same conclusion. RG did this and the police wanted to make it look like AK and RS did.
I am done with this. I have an opinion backed up by an international lawyer.
I won't be swayed in this case. I don't believe that she will be sent back.
I agree that not all justice systems are equal. That is why I live in the US and research the laws of any country I chose to travel to. If I can't abide by their laws I don't visit the country. I realize I'm a guest and have to respect the rules of my host.
I, too, have gone over the evidence and I just come to a different conclusion than others. I have no hate in my heart for anyone. But I do expect people to be accountable for their actions. I don't understand the logic that because Rudy has served his time, the others involved should be given a pass.
So if some of the media portray the accused in a bad way... all the judges/jurors/courts will be overcome by this and rule against them???
These are weak bases for a debate for innocent IMO. A legitimate Court(s) have found both AK and RS guilty. There is no way around that at this point. The Supreme Court rules whether to confirm.
He was in several Italian radio and TV shows to make it clear that he can't remember. I am not sure what he is trying to accomplish with it. It all seems a bit too late to me. It goes like this:Hi everyone, has the court made their decision yet?
Also, anyone have a link to Raffaele's latest appeal in which he distances himself from Amanda and says that he can't be sure whether she was there for whole time or not?
TIA.
1. No, the ruling will be tomorrow
2. I found the 306 page document, but it is in italian.
Friday. He doesn't really distance himself... in fact it doesn't have much gusto at all IMO.
For those who don't believe that AK and RS were acquitted, here are some articles for your reading pleasure:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/amanda-knox-acquitted-leaves-prison/story?id=14654317
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/w...ox-defends-herself-in-italian-court.html?_r=0
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/03/amanda-knox-verdict-_n_992798.html
and here is video of the actual verdict being read:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqdK9L2ZtoA
If the prosecution did not have the right to appeal, then the process would have ended then and there. However, in Italy (and many countries), the prosecution can appeal and did. As a result, that decision was annulled. Today we are waiting to see if the guilty verdict will be affirmed. We are not waiting to see if an acquittal will be confirmed.
I understand what this decision was about. I am responding to posters who say they weren't acquitted. They were. Combine this with the obvious corruption involved, and it doesnt matter what the decision is tomorrow. AK is not going back to prison. RS on the other hand will have to sit in prison with all of the other wrongfully convicted italians. JMO
:seeya: I found a link at the Wiki Page, but it's in Italian
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Main_Page
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...l-Supplementare-Bongiorno-Maori-Sollecito.pdf
I hope that the True Justice for Meredith Kercher/PMF groups will translate this document.
The entire double jeopardy suggestion is based on US law, which states that the prosecutor cannot appeal a verdict. The belief, in the US, is that if a prosecutor can appeal a verdict, and the appeal is successful, then there is double jeopardy.
Let's look way up, across the border to that beautiful country in the North: Canada. In that country, there is double jeopardy, but the prosecutor can appeal a verdict. If the verdict is overturned, then the earlier trial judgement is annulled. Hard to believe, but this is exactly what happened in Italy.
Rather than suggest that US law should be imposed on the courts in Italy, let's impose Canadian law on the courts in Italy ... or rather, let's respect Canadian law and Italian law and accept the fact that Knox and Sollecito's acquittal was annulled by law.
The double jeopardy suggestion seems to hinge on the belief that US law applies to US citizens when they are convicted of a criminal offence in a foreign country. Is there any basis for that belief, or is merely a wish? Per US law, should Knox have had her appeals denied and been put to death shortly after she was convicted of murder?
We know that the decision was successfully appealed by the prosecution, and that the decision has been annulled.
How is that annulled acquittal relevant today?