Knox Released

Hmmm:

In a ruling read to a tension-filled courtroom, an Italian jury on Monday cleared Amanda Knox of murder and other charges, nearly four years after she was arrested on suspicion of having killed her roommate in this picturesque Italian university town.

There was an audible gasp in the courtroom as the verdict was read, then an eruption of emotion, prompting the judge to call for silence. Knox herself was nearly hysterical, according to CNN’s Matthew Chance, and had to be assisted out of the courtroom by two people.

I’ve been casually following the case and I my opinion was been expressed by Bill James: nothing will restore your confidence in the American system of criminal justice than watching that of another country. This seemed a case built more on sensation and innuendo than evidence.

But I’m interested in your opinions. Murderess or victim?

Comments are closed.

  1. InaneGoldfish

    when the prosecution rebuts the court’s expert DNA witnesses as “the shoddy work of people with little experience in genuine investigation”… you start to wonder if they every had a case to begin with… my vote would have been for acquittal

    Thumb up 0

  2. HARLEY

    When i first heard of this case, and the “facts “surrounding it, i got the impression that Amanda knox was doing her best to act like the Lil American girl at the mercy of a alien country. Maybe that impression was wrong.

    Thumb up 1

  3. Poosh

    He’ll leave by the back door. That way, with the help of all the media bar Fox News, this entire should-be-scandal will be brushed away. Not that it will ever gain traction currently, but if it does start to, it will lose traction when he leaves, including some claims that “Obama told him to leave” in order to actually turn this scandal into a positive: ooh! Obama is a leader!

    Thumb up 0

  4. Seattle Outcast

    Now if they will only make some attempt to compensate her for 4 years of unjust imprisonment.

    They also need to take that miserable excuse for a prosecutor out and hang him in the city square. Look him up; he’s been chasing “demonic sects”, “witches” and other assorted non-existent boogeymen for decades with the help of a psychic.

    Thumb up 0

  5. Seattle Outcast

    Four of three, for telling the truth about her interrogation.

    I’ve known for years that Europe in general had a legal system that was mostly a joke. You leave your “rights” at the US border – best to remember that in most of the world, once accused, you have to prove innocence, they don’t really have to prove guilt. After all, why would they accuse an innocent person?

    Thumb up 3

  6. Kimpost

    I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but I think that it’s difficult to call justice something general in Europe. It varies greatly, IMO. I’d probably prefer Sweden over any country on earth, because it’s the system I’ve grown up with. But after that I’d prefer Germany, France and UK over Italy, Greece, Russia or Albania, just to name a few.

    And as far as I know all democracies stem from legal traditions that require establishing guilt.

    Thumb up 0

  7. Poosh

    Yeah totally. The more trashy eurotrash countries are corrupt. Not horribly corrupt but corrupt by UK/US standards, and German. French standards.

    Italy and Spain are aften seen as just another advanced western country. Not quite true. This Amanda Knox case was a modern witchunt.

    Russia is a whooole other story though ah a.

    Thumb up 0

  8. mrblume

    After all, why would they accuse an innocent person?

    Please. When it comes to that kind of authoritarian thinking, the US is up there with the best of them. And not just when dealing with supposed terrorists.

    There are so many examples of outrageous abuses by prosecutors, and general stupidity all around, in the US criminal justice system, a small selection of which Hal himself has talked about this blog, I’m not sure what’s so special about this case that it would make him reassess anything.

    Thumb up 0

  9. Poosh

    on a day to day basis for a regular citizen it is much better to live in America, Sweden, UK than Spain or Italy. You can cut that “authoritarian” crap right now. That relates to extreme cases and many can justify it i.e it’s your opinion.

    When it comes to countries like Spain or Italy, criminal justice just isn’t up to the standard of say, a German experiences. And the government, politicians are often mildly corrupt as a norm, not an exception. Spain and Italy need massive overhauls. This case is special in it just highlights how absurd “justice” is in these countries. Even in America for all its faults you are bloody lucky.

    Thumb up 2

  10. AlexInCT

    And as far as I know all democracies stem from legal traditions that require establishing guilt.

    Erm, can you elaborate on that? I am not sure I understand what guilt has to do with demoracy.

    And I will start off by saying that I am not a big fan of pure demcoracy. Pure demcoracy is basically 3 wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner. I prefer a republic that restricts the will of the majority somewhat. Then again, even a republic seems to not be immune to the masses discovering that they can use their vote to raid the treasury as I believe it was Plato pointed out, basically causing the downfal of said demcoracy.

    Thumb up 0

  11. Poosh

    This is what my friend had to say, who is a girl – and it seems to be a lot of girls have a psychological investment in making sure Knox is a villain:

    Since when did you become a forensics expert Poosh :P only some of the evidence was compromised, not all. And let’s not forget the fact she was apparently staying at her boyfriends that night, despite independant witnesses seeing her in several places that evening. Don’t be so easily swayed by the media. Evidence is evidence, even if the Italian police are tards and risked cross contaminating some of it. There are other points though that are black and white. I’m not saying she is guilty but I don’t think you are in a position to say she is ‘obviously innocent’ either. I did study forensics and although the italian police/investigators f***ed a lot up, there is still a huge amount of evidence that involves Knox. I think it’s awful that her family are unlikely now to ever know the truth or have closure on such a horrible murder. She was acquitted solely on the fact that evidence was compromised, the actual degree of that will never be truly known ad therefore other evidence that is important could have been disregarded. Don’t forget Knox will profit out of this massively……justice????​ Right….

    oh come on. The media has tried to make the case as emotive as possible, straying from simple facts. There are forensic experts who also actually give evidence against her, maybe you’re being selective about what you read. You forget that I am not saying she’s guilty but honestly, nothing about this case is ‘obvious’ as you say. It doesn’t take someone who practices forensics, but who knows to what degree evidence can or cannot be compromised and how much the other evidence gathered is worth. This is hardly a witch hunt, you exaggerate so much….and the key word in that quote was ‘theory’, when did I ever say I had a theory on the murder? No, read again. No-one (not even you surprisingly) can say she did or didn’t do it. There is ot strong enough evidence to say she did, due to cross contamination, but neither is there anything really strong enough to say she didn’t. Another big part of why you can’t really say that, is that Italy have a completely different legal system to us, a system that OFTEN (read more cases from italy, france etc) fails them as their legal system relies totally on inquisitorial evidence. This isn’t the first case Poosh where this has happened, just a massive publicity awareness of it. … This one is just super hyped up to a ridiculous degree. And what is wrong with you? What is there about this to rub in anyones face? It’s not a competition Poosh, a girl was murdered. Rub it in her familys face? Completely the wrong thing to say!

    Thumb up 0

  12. Kimpost

    One does not have to with the other, I just stated the fact that democracies seem prone to use western justice systems. Anyway, democracies (regardless of form) surely are better than dictatorships at what we would call justice, so I think the democratic world should be our meter.

    We all generally base our justice systems on civil- and common law, and all it’s subtypes.

    As for your republic preference, I would agree on principle. I like the US system. But notice that most democracies have provisions to prevent mob rule. Individual freedom is pretty important in most places…

    Thumb up 0

  13. richtaylor365

    To tell you the truth I am a bit surprised that pretty much everyone here thinks she is innocent. Knox is worse than Casey Anthony, not only was she complicit in murder but she implicated an innocent man to cover her tracks, is there anything worse then that?

    Not only did the prosecution provide 400 pages of proof at the original trial, but even without the DNA (which only some was suspected as improperly handled, not all, and the DNA which was not suspected was rock solid). Knox lied to the police about her whereabouts that night, she and her boyfriend staged a fake burglary in the other apartment to conceal their crime, this is undisputed. Once found out about the lie, she lied again, implicating a totally innocent man who then spent two weeks in jail (and a ruined reputation). Once he produced dozens of eye witnesses that placed him at his bar that night (not at the scene) he was released. During interrogation she revealed something no one knew except the police, that the victim was sexually assaulted before the murder. She lied to the police when they became suspicious as to the victims where abouts, when the police entered the apartment all the victim’s friends where there wanting to know if she (Kircher) was alright, but not Knox, who tried unsuccessfully to block the police from entering, then when they did enter she fled the scene, knowing that a dead Meredith Kircher would be found.

    She got a fair trial the first time, but the sensationalism of the case, propelling her to “Mumia” status, and some behind the scenes work from the State Dept. got her a second hearing and acquittal.

    Now we have Meredith’s family wondering what the hell happened and a murderer (or an accomplice to murder) coming home to make millions off of her work, nice.

    Thumb up 0

  14. briggie

    You should see the comments on the article that Hal linked. If that is how people think justice works, this world is doomed. It is surprising that people can not understand simple concepts like “Innocent till proven guilty” or “A person can not be convicted of a crime unless beyond any shadow of a reasonable doubt.” The episode of penn and teller’s bullshit about the justice system has a nice summary of that at the end.

    Thumb up 0

  15. AlexInCT

    Anyway, democracies (regardless of form) surely are better than dictatorships at what we would call justice, so I think the democratic world should be our meter.

    Do you have hard proof or are you basing this on the fact dictatorships tend to control their justice systems to favor those in power? Frankly I don’t hold many of the West’s justice systems, maybe even none of them, in too high regard, because I consider many of them politicized too. I guess it is a matter of degrees. They are better than those of your average dictatorship, but they have just as many problems IMO.

    Individual freedom is pretty important in most places…

    I have a real hard time with this one Kimpost, and that’s because I find that the majority of people in practically every Western nation seem to conflate freedom with the state taking care of them and protecting them from the consequences of their mistakes or bad choices. In fact, I feel that they often have traded their real freedoms for such guarantees. The collective welfare takes precedence over the individual, especially the individual that doesn’t want the state penalizing them for working hard and trying to get rich.

    Thumb up 2

  16. Poosh

    I don’t recognise some of those claims. The DNA was obviously suspect right from the start. Even the logic of it. No DNA traces or evidence has been found that for her at the murder scene that was not later dismissed by experts. At most there is circumstantial evidence of her guilt, such as possible staged break in. Her apparently erratic behavior is not evidence of guilt, especially if she was subject to various police indiscretions which is not uncommon in Italy. It isn’t as clear cut as perhaps I made out but it is clear cut that she is at least due “insufficient evidence” in terms of not found guilty, rather than innocent. I am not aware that she fled the scene once police arrived. In fact if I recall they called the police.

    Thumb up 0

  17. Poosh

    And how is it that this couple, forgive me if I get this wrong, but they help murder a girl, create a staged break in, ruffle through the victim’s clothes and stuff, lock the door on the way out and yet somehow leave no dna evidence ? It really beggars belief.

    Not to mention the simple fact that the judge was himself under investigation. This entire trial smells of corruption and stupidity, mixed with a dose of anti-americanism. Even if she is somehow guilty nothing has demonstrated this beyond reasonable doubt. Nothing.

    Thumb up 1

  18. richtaylor365

    Even the logic of it.

    How so? Chain of custody measures aside, there was Knox’s DNA mixed with the victim’s blood in the bathroom, there was Knox’s fingerprints on the knife with the victims blood that was later found in the boyfriend’s apartment. Sure, all this gets thrown out because of chain of custody problems, I understand that, but that does not change the DNA hits they found, only it’s admissibility.

    And how is it that this couple, forgive me if I get this wrong, but they help murder a girl, create a staged break in, ruffle through the victim’s clothes and stuff, lock the door on the way out and yet somehow leave no dna evidence ?

    They did leave DNA, but the evidence was ruled inadmissible. What is also interesting is that police forensics found the entire room wiped with bleach, a room where Knox lived for 4 months they only found one fingerprint that was not wiped with bleach. The prosecution also produced a witness who worked at a convenience store in the area who testified at the first trial that when she opened up at 8:30 in the morning, Knox was waiting at the door, she entered and bought cleaning supplies including bleach, the receipt of the purchase was produced in court.

    Look, I admit that no one here sat in on the trial and heard all the evidence so what we do here is give an opinion based solely on stuff that we have read about the trial, fair enough, I don’t know for sure what happened, but I know what looks suspicious and when I apply the “reasonable and prudent” test, what a reasonable and prudent man would consider of her story, it lacks credibility. She was caught lieing about her whereabouts that night and she falsely implicated her boss, why would an innocent person do this?

    The burden of proof was not met (or so they say) and she was acquitted, fine, that is the judicial system at work, I have no problem with that. But there is a big difference between being acquitted and being innocent. Personally I hope whatever monetary gains she receives gets garnered in a civil suit by the poor guy that she implicated for the murder.

    Thumb up 0

  19. Seattle Outcast

    You really need to dig a bit deeper than what was tossed out there by the British press.

    First off, it’s been established that she was interrogated without a translator for 50+ hours, during which she was denied legal representation, sleep, food, water, etc. Her interrogation, and anything “learned” from it have been proven to be worthless.

    Second, the prosecutor was still pursuing his “satanic cult” angle from a previously botched investigation of a serial killer in Florence.

    Finally, nobody has been able to come up with anything at all that resembles a motive. Seriously, an “orgy gone bad” is the best they could come up with?

    Thumb up 0

  20. Seattle Outcast

    Chain of custody measures aside, there was Knox’s DNA mixed with the victim’s blood in the bathroom, there was Knox’s fingerprints on the knife with the victims blood that was later found in the boyfriend’s apartment. Sure, all this gets thrown out because of chain of custody problems, I understand that, but that does not change the DNA hits they found, only it’s admissibility.

    No, there was substantial cross contamination on all the DNA, and the DNA was so degraded that you could have gotten a “match” from a chimp at that point. Also, it was proven that the knife in question was not the murder weapon as it could not have left the wounds on the victim.

    The prosecution also produced a witness who worked at a convenience store in the area who testified at the first trial that when she opened up at 8:30 in the morning, Knox was waiting at the door, she entered and bought cleaning supplies including bleach, the receipt of the purchase was produced in court.

    This was shown to be a prosecution-contaminated witness. The actual clerk that worked the counter said that Knox wasn’t present.

    Thumb up 1

  21. Poosh

    That seems fair, there are a lot of issues but “innocent until proven guilty” means innocent as far as I’m concerned, in civil law bar the odd circumstance. My main issue is no motive at all other than the most insane notions pulled out of a judge’s arse.

    No evidence that Knox brought cleaning products and the eye witness only claimed he saw her a year after the murder, he did not see her buy bleach. However, I seem to remember there being a receipt saying she bought bleach but that might have been bullshit. I can buy her creating conflicting accounts and blaming her boss under police pressure if certain tactics were used against her, which I can believe. But that’s just me. Like here. So much of what was reported in the UK about the murderer turns out to be baseless or dubious and this reaks of trial-by-gossip.

    If they had bleached the flood of the victim their dna would still be there as they re-created a false break-in. I read the report that she did cartwheels after the murder – turns out this is bullshit based on one account from an Itallian policeman and she was actually doing yoga etc to relieve stress which is far more believable than her doing cartwheels. There was so much “facts” that were reported by the media that turned out to be not even used in the trial it’s just mental.

    I should retract that it is as clear cut but it certainly is incredibly dubious, and as now seem sto be the case, this case would have been thrown out of court if it got to the UK.

    Thumb up 0

  22. Poosh

    The knife which may well – and probably imo – was not the murder weapon would be expected to have her finger prints on it. It was a kitchen knife.

    Thumb up 0

  23. Poosh

    She was caught lieing about her whereabouts that night and she falsely implicated her boss, why would an innocent person do this?

    Now I read that might not even be true. She could not speak italian at the time fully apparently and the police inquired as to a text from her boss.. If she was under duress she might have been coaxed – or out of fear – blamed the guy. Then maybe concocted a story. This seems plausible under duress. She recanted it later. The prison sentence she just spent was for this crime anyway: slander. She has not served time for murder, unless I am mistaken.

    Thumb up 0

  24. AlexInCT

    If that is how people think justice works, this world is doomed. It is surprising that people can not understand simple concepts like “Innocent till proven guilty” or “A person can not be convicted of a crime unless beyond any shadow of a reasonable doubt.”

    You do realize that those 2 items are pretty rare, if not unique to the US justice system, right? And many countries pretend these rights exist, but when push comes to shove, the law works the exact opposite way. Italy is one of them for sure, and I speak from experience. Of course you could be in one of those countries where the only way the law works fro you is if you are connected.

    Thumb up 1

  25. AlexInCT

    To tell you the truth I am a bit surprised that pretty much everyone here thinks she is innocent. Knox is worse than Casey Anthony, not only was she complicit in murder but she implicated an innocent man to cover her tracks, is there anything worse then that?

    The problem is that the Italians not only botched the evidence gathering/analysis process, but made a complete joke of the trail that used them as evidence. I am surprised they actually dismissed the case instead of just sticking to the desired outcome. Guilty or not, such a level of incompetence should not be excused so that the desired verdict can be reached. Not if you want to seriously claim you value the law and the legal system supporting it.

    Thumb up 0

  26. richtaylor365

    Guilty or not, such a level of incompetence should not be excused so that the desired verdict can be reached.

    Not making excuses at all, they did “botch” a good deal of the case, but evidence that was not botched and was not refuted by the defense indicates to me that at the very least, she was in the room at the time of the murder.

    Knox’s wiki page indicates that the verdict was overturned because her civil rights were violated, here in the US this would be grounds for a new trial, there they just let her go.

    Thumb up 0

  27. richtaylor365

    Also, it was proven that the knife in question was not the murder weapon as it could not have left the wounds on the victim.

    Her wiki page mentions 2 murder weapons and that the one found in the boyfriend’s flat was one of them.

    This was shown to be a prosecution-contaminated witness. The actual clerk that worked the counter said that Knox wasn’t present.

    I found a source that indicates that it was the boyfriend that bought the bleach that morning, and dated receipts were produced in court.

    Thumb up 0

  28. richtaylor365

    This seems plausible under duress

    Does this seem reasonable to you? I have also read links that say she was only questioned in Italian, the prosecutor denies this of course. You think if the cops here picked up a French person for murder and wanted to interrogate her, they would try to communicate with her in English or better to get a French speaking interpreter? Seems like a colossal waste of time to speak to someone who can’t understand you. But why accuse someone totally innocent? You say she recanted later, much later and after 14 days the innocent guy spent in jail, was she duressed for 14 days? Yes, she was found guilty of making false accusations and got a 3 year sentence for it, but why did she do it?

    Thumb up 0

  29. briggie

    Yeah I am aware of that. Did not mean to single out just this case. A good example of public outrage for someone’s acquittal can be found in the US with the recent cases of Casey Anthony and DSK. I am sure those cases have been gone over quite a bit at this site, which is why I did not bring them up specifically. Even in the US there are people who think that the prosecution is always right and assume guilt (I hate you Nancy Grace). Normally I wouldn’t care, but:

    “Some part of the public takes her seriously, and her show erodes the respect for basic rights.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/23/business/media/23carr.html?_r=2

    Thumb up 0

  30. Poosh

    I think it’s quite easy to see this happening. Put yourself in her shoes under certain assumptions (which could be untrue, sure). I would even say the Judge should be ignored, which he should be, I have no idea how he was judge. She knew very basic Italian I believe. But if she did get an interpretor then his name should be easy to find. But there is so much “this and that” that clearly there is strong reasonable doubt. There was also the actual murderer which people seem to forget, who if I read this correctly was caught, with a knife, then released! Only to be arrested again. It just goes on and on. Even if she was guilty which I doubt, no non-retarded motive, there is no evidence for her guilt that creates a “beyond reasonable doubt”.

    The reason she may ahve pointed to her boss who was innocent, was that the police suggested it to her, via a text message she received. I am unclear of the details – but if stressed and suffering aggression from a police force which I have no reason to believe is non-corrupt given the entire stinking state of Italy is a cesspit, she could feel pressured into accusing someone, anyone, as stupid as that is. And then concocting a story.

    It is true that she could also have tried to blame someone to shift the blame from her. But if she is so intelligent that she quite effectively it seemed managed to help commit a murder and remove most of the evidence as is suggested, how could she have somehow pointed to a man who more than likely would have had witnesses and make her a liar with little effort? It doesn’t add up. She’s a calculating villain who somehow blamed someone who more than likely would have an alibi? If I was her, and guilty, and for whatever reason i was going to blame someone, I would make up a stranger who I did not know. Not point the figure at someone who may well have an alibi.

    Thumb up 0

  31. Poosh

    In addition it was my believe that she and the other guy called the police in the first place.

    If she was guilty and this was all part of a plot then I’d expect her to have her story straight before she alerted the authorities.

    Thumb up 0

  32. richtaylor365

    Yes, she accused an innocent man of committing the crime, and in the process revealed something no one would know, except an accessory, that the victim was sexually assaulted right before the murder. Knox supposedly was with her boyfriend all night, not at the scene of the crime, how did she know what happened to Kirchner?

    Thumb up 0

  33. Poosh

    Is that even true though? I have not heard that but I have no reason to believe its true. That could be the case but I have no reason to believe that anything Knox said whilst being interrogated was said of her own accord nor the truth of the statements. They did not even bother to record the interviews.

    Thumb up 0

  34. richtaylor365

    In addition it was my believe that she and the other guy called the police in the first place.

    It was Sollecito (the boyfriend) that called to report a burglary of another roommate, Filomena Romanelli. He made two calls to the police, both recorded, and in both he made the statement that nothing was missing, Romanelli was not at home, how did he know nothing was missing when Romanelli had not returned to inventory her stuff?

    While the police where investigating the burglary they inquired about Kirchner’s locked door (separate room), Knox intentionally lied to the police, telling them that she always locks her door and this was nothing unusual. Romanenilli comes home and tells the police that Kirchner NEVER locks her door and something was amiss. As the police break down the door Romanelli is genuinely concerned so she sticks around to see what is going on, but Knox high tails it out of there, knowing that the police will discover Kirchner’s dead body.

    Thumb up 0

  35. Poosh

    It was my understanding that Knox saw the blood in the bathroom and noticed the murder victim’s locked door and called her mother to ask her what to do who told her to call the police. Her boyfriend then called – I assumed he was with her but she could have said. Again I have not read your account, I have read nothing about her running away from the scene, which makes no sense in itself as she (her bf) called what the wiki page says are the National Guard. Why would she call the National Guard to come to the flat where they would find the dead body and then run away. Are we supposed to think she is that stupid? I dont’ know if she didn’t run away but have not heard that. Again and again dubious accounts pop up which sometimes never make into the court case but are reported as ‘fact’ to the Italian media which filters to other countries’ media. I don’t know for sure which account is true but i’ve not heard of the account you have given before. Certainly not her funning away.

    Thumb up 0

  36. richtaylor365

    Is that even true though?

    I don’t know, I was not there. But there was dozens of google links that reveal portions of her testimony.

    Knox also placed herself at the scene and told cops this:

    “He wanted her. … Raffaele and I went into another room and then I heard screams. … Patrick and Meredith were in Meredith’s bedroom while I think I stayed in the kitchen. … I can’t remember how long they were together in the bedroom, but the only thing I can say is that at a certain point I remember hearing Meredith’s screams and I covered my ears. … I can’t remember if Meredith was screaming and if I heard thuds but I could imagine what was going on.”

    For someone who was at her boyfriend’s all night, and should not have known anything about a murder which she was not a part of, she goes into a lot of detail.

    Thumb up 0

  37. Poosh

    She retracted that and claimed it was under duress. She even claimed she was struck – which she is being taken to trial for slander i believe. I don’t know if that’s true or not but I happen to think it’s more than possible. If Knox was misstreated, I can imagine under a similar state I might say all sorts of things.

    I am sorry to see my favourite Ann Coulter rush out a half-baked article here, she’s assumed it’s part of a narrative that she has failed to look at the case in detail (Coulter has taken certain claims, some I have not heard before, and not taken the big picture or listened to anyone else, it’s not just the ‘america media’ who have problems with this case, I’ve seen in more upscale newspapers in the UK how this case would never have happened in the UK, it would have been “thrown out of court”) – but this case has multiple nuances and strings and it’s very hard to follow, and certainly Ann Coulter has presented a very simple and inaccurate version of events or, just one point of view. Not that I have looked into this in detail, I haven’t got the time but basic “beyond reasonable doubt” denies her guilt in that context.

    Thumb up 0

  38. richtaylor365

    Not that I have looked into this in detail, I haven’t got the time but basic “beyond reasonable doubt” denies her guilt in that context.

    Ditto. I have to respect the mechanisms of our criminal justice system, so although I think both Casey Anthony and Amanda Knox are more complicit then the findings, that is how the system works, so be it.

    Thumb up 0

  39. Poosh

    I think Ann Coulter simplified this case far too much and forget to engage in other perspectives. There are plenty of experienced experts who thought Knox was innocent / there was insufficient evidence. With the guy whose name I can no longer remember who was executed the other month for killing a policeman, Coulter glossed over too many points and simplified what was quite a complicated case (though she made some fair points in places). I think her lawyer skills have faded.

    An issue that should not be forgotten is how corrupt Italy is and, as the EU falls apart, we should remember Italy and certain other EU countries aren’t as “free and westernised” as the rest of us. The mere fact that Knox was being judged by a corrupt, at the time investigated, judge shows how absurd that country is. I saw an article showing how a large amount of Italy’s politicians were under investigation for corruption, every party, everyone. It was sickening.

    Living in America/UK .. Sweden … has its perks.

    Thumb up 0

  40. richtaylor365

    I was not aware of the corruption problem with the judge.

    regarding Italy, I vacationed there last year and fell in love with the place. And how can you not love a place where the prime minister (72 years old) is banging an 18 year old model. Talk about “La Buona Vita”

    Uploaded with ImageShack.us

    Thumb up 0

  41. Seattle Outcast

    When all the various debates over half-remembered details is over, remember this; all the evidence used by the prosecution was tossed because it wasn’t actually useable in any fashion. They hosed it from the beginning to end with the forensics, and then relied on extremely questionable witnesses (unreliable even in the best of circumstances), character assassination, and essentially making shit up to fit the theory.

    The only person that was 100% guilty beyond any doubt was the drifter from the Ivory Coast with a criminal record. A person that had zero connection with either Knox or her “boyfriend” of less than a week that she spent an evening fucking and getting stoned with.

    Thumb up 1

  42. Hal_10000 *

    Rich, rather than respond point-by-point I’ll put it all here:

    1) this was not a subtle crime. Kercher’s room was a mess. Guede’s DNA and fingerprints were everywhere. If they were such brilliant criminals to clean that up, why did they leave his evidence and ONLY his evidence everywhere?

    2) The DNA supposedly tying her to crime was miniscule and basically inconclusive. The only DNA in the room was from Kercher’s bra, collected 47 days after the crime. Knox lived there. Finding a trace of her DNA 47 days later is not interesting. Considering what they were alleging — a sex orgy gone wrong — her DNA and her boyfriends should have been all over that apartment.

    3) Knox’s confession and implication of someone is not surprising, considering she was interrogated until 5:45 in the morning. False confessions are VERY common. The Innocence Project has found that about 1/5 of false convictions involved a confession. Here are jus a couple of stories:

    http://www.martytankleff.org/Gui/Content.aspx?Page=STORY
    http://www.economist.com/node/21525840?fsrc=scn/tw/te/ar/silenceisgolden

    The Knox bashers can’t have it both ways. They can’t say they believe part of her confession and disagree with the rest.

    4) Stranger witnesses are notoriously unreliable, especially in a high-profile case like this. One of the witnesses — I think it’s the one who saw them fighting — was a known drug addict.

    5) The “faked break-in”, assuming it was faked, is perfectly consisent with Gede acting alone and trying to cover his tracks.

    6) that he knife may have matched some of the wounds means less than you think. Wound-matching evidence is notoriously unreliable.

    I just don’t know what theory the Knox-is-guilty crowd have. She managed to conceal 2/3 of the crime? Despite her guilt, she decided to stay in the area unlike the others? She disposed of all the evidence except the murder weapon? It makes no sense?

    On the other hand, Gede acting alone, Knox giving a false confession and an overzealous prosecutor with a LONG history of sensational retarded satanic ritual theories makes sense of everything.

    Here’s a great article in Rolling Stone:

    http://www.economist.com/node/21525840?fsrc=scn/tw/te/ar/silenceisgolden

    Thumb up 1

  43. richtaylor365

    All good points

    My suspicion that she was part of the crime rests on several factors:

    The roommates testified in court that she and the victim constantly fought over Knox’s hygiene, she was a slob and never cleaned after herself.

    Filomena Romanelli, one of the roommates testified that when she got home she found the victim’s clothes in the washing machine, which was warm, who was washing her clothes since she was already dead for like 12 hours. Also, she testified that Knox called her that morning advising that when she got home she found lots of blood in the bathroom, yet, she took a shower and was going to her boyfriends, like nothing was out of place. Romanelli told her something was wrong (obviously) and where is Merideth, Knox said ,”I don’t know” and hung up. Other witnesses, including Romanelli heard Knox lie to the police, telling them that the victim Always locks her door, when in fact Romanelli knew (and told the police) that the victim never locks her door. Time after time after time, Knox is caught in lies and deceptions.

    While being interrogated she lies to the police, telling them that she was with her boyfriends house all night, even the boyfriend contradicts this.

    She gives up her boss as the killer and “imagines” this sex scenario where the victim is raped and murdered, which turns out to be exactly what happened.

    We have the boyfriend’s house keeper testifying that she found two containers of bleach in his apartment, a brand by the way that she did not recognize, and since she is the one that cleans the apartment, she knows what cleaning supplies belong there. There is also the receipt found in the apartment of the bleach bought that day.

    Police forensics found bleach residue all over the crime scene, yet earlier testimony puts Knox as a slob who never cleans up after herself, why is she cleaning the place now?

    The boyfriend makes 2 calls to the police reporting the burglary, in both calls he tells them that nothing was missing or stolen, since it was not his apartment , it was Romanelli’s, how would he know nothing was missing? When Romanelli gets home and checks her stuff she finds glass shards on top of her laptop and clothes which would indicate that the place was rifled first, then the glass was broken.

    As I said earlier, it is difficult to render an educated opinion without sitting in on the trial and hearing all the evidence, but just on the stuff that I have read on the case, I believe at the very least, she was in the room and witnessed the murder, but, I could be wrong.

    Regarding the rough interrogation, I agree that confessions under these circumstances are not reliable, but she never confessed, she gave them lie after lie after lie, people do not lie for no reason.

    Thumb up 0

  44. Hal_10000 *

    While being interrogated she lies to the police, telling them that she was with her boyfriends house all night, even the boyfriend contradicts this.

    Just to clarify: my understanding is that the boyfriend did not say this. What he said was that she could have left the apartment while she was asleep. They then told her he’d said she’d left the apartment to get her to confess.

    Thumb up 0

  45. richtaylor365

    Just to clarify: my understanding is that the boyfriend did not say this. What he said was that she could have left the apartment while she was asleep.

    Not really

    Knox told the police that she spent the night at Sollecito’s, they went to bed early, stayed there all night and did not get up until 10am. During the trial the prosecution presented several witnesses that contradicited this, seeing the two together at all hours of the night outside his apartment, here is just one.

    During his own police questioning, Sollecito said this:

    During his interrogation, Sollecito admitted to police that he did not know for sure if Knox actually spent the night of the murder at his house, as she had told police earlier.

    Also:

    Knox maintains that she spent the night of Nov. 1, 2007, at Sollecito’s house. Sollecito did not take the stand during this trial, and his lawyer told NEWSWEEK that it was, at least in part, because he could not corroborate Knox’s alibi. In fact, before his arrest Sollecito told police that he was smoking pot and downloading cartoons on his computer the night of the murder. He said Knox was there, but that she left, and that he could not remember when or if she came back. Knox says the two cooked dinner, watched a movie, smoked pot, and had sex. A parade of bizarre witnesses—including a homeless man who slept on a park bench near the scene of the crime, and who said he did not wear a watch that night—testified in the trial that Knox and Sollecito were near the house close to the time of Kercher’s murder. Computer experts for the prosecution testified that there was no activity on Sollecito’s computer during the time he was allegedly downloading files

    If a murder occurred at your house, the police would be looking at you real hard because, after all, you live. Romanelli, the other roommate, had a rock solid alibi and did not lie to the cops, Knox did lie, why?

    Kirchner was not a hooker or even promiscuous, how did Knox know that Kirchner was sexually assaulted before the murder?

    Thumb up 0

  46. Poosh

    During the trial the prosecution presented several witnesses that contradicited this

    And the defence, perhaps convincingly, have said they were unreliable.

    You keep saying Knox lied whilst ignoring she was was allegedly threatened, manipulated and even hit. And who said that Knox knew she was sexually assaulted? I have zero reason to believe a word the Italian police say – unless they can offer recordings.

    Thumb up 0

  47. richtaylor365

    Poosh, this thread has run it’s course (at least for me) so I will close with this, if you want to believe that Knox’s statements implicating her boss in the murder, statements btw that included a sexual assault which is exactly what happened , were some how coerced and not freely given, that’s fine, but others do not agree. Judges/jurors in the first murder trail, in the subsequent trial for lying and obstruction of justice (which she was found guilty of) and the civil suit against her for defamation brought by the boss (which she was found guilty of) all these officials thought differently. If you want to believe all that stuff about her being beaten and that she was only interrogated in Italian, fine, but that is not reasonable to me. The purpose of an interrogation is to illicit information, how is that possible when you can’t communicate? Out of all those folks at the station, what percentage of those could speak English, 90%, more?

    It is also interesting that for all the bad mouthing about the DNA, how unreliable it was, funny, but it was the DNA that identified Guede as being at the scene. After being picked up he admitted to being at the murder scene, witnessing the murder himself but not being the murderer. As far as I know, there is no movement afoot to get that conviction overturned for sloppy DNA handling, yet that same DNA found both Knox and Sollecito complicit in Kirchner’s murder.

    The one thing I will give you, and it just boggles the mind, but it was totally inexcusable to have not tapped the Knox interrogation. I can not imagine any police organization anywhere on the planet that would not tape a murder investigation interview, incredible.

    Thumb up 0

  48. Poosh

    What bothers me is the possibility of other regular Italians suffering through this legal system.

    The reason I do not hold the Italian police to much esteem or their claims is because the entire Italian state is defunct and unworthy of being called European, as far as I’m concerned. What country allows a judge under criminal investigation to preside over anything? Italy is a mess and it’s 2011 and this just grinds my gears. I can’t find the article off hand but a massive amount of its regular politicians are under investigation for corruption, it was a staggering stat but I can’t find the link. What a joke the EU is to not reign in Italy – which may well default apparently.

    Thumb up 0