Amanda Knox

sdanseo

NickDrake wrote: »

You cannot appeal an appeal - She is free and the correct decision has been made. The right man is in jail and he even admitted to the murder in jail.

They can appeal the acquittal to the supreme court.

Unlikely, I'd say, given she would need to be extradited etc etc.

Warper

There were 3 people convicted originally. Guess what, the person from a broken family and lack of support is still in prison. Being able to afford top laywers is the difference between spending your life in jail or not. God isnt the system great.

x in the city

Mazeire wrote: »

Hayden Pantierre (cheeleader from Heros) is playing Knox. There was uproar as they were filming just before their appeal. Seemingly the script is a bit...salacious....

dont read into this crap so no idea about this.

I prefer family guy, futurama and the new series of the walking dead. :pac:

ColeTrain

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Yep. There was one item of DNA evidence which was discredited.

Everything else was allegations about her personality, character; nothing to do with the original crime.

It was amateur hour with the DNA being contaminated.
Her boyfriends story didn't add up, he even fled the country.
Their phones were knocked off and then back on again at 6am.
She confessed to being in the house and hearing a scream.
She accused an innocent man.
Also the staged break in.

This was far from an open and shut case and many people have doubts over their innocence - myself included. No need to say the only evidence was a video of them kissing.

tigger123

NickDrake wrote: »

You cannot appeal an appeal - She is free and the correct decision has been made. The right man is in jail and he even admitted to the murder in jail.

The prosecution team can appeal the decision to the Italian Supreme Court. As Knox and her team could have if tonight's ruling had of gone against them.

Cypher_sounds

Cypher_sounds wrote: »

I think she will be acquitted along with Sollecito, Guede did the damage.

.

NickDrake

sdeire wrote: »

They can appeal the acquittal to the supreme court.

Unlikely, I'd say, given she would need to be extradited etc etc.

Can it? On what grounds exactly? they will need a legal reason and not a factual reason to appeal it.

Cypher_sounds

Amanda Knox's Lawyer should been swimming in Money soon from Compensations.

Mazeire

x in the city wrote: »

dont read into this crap so no idea about this.

I prefer family guy, futurama and the new series of the walking dead. :pac:

No worries. If you don't want to know what's going on around you that's entirely your choice. It would be nice though if you were slightly more respectful of others choices and not so quick to dismiss them as crap.

Thanks.

tigger123

NickDrake wrote: »

Can it? On what grounds exactly? they will need a legal reason and not a factual reason to appeal it.

Yep. On technical or legal argument. Or if new evidence came to light. Or, if the evidence used to secure a conviction is called into question, which is how the appeal came about (as the DNA evidence was suspect).

A Primal Nut

ColeTrain wrote: »

It was amateur hour with the DNA being contaminated.
Her boyfriends story didn't add up, he even fled the country.
Their phones were knocked off and then back on again at 6am.
She confessed to being in the house and hearing a scream.
She accused an innocent man.
Also the staged break in.

Points 2,4 and 5 were under harsh interrogations. They weren't video-taped.
The break in was staged by Guede who's DNA was all over the crime scene.

Their phones being turned off is a strange co-incidence I admit.

Tayla

Mazeire wrote: »

Hayden Pantierre (cheeleader from Heros) is playing Knox. There was uproar as they were filming just before their appeal. Seemingly the script is a bit...salacious....

That film with Hayden as Amanda was already shown....i've seen it myself.
They had to cut the murder scene from the final film though.

Glenbhoy

Warper wrote: »

There were 3 people convicted originally. Guess what, the person from a broken family and lack of support is still in prison. Being able to afford top laywers is the difference between spending your life in jail or not. God isnt the system great.

Was Raffaele from a wealthy family? I know he was from Bari, but can't see much else about him.

Mazeire

Tayla wrote: »

That film with Hayden as Amanda was already shown....i've seen it myself.
They had to cut the murder scene from the final film though.

Really? I thought it was still in production. What did you think of it?

NickDrake

tigger123 wrote: »

Yep. On technical or legal argument. Or if new evidence came to light. Or, if the evidence used to secure a conviction is called into question, which is how the appeal came about (as the DNA evidence was suspect).

Not much hope of them finding a legal reason. This is what is required. Not a technical one. A technical fault example DNA that caused evidence to become inadmissable (a legal reason) then ya - As what happened already.

I am delighted she is free. Great to see justice actually working for a change

AngeGal

NickDrake wrote: »

Can it? On what grounds exactly? they will need a legal reason and not a factual reason to appeal it.

Yeah you can in Italy, they will claim fault with the judge, 'expert' witnesses biased,etc. Doesn't matter though, Knox will be back in America selling books/doing interviews, never to step foot in Italy again. The US won't extradite her so doesn't matter what the Upper Court say.

For what it's worth though, The Upper Court actually already said in the appeal of the guy who got convicted that while he did, he had two accomplices.

ColeTrain

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Points 2,4 and 5 were under harsh interrogations. They weren't video-taped.
The break in was staged by Guede who's DNA was all over the crime scene.

Their phones being turned off is a strange co-incidence I admit.

Wasn't she not found guilty of slandering the police, she falsely accused them of starving her and abusing her. It may have been under harsh interrogation but who knows.

Also, whoever killed the victim wasn't an expert on handling knifes. They also used towels to mop up the blood and wrap a blanket around her? Why?

Sollecito also couldn't give her an alibi, which is very strange. Also, his computer showed it was not in use that evening, which he claimed it was.

Maybe there isn't enough to convict there and the lack of a motive is the big issue. I think we can all agree that the Italian police really messed up the case with the interrogation and the DNA. The big loser is the victims family, imagine how they feel tonight.

Warper

Police evidence was presented showing that Knox and Sollecito did not have alibis for the time of the murder. Sollecito maintained that he was at his apartment, using his computer. Police computer analysts testified that his computer had not been used between 9:10 on the evening of the murder and 5:32 the next morning.

Knox has maintained that she was with Sollecito at the time, but during police questioning after 10 pm on Monday November 5th 2007, Sollecito said that he could not be certain she was with him when he was asleep. Their version of events was contradicted by a witness, who testified that he had seen Knox and Sollecito chatting animatedly on a basketball court around five times between 9.30 and midnight on the night of the murder.

Knox's DNA was matched to the handle of a kitchen knife recovered from Sollecito's flat, and the prosecution stated that Kercher's DNA was on the blade. A June 2011 report by court appointed forensic experts concluded that the previous results indicating that Kercher's DNA was on the knife blade appeared "unreliable because not supported by scientifically valid analytical procedures". Prosecution witnesses stated that the knife could have made one of the three wounds on Kercher's neck.

Carlo Torre, a professor of criminal science based in Turin, hired by Knox, testified that all three wounds originated from a different knife that had a blade one quarter the size of that recovered from Sollecito's flat. During her trial, Knox's lawyers argued that she had used knives for cooking at Sollecito's apartment.

Tayla

Warper wrote: »

There were 3 people convicted originally. Guess what, the person from a broken family and lack of support is still in prison. Being able to afford top laywers is the difference between spending your life in jail or not. God isnt the system great.

He's guilty, completely 100% guilty but of course that couldn't possibly be the reason why he's still in prison now could it...

Anyway he had a rich foster or adoptive father (can't remember which)....clearly he didn't think Rudy was worth the support......

orourkeda

The standard of forensic and circumstantial evidence in this case was absolutely disgraceful.

How on earth they managed to secure a conviction on it baffles me.

x in the city

Mazeire wrote: »

No worries. If you don't want to know what's going on around you that's entirely your choice. It would be nice though if you were slightly more respectful of others choices and not so quick to dismiss them as crap.

Thanks.

from what i have read i am not entirely convinced amanda is innocent, plus the fact Italy is basically 1 rather large corrupt country.

as for a movie on it... thats just lol

but im not at all surprised.

its just all ballooning into a orgasmic tabloid saga zzzzzzz

orourkeda

Warper wrote: »

Police evidence was presented showing that Knox and Sollecito did not have alibis for the time of the murder. Sollecito maintained that he was at his apartment, using his computer. Police computer analysts testified that his computer had not been used between 9:10 on the evening of the murder and 5:32 the next morning.

Knox has maintained that she was with Sollecito at the time, but during police questioning after 10 pm on Monday November 5th 2007, Sollecito said that he could not be certain she was with him when he was asleep. Their version of events was contradicted by a witness, who testified that he had seen Knox and Sollecito chatting animatedly on a basketball court around five times between 9.30 and midnight on the night of the murder.

Knox's DNA was matched to the handle of a kitchen knife recovered from Sollecito's flat, and the prosecution stated that Kercher's DNA was on the blade. A June 2011 report by court appointed forensic experts concluded that the previous results indicating that Kercher's DNA was on the knife blade appeared "unreliable because not supported by scientifically valid analytical procedures". Prosecution witnesses stated that the knife could have made one of the three wounds on Kercher's neck.

Carlo Torre, a professor of criminal science based in Turin, hired by Knox, testified that all three wounds originated from a different knife that had a blade one quarter the size of that recovered from Sollecito's flat. During her trial, Knox's lawyers argued that she had used knives for cooking at Sollecito's apartment.

The evidence simply wasnt compelling enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they murdered the girl.

Warper

Tayla wrote: »

He's guilty, completely 100% guilty but of course that couldn't possibly be the reason why he's still in prison now could it

Anyway he had a rich foster or adoptive father (can't remember which)....clearly he didn't think Rudy was worth the support......

:rolleyes: Show me the proof

orourkeda

x in the city wrote: »

from what i have read i am not entirely convinced amanda is innocent, plus the fact Italy is basically 1 rather large corrupt country.

as for a movie on it... thats just lol

but im not at all surprised.

its just all ballooning into a orgasmic tabloid saga zzzzzzz

There should be no doubt. On that basis alone the right decision has been reached.

Warper

Lets face it, this is exactly like the OJ Simpson case where if you can hire a top quality laywer you have a good chance of getting off. History has proven that wealth is the best way to stay out of prison. Even look at Strauss-Kahn

A Primal Nut

ColeTrain wrote: »

Wasn't she not found guilty of slandering the police, she falsely accused them of starving her and abusing her. It may have been under harsh interrogation but who knows.

Also, whoever killed the victim wasn't an expert on handling knifes. They also used towels to mop up the blood and wrap a blanket around her? Why?

Sollecito also couldn't give her an alibi, which is very strange. Also, his computer showed it was not in use that evening, which he claimed it was.

Maybe there isn't enough to convict there and the lack of a motive is the big issue. I think we can all agree that the Italian police really messed up the case with the interrogation and the DNA. The big loser is the victims family, imagine how they feel tonight.

I agree with that. According to the following article the police didn't measure the exact time of death. This would have clarified whether Amanda and Raffaele's alibi about being in Raffaele's apartment was correct or not.

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/the-neverending-nightmare-of-amanda-knox-20110627

Page 4.

NickDrake

orourkeda wrote: »

There should be no doubt. On that basis alone the right decision has been reached.

Exactly - Its amazing how people don't understand the law and try and convict her on absolute rubbish evidence.

she was totally innocent. The actual murderer even admitted the crime in jail to other prisioners.

orourkeda

Cypher_sounds wrote: »

Amanda Knox's Lawyer should been swimming in Money soon from Compensations.

She lost four years of her life on a bullsh1t murder charge.

Thats only fair

Thrill

Warper wrote: »

Lets face it, this is exactly like the OJ Simpson case where if you can hire a top quality laywer you have a good chance of getting off.

Like they did in the first trial?

orourkeda

NickDrake wrote: »

Exactly - Its amazing how people don't understand the law and try and convict her on absolute rubbish evidence.

she was totally innocent. The actual murderer even admitted the crime in jail to other prisioners.

I agree. But how can a case even reach court if certain standards of evidence are not met.