Amanda Knox

[suzyq]

Why is Amanda forever on trial - doesn't double jeopardy exist in Italy.

Trial after trial .... what happens to her now - can she be forced to return to
Italy?

[Todd]

Trial after trial .... what happens to her now

She asks the Italians for best three out of five?

[Gurn Blanston]

Why is Amanda forever on trial - doesn't double jeopardy exist in Italy.

Trial after trial .... what happens to her now - can she be forced to return to
Italy?

No, she can't. The US doesn't recognize convictions that violate double jeopardy. If Italy applies for an extradition writ, it will be denied. Rightly so, they have no grip on how to run a court system apparently.

[TheGSMoeller]

No, she can't. The US doesn't recognize convictions that violate double jeopardy. If Italy applies for an extradition writ, it will be denied. Rightly so, they have no grip on how to run a court system apparently.

I was wondering if the US would comply with the Italian's conviction and hand her over, if that's even how it works at this point. The trial(s) seemed to be a mess.

[Ten thumbs]

In the UK we have quite rightly abandoned double jeopardy as advances in forensic science are so often bringing up new evidence. Without commenting on this particular case, someone who is guilty should never feel safe.

[North Star]

No, she can't. The US doesn't recognize convictions that violate double jeopardy. If Italy applies for an extradition writ, it will be denied. Rightly so, they have no grip on how to run a court system apparently.

I'm sure that the West Memphis Three would agree...

[Gurn Blanston]

I'm sure that the West Memphis Three would agree...

As it is now, the Italian court hasn't issued an extradition request. Speculation is they know it will be denied and lead to a years-long court battle, so better to take a paper victory. Always subject to change though.

The WM3 isn't remotely like sending an American citizen to a foreign prison due to a double jeopardy conviction in  a non-American court. Just sayin'. In any case, surely you aren't asserting that the WM3 were innocent!   

[Sef]

This all sounds like you know that she is innocent! I wonder what you would be thinking if it wasn't a good looking young white middle class girl? And because the justice system is different in Italy it doesn't make it any more unjust than here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25989342

I'm sure that if the crime had been committed in the US and the culprit found in Italy you'd have something different to say about extradition. And in any case it would depend on the extradition treaty and it is very unlikely that an international treaty would have a provision that the suspect must be found guilty under the provisions of the second country - that would be pointless.

Think further. If this was a young black guy found guilty of murdering a white middle class girl in Texas or Missouri, then we would execute him (in an inhumane way) - and have a lot of people justifying it because he had it coming to him - hypocracy!

[Gurn Blanston]

This all sounds like you know that she is innocent! I wonder what you would be thinking if it wasn't a good looking young white middle class girl? And because the justice system is different in Italy it doesn't make it any more unjust than here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25989342

I'm sure that if the crime had been committed in the US and the culprit found in Italy you'd have something different to say about extradition. And in any case it would depend on the extradition treaty and it is very unlikely that an international treaty would have a provision that the suspect must be found guilty under the provisions of the second country - that would be pointless.

Think further. If this was a young black guy found guilty of murdering a white middle class girl in Texas or Missouri, then we would execute him (in an inhumane way) - and have a lot of people justifying it because he had it coming to him - hypocracy!

The problem is, you don't know if she is guilty any more than I do. The first  trial was such a media circus, the Italian press was far more hung up on the pretty white girl (Foxy Knoxy, IIRC ) than I would ever be, even if I wasn't too old for such things. If the so-called facts of the case have ever been presented accurately in the press, then the entire thing consists of either circumstantial evidence which has no probative value, or forensic evidence which has a multitude of possible explanations (she lived there, why wouldn't her DNA be present? for example). I don't personally have any dog in this fight. If she did it I would be pleased to see her jailed. But her trial doesn't belong in the press, either Italian, American or British.

[Sef]

The problem is, you don't know if she is guilty any more than I do. The first  trial was such a media circus, the Italian press was far more hung up on the pretty white girl (Foxy Knoxy, IIRC ) than I would ever be, even if I wasn't too old for such things. If the so-called facts of the case have ever been presented accurately in the press, then the entire thing consists of either circumstantial evidence which has no probative value, or forensic evidence which has a multitude of possible explanations (she lived there, why wouldn't her DNA be present? for example). I don't personally have any dog in this fight. If she did it I would be pleased to see her jailed. But her trial doesn't belong in the press, either Italian, American or British.

Well I can certainly agree with all of this. As the article said, let's hope that cool heads prevail when the extradition process begins and it doesn't become an us versus them match.

[Brian]

I've done some reading on the case. Certainly by the American standard of "reasonable doubt," she is not guilty of the crime. The Italian police handled the evidence with carelessness that's below average even for Italian police; none of the witnesses' stories make much sense; the prosecution's description of Knox sounds like blatant exploitation. I don't know if the Italian system has the "reasonable doubt" standard, but it clearly doesn't have the double jeopardy rule. What's happening is unfair to her.

[Sef]

I've done some reading on the case. Certainly by the American standard of "reasonable doubt," she is not guilty of the crime. The Italian police handled the evidence with carelessness that's below average even for Italian police; none of the witnesses' stories make much sense; the prosecution's description of Knox sounds like blatant exploitation. I don't know if the Italian system has the "reasonable doubt" standard, but it clearly doesn't have the double jeopardy rule. What's happening is unfair to her.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Code_of_Criminal_Procedure#Appellate_Courts

From a BBC web site: "The Court of Cassation ruling last March meant the latest hearing in Florence was a re-run of the appeals process, - so technically not a new trial but a continuation of the original one."

"The case has been described as one of the highest profile murder trials in recent Italian history. That is partly because of the young age of both victim and defendants and partly because of media interest in the alleged sexual nature of Meredith Kercher's death. "I don't remember any case which has been as highly publicised and where the countries have taken sides,'' noted defence attorney Alan Dershowitz told the AP news agency. "I think it's fair to say that the vast number of Americans think she is innocent and a substantial number of Italians think she is guilty,'' he said."

But how can that be? Surely they are all hearing the same thing? Is it being presented differently for local consumption? Can anyone rely on anything they may have heard about the case? As I wasn't there I can never know the facts, and I'm not going to judge based on potentially biased media reports, or on a potentially lying defendant. And, being a dual American/UK citizen, I have no side to take in any case. My thoughts are that if the process has been legally followed in Italy, and that she has been found guilty through all the appeals processes, and that a treaty exists to extradite such a person,  then under what grounds could you refuse to extradite a convicted criminal? If you didn't like the legal system then you wouldn't have signed the treaty. If there is a history of unjust convictions (be careful US) then you wouldn't have signed the treaty. Unless there is a clause that says that if the convicted criminal is eminently shagable she should not be extradited, I cannot see the justification.

By the way, this isn't just anti-American. It works the other way round too. The British guy with Asbergers wanted for hacking for instance. The British government refused to extradite him to America based (really) on public opinion last year. No different. Xenophobia and nationalism (and racism) still exists today throughout the world. It bugs me.

[Sammy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Code_of_Criminal_Procedure#Appellate_Courts

From a BBC web site: "The Court of Cassation ruling last March meant the latest hearing in Florence was a re-run of the appeals process, - so technically not a new trial but a continuation of the original one."

"The case has been described as one of the highest profile murder trials in recent Italian history. That is partly because of the young age of both victim and defendants and partly because of media interest in the alleged sexual nature of Meredith Kercher's death. "I don't remember any case which has been as highly publicised and where the countries have taken sides,'' noted defence attorney Alan Dershowitz told the AP news agency. "I think it's fair to say that the vast number of Americans think she is innocent and a substantial number of Italians think she is guilty,'' he said."

But how can that be? Surely they are all hearing the same thing? Is it being presented differently for local consumption? Can anyone rely on anything they may have heard about the case? As I wasn't there I can never know the facts, and I'm not going to judge based on potentially biased media reports, or on a potentially lying defendant. And, being a dual American/UK citizen, I have no side to take in any case. My thoughts are that if the process has been legally followed in Italy, and that she has been found guilty through all the appeals processes, and that a treaty exists to extradite such a person,  then under what grounds could you refuse to extradite a convicted criminal? If you didn't like the legal system then you wouldn't have signed the treaty. If there is a history of unjust convictions (be careful US) then you wouldn't have signed the treaty. Unless there is a clause that says that if the convicted criminal is eminently shagable she should not be extradited, I cannot see the justification.

By the way, this isn't just anti-American. It works the other way round too. The British guy with Asbergers wanted for hacking for instance. The British government refused to extradite him to America based (really) on public opinion last year. No different. Xenophobia and nationalism (and racism) still exists today throughout the world. It bugs me.

It doesn't bug me at all.  FWIW, I don't think Obama would allow her to be forced to return to Italy for a long prison term;  the evidence just isn't there.  If Obama does force her, I'd be okay with impeaching the man - don't screw a fellow American.

[Todd]

then under what grounds could you refuse to extradite a convicted criminal?

Power.  The US is generally far better at pressuring other countries into extraditing wanted persons than giving into requests to do the same, at least if there is an interest in not extraditing the person under consideration.  Sometimes the US fails to get their man (or woman), and sometimes they just hand over criminals, but handing over an American citizen on the basis of three trials with two different outcomes may be politically difficult.

But first, the Italians have to finish their legal processes, which as I understand it are not quite done, and then the Italian government would have to start extradition proceedings with the State Department and Department of Justice, and Ms Knox has the right to fight the process in court, all of which can take a very long time, possibly years.  In addition to potentially being a pawn in international politics, she could potentially be an issue in 2016 if this drags on long enough and she keeps on getting in front of cameras.

This isn't necessarily fair, of course, but that's a different issue, and it has nothing to do with her actual guilt or innocence.

[escher]

This all sounds like you know that she is innocent! I wonder what you would be thinking if it wasn't a good looking young white middle class girl? And because the justice system is different in Italy it doesn't make it any more unjust than here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25989342

I'm sure that if the crime had been committed in the US and the culprit found in Italy you'd have something different to say about extradition.

I think it's the fact that consciously or not, many tend to support they fellow citizens. Paradoxically, in Italy now there's also the case of two italian soldiers that have been accused of murder in India. And a lot of people here support them like they have not killed two men.

[vandermolen]

My sympathy in this appalling crime is entirely with the British victim, Meredith Kercher, who has been largely forgotten in the media circus. I have to say that I have little sympathy for Amanda Knox after she implicated a completely innocent person in the crime and her former boyfriend appears to have been trying to escape from the country. None of this makes them guilty of course but if the Italian Supreme Court upholds the original verdict I would hope that the US would extradite her to Italy.

[The new erato]

It doesn't bug me at all.  FWIW, I don't think Obama would allow her to be forced to return to Italy for a long prison term;  the evidence just isn't there.  If Obama does force her, I'd be okay with impeaching the man - don't screw a fellow American.

So Americans are free to murder all over the world as long as they can make it to home base before being caught? I hope that isn't your general position but only referring to this case since you consider he evidence weak?

I also refer to vandermolens finely considered post.

[Daverz]

My sympathy in this appalling crime is entirely with the British victim, Meredith Kercher, who has been largely forgotten in the media circus. I have to say that I have little sympathy for Amanda Knox after she implicated a completely innocent person in the crime

She did do time for that.  Who knows what stupid shit I would have done at 20 if I were alone and being threatened by the police in a foreign country in a language I barely knew.

As for whether she is guilty or not, what I do remember from the time of the trial was that the prosecutor was a complete nut who made up a ridiculous "satanic sex game" theory of the crime.  Shades of the Satanic Panic that the U.S. went through in the 80s/90s.

[vandermolen]

She did do time for that.  Who knows what stupid shit I would have done at 20 if I were alone and being threatened by the police in a foreign country in a language I barely knew.

As for whether she is guilty or not, what I do remember from the time of the trial was that the prosecutor was a complete nut who made up a ridiculous "satanic sex game" theory of the crime.  Shades of the Satanic Panic that the U.S. went through in the 80s/90s.

I doubt if Amanda Knox will ever be extradited but I do not think that being 20 years old is too young to be responsible for your actions, even under great pressure and surely protesting your innocence doesn't need to involve incriminating a completely blameless person. At what age do you become responsible for your actions? My own daughter was studying at the same university as the victim (and I'm talking about Meredith Kercher and not Amanda Knox), is a similar age and also did a year abroad (a very happy one in The Netherlands, where I had the great pleasure of meeting two fellow members of this forum). I guess that you have to expect people in the UK to be less sympathetic to Miss Knox than those in the USA.

[The new erato]

One wonders how many would have cared if she hadn't been a "looker".