Ernest
Stupid IDIOT
We extradite people anywhere, such as the lads who got extradited to Greece on flimsy evidence
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Amanda Knox
- Thread starter bhafc99
- Start date
We extradite people anywhere, such as the lads who got extradited to Greece on flimsy evidence
arkan
Active member
Amanda Knox, white girl tried in court for killing her house mate. Found guilty,only circumstantial evidence available, Amanda appeals. America outraged and Amanda is freed.
Troy Davis, a black man tried in court for killing a policeman. Found guilty, only circumstantial evidence available, Troy appeals. America outraged but Troy is still killed.
Troy Davis, a black man tried in court for killing a policeman. Found guilty, only circumstantial evidence available, Troy appeals. America outraged but Troy is still killed.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,878
I agree, but don't know enough about that case.
Basically
1) If the crime was committed here then no. For example if you are sitting on a computer HERE hacking into something there, if you have broken a law (see below) - you should be tried HERE.
2) If it's not a crime HERE then, no
3) Prima facie case HERE, not there
Colossal Squid
Returning video tapes
With four years in jail surely she's had time to have already written her "If I had done it"
I look forward to that
I look forward to that
chucky1973
New member
merediths sister Stephanie works at Gatwick, a cracking girl with a top personality, hope they are all bearing up with the news and a safe trip home.
Obviously not as she has just been freed!
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,878
Judge and Jury I think ?
Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
the bitch has got off on a technicality.
So she was guilty all along?
Derp.
I had to google that. Don't think I asked the daft question however!
The DNA evidence was entirely shit and there is basically nothing to place either him or her at the scene of the murder. So she probably didn't do it. It still doesn't change the fact that Meredith was murdered by someone or someones, and I hope for the family's sake it can be totally established what happened.
kevo
Well-known member
- Mar 8, 2008
- 9,810
Totally agree that there was insufficient evidence to convict them (don't know if they use the concept of 'beyond reasonable doubt' in Italy - but there was obviously 'reasonable doubt' here) - the DNA evidence, for example, was extremely flimsy. There is virtually nothing to connect them to the crime and another person had already (rightly, it would seem) been found guilty of the murder.
Yet.... there are still lots of unanswered questions. Why did Knox try to frame someone else - and why did she initially claim she was at the house when it happened then change her story to say she was at her boyfriend's place? Surely if they hadn't been present when the murder happened, they would just say that all along? Simply doesn't make any sense.
So yes, reasonable doubt - and certainly not enough evidence for a conviction - but still can't help thinking they had something to do with it. Guede probably was the killer, but they were involved.
Yet.... there are still lots of unanswered questions. Why did Knox try to frame someone else - and why did she initially claim she was at the house when it happened then change her story to say she was at her boyfriend's place? Surely if they hadn't been present when the murder happened, they would just say that all along? Simply doesn't make any sense.
So yes, reasonable doubt - and certainly not enough evidence for a conviction - but still can't help thinking they had something to do with it. Guede probably was the killer, but they were involved.
Exiled in Exeter
New member
FIVE REASONS KNOX IS GUILTY
1) The confession.
Knox confessed that she was in the house on the night of the murder and that she heard Miss Kercher scream, identifying a Congolese bar owner, Patrick Lumumba, as the assailant. She told the court during the trial that the confession was made under duress but then repeated the entire account in a five page memorandum the next morning.
2) The false accusation.
The prosecution said the fact that Knox falsely accused Lumumba of being the killer was a sign of her own guilt and an attempt to throw them off her trail. He was arrested in a dawn raid by armed police and spent two weeks in jail. It was only by chance that a Swiss businessman read about the case and came forward to say he had been talking to Lumumba in his bar on the night of the murder — offering him a rock-solid alibi. Lumumba says Knox nearly ruined his life and is suing her for defamation.
3) The alibi.
Sollecito could not back up Knox’s alibi on the night of the murder.
She claimed she spent the evening with him, smoking marijuana, watching the French film Amelie and making love. But Sollecito told police he could not remember if Knox was with him that evening or not.
Even assuming his memory was hazy because of the drugs, it seemed odd that a young man who had just embarked on a new relationship could not recall whether he had spent the night with his girlfriend or not.
4) Computer and telephone records.
Sollecito claimed he used his computer to download and watch cartoons and Amelie. But computer experts told the court that there was no activity on his laptop between 9.10pm on Nov 1, and 5.32am the next morning — the time frame in which the murder took place.
Knox and Sollecito turned off their mobile phones on the night of the murder, from around 8.40pm, and turned them back on at around 6am, inviting further suspicion.
5) The staged break-in.
A bedroom belonging to one of Miss Kercher’s Italian flatmates was ransacked on the night of the murder, with a window smashed with a rock. But police said the break-in was staged - broken glass from the window was found on top of clothes scattered on the floor, suggesting the window was broken after the contents of the room were messed up. Prosecutors accused Knox and her boyfriend of staging the break-in to make the killing look like a burglary that had turned into rape and murder.
FIVE REASONS KNOX IS INNOCENT
1) Lack of motive.
There still seems to be no convincing motive for the murder.
Prosecutors said tensions between Knox and Miss Kercher had reached boiling point over disagreements about housework, hygiene and boyfriends. They claimed Knox was driven to rage by jealousy towards her British flatmate. But it seemed far-fetched to claim that such relatively minor differences would lead Knox to kill.
2) Lack of DNA.
None of Knox’s DNA was found in the bedroom in which Miss Kercher was stabbed to death. The prosecution claimed that Knox’s DNA was on the handle of the presumed murder weapon, a kitchen knife, and Kercher’s genetic material on the blade, linking the American to the killing.
They also said that Sollecito’s DNA was found on the clasp, which had been cut or torn off the bra, proving that he took part in the attack too.
But a review of the evidence by two independent experts from La Sapienza University in Rome found that the DNA traces were too low to be reliable and so small that they could not be retested.
The bra clasp was only found six weeks after the initial crime scene investigation, by which time it had been kicked around the floor of Miss Kercher’s bedroom, leading to a high risk of contamination.
3) No witnesses.
The prosecution struggled to come up with witnesses who could place Knox and Sollecito at the scene of the crime. A homeless drug addict, Antonio Curatolo, told the initial trial that he had seen Knox and her boyfriend arguing on the night of the murder near the scene of the crime. But during the appeal he gave confusing and contradictory evidence, mixing up dates, and admitted to regularly using heroin, further undermining his credibility.
Even Rudy Guede, the Ivory Coast-born drifter who was also convicted of the murder, initially said that Knox was not in the house on the night of the murder. He changed his story a few months after his arrest, saying that on coming out of the bathroom he had grappled with a stranger, who could have been Sollecito, and that he saw Knox’s silhouette outside the house.
4) Doubts over the murder weapon.
Police and prosecutors said Miss Kercher was killed with a 6.5 inch long kitchen knife found in Sollecito’s apartment. But the blade of the knife did not match two out of three of the wounds to her neck.
Nor did it match a bloody, knife-shaped smear on Miss Kercher’s bedclothes. The trial judge said that two knives must have been used; the second has never been found.
5) The false confession.
The defence said that when Knox "confessed" to being in the house on the night of the murder and could remember hearing Miss Kercher scream, she was traumatised and acting under extreme psychological pressure after an all night interrogation by police. Knox told the trial that during the questioning she had been cuffed around the head by an officer and told that if she did not start cooperating she would face decades in jail. She was questioned without a lawyer being present and at the time she knew only basic Italian.
Amanda Knox: Guilty or innocent, five reasons why - Telegraph
1) The confession.
Knox confessed that she was in the house on the night of the murder and that she heard Miss Kercher scream, identifying a Congolese bar owner, Patrick Lumumba, as the assailant. She told the court during the trial that the confession was made under duress but then repeated the entire account in a five page memorandum the next morning.
2) The false accusation.
The prosecution said the fact that Knox falsely accused Lumumba of being the killer was a sign of her own guilt and an attempt to throw them off her trail. He was arrested in a dawn raid by armed police and spent two weeks in jail. It was only by chance that a Swiss businessman read about the case and came forward to say he had been talking to Lumumba in his bar on the night of the murder — offering him a rock-solid alibi. Lumumba says Knox nearly ruined his life and is suing her for defamation.
3) The alibi.
Sollecito could not back up Knox’s alibi on the night of the murder.
She claimed she spent the evening with him, smoking marijuana, watching the French film Amelie and making love. But Sollecito told police he could not remember if Knox was with him that evening or not.
Even assuming his memory was hazy because of the drugs, it seemed odd that a young man who had just embarked on a new relationship could not recall whether he had spent the night with his girlfriend or not.
4) Computer and telephone records.
Sollecito claimed he used his computer to download and watch cartoons and Amelie. But computer experts told the court that there was no activity on his laptop between 9.10pm on Nov 1, and 5.32am the next morning — the time frame in which the murder took place.
Knox and Sollecito turned off their mobile phones on the night of the murder, from around 8.40pm, and turned them back on at around 6am, inviting further suspicion.
5) The staged break-in.
A bedroom belonging to one of Miss Kercher’s Italian flatmates was ransacked on the night of the murder, with a window smashed with a rock. But police said the break-in was staged - broken glass from the window was found on top of clothes scattered on the floor, suggesting the window was broken after the contents of the room were messed up. Prosecutors accused Knox and her boyfriend of staging the break-in to make the killing look like a burglary that had turned into rape and murder.
FIVE REASONS KNOX IS INNOCENT
1) Lack of motive.
There still seems to be no convincing motive for the murder.
Prosecutors said tensions between Knox and Miss Kercher had reached boiling point over disagreements about housework, hygiene and boyfriends. They claimed Knox was driven to rage by jealousy towards her British flatmate. But it seemed far-fetched to claim that such relatively minor differences would lead Knox to kill.
2) Lack of DNA.
None of Knox’s DNA was found in the bedroom in which Miss Kercher was stabbed to death. The prosecution claimed that Knox’s DNA was on the handle of the presumed murder weapon, a kitchen knife, and Kercher’s genetic material on the blade, linking the American to the killing.
They also said that Sollecito’s DNA was found on the clasp, which had been cut or torn off the bra, proving that he took part in the attack too.
But a review of the evidence by two independent experts from La Sapienza University in Rome found that the DNA traces were too low to be reliable and so small that they could not be retested.
The bra clasp was only found six weeks after the initial crime scene investigation, by which time it had been kicked around the floor of Miss Kercher’s bedroom, leading to a high risk of contamination.
3) No witnesses.
The prosecution struggled to come up with witnesses who could place Knox and Sollecito at the scene of the crime. A homeless drug addict, Antonio Curatolo, told the initial trial that he had seen Knox and her boyfriend arguing on the night of the murder near the scene of the crime. But during the appeal he gave confusing and contradictory evidence, mixing up dates, and admitted to regularly using heroin, further undermining his credibility.
Even Rudy Guede, the Ivory Coast-born drifter who was also convicted of the murder, initially said that Knox was not in the house on the night of the murder. He changed his story a few months after his arrest, saying that on coming out of the bathroom he had grappled with a stranger, who could have been Sollecito, and that he saw Knox’s silhouette outside the house.
4) Doubts over the murder weapon.
Police and prosecutors said Miss Kercher was killed with a 6.5 inch long kitchen knife found in Sollecito’s apartment. But the blade of the knife did not match two out of three of the wounds to her neck.
Nor did it match a bloody, knife-shaped smear on Miss Kercher’s bedclothes. The trial judge said that two knives must have been used; the second has never been found.
5) The false confession.
The defence said that when Knox "confessed" to being in the house on the night of the murder and could remember hearing Miss Kercher scream, she was traumatised and acting under extreme psychological pressure after an all night interrogation by police. Knox told the trial that during the questioning she had been cuffed around the head by an officer and told that if she did not start cooperating she would face decades in jail. She was questioned without a lawyer being present and at the time she knew only basic Italian.
Amanda Knox: Guilty or innocent, five reasons why - Telegraph
If you look at the evidence how can anyone say shes guilty? there is no evidence, just the bizarre, rambling conclusions of a perverted italian prosecutor and two people convicted in the media. Makes my blood boil this case and makes an absolute mockery of the italian justice system. The only definate is the third guy rudy godoy or something whos dna was found at the scene.
Nope not at all, ppl that just say guilty without even knowing the facts are just idiot sheep
Colossal Squid
Returning video tapes
Like many media outlets the Mail managed to get the wrong end of the stick and announce that she had been found guilty, again, when the judge began his verdict. However, unlike everyone else the Mail went one further and published a whole story including reactions, claiming Knox and Sollecito had been found guilty. They basically MADE UP the news to be first with the story.
Hugely embarrassing: Daily Mail jumps gun on Malcolm Coles
What a GAFFE
Hugely embarrassing: Daily Mail jumps gun on Malcolm Coles
What a GAFFE