Sure. American courts are no strangers to miscarriages of justice.
Right, that’s all jingoism. There was nothing presented in this thread which makes questioning the trial a legitimate position.
Show me one post from this thread where that presumption appears.
Read “Monster of Florence”. There is no chance that either the evidence or the procedure would hold up in an American court. The Italian system allows rumor and innuendo to enter proceedings to a degree that the US system would find laughable. The prosecutor is a hack fan of conspiracy theories and this travesty is the result.
A murder trial shouldn’t be about thinking she seems guilty. She seems like she might be guilty to me. A reasonable person however, can’t find that she is guilty beyond the reasonable doubt standard. I feel bad for her and much like in Japan, Italy has a long way to go towards establishing a responsible judicial system.
This is hardly worthy of a response
A “feeling”?
How about, the lack of any definite physical evidence? All I’ve heard is that they found her DNA on a knife, and I’m at a loss to understand why that’s significant since one’s DNA is apt to be on any and every kitchen utensil in the house where one lives. I don’t know from eleven months of testimony; all I have is a couple of soundbites on CNN. Biased they may be, but if they’ve been omitting information about real evidence, please enlighten us. Of course, that would be real evidence I’d like to hear about, not just that her boinking, drinking, and toking lifestyle–one that would raise few eyebrows on most university campuses–is reason enough to put her away.
The length of the trial has nothing to do with whether the defendant is truly guilty. The Simpson criminal proceeding went on a lot longer than eleven months, but he was acquitted. By your logic, that was the correct outcome?
Well, I for one, have never had any reason to disparage the Italian justice system.
Until now.
I’m not saying that there aren’t problems in the US system, but it must be said that from the point of view of the accused, there are MANY MANY more safeguards. That many of the “miscarriages of justice” in the US are of the OJ variety (where someone clearly guilty goes free) instead of the reverse, I believe is a glorious tribute to the US system.
I honestly don’t have any idea if she’s guilty or not, but I do know that based on my US sensibilities which include “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” and “better that ten guilty people go free than one innocent wrongly convicted”, that this is a travesty.
It’s not as bad as landing in court in Iran or North Korea or something, but I still find it somewhat terrifying that in a seemingly westernized developed nation you can end up in a court that is so heavily skewed towards conviction.
Unless we are talking about Norway or something, the average foreign judicial system is apt to be far more corrupt and unjust than the US. The idea that the Italian system is better designed and less corrupt than the US boggles the mind. It is one of those things you say to sound open minded, but it is complete nonsense.
Would you say the same for Russia? Italian civil service has never had the reputation for clean hands and, as one example, the mafia continues to have a level of influence that would be unimaginable in the US.
I have to ask: You admit that you have a limited knowledge of this case and (presumably) the evidence for or against guilt, correct?
Why are you more interested in Knox’s childhood/teenage years rather than the evidence that convicted her? Quite frankly, I think it’s weird you admit you don’t know much about the actual murder/trial, don’t seem at all interested in reading up on the case but would like to play armchair psychologist.
Just a prurient interest? Like to play CSI?
I understand what you’re saying. I don’t have the data to agree or disagree with it. I do know, however, that verdicts like Knox/Sollecito have happened in the United States with enough frequency that I don’t feel comfortable making the distinction between “us” and “them.”
Hogwash. I would take the US system over one with a majority rules jury, not sequestered, that includes two members not my peers any day.
Oh, and I would like the concept of double jeopardy to exist, thank you very much.
thanks for completely missing my point.
the relative merits of the US criminal justice system over the foreign system could not be any more irrelevant. it is what it is. americans voluntarily visit these countries and subject themselves to the vagaries of whatever criminal justice system these countries have.
Yes, but apparently there are some here who think that extremely suspicious behavior like this (not to mention the handwritten confession where Amanda said she “had a vision” of being at the murder scene and hearing Meridith’s screams) mean absolutely nothing, and if there isnt gallons of Amanda’s blood mixed with Meridith’s, (along with a live-action DVD recording of the murder as it happens, authenticated by NASA and independently reviewed by the replay officials at Monday Night Football), poor widdle Amanda could NOT POSSIBLY have been involved…
Yes, Amanda MAY be completely innocent of any wrongdoing in this savage murder, but if that is the case, she has done a masterful job of making herself appear to be about 116 kinds of bull-goose bughouse crazee, (not to mention icy and indifferent to her roomates death) which in a lot of peoples minds (including at least 5 Italian jury members) equals GUILTY.
No, you presume that any complaints by Americans of the injustice of this situation is the result of arrogance.
Of course anyone who goes into a foreign country is subject to their laws, no one is disputing that. But should I never study abroad, for fear that I may be accused of a crime? Must I be a legal expert on every country that I choose to travel, because their concept of criminal justice lacks in certain key areas?
If you were studying abroad, would it cross your mind beforehand to examine their jury system in the event you were accused of killing your roommate?
That doesn’t mean we have to like it.
And I think it’s fair to say that people are not going to plan their holidays around the nitty-gritty of each nation’s criminal justice systems.
If it’s so patently corrupt and unfair as everyone (edit: many, just in case hyperbole isn’t appreciated) here seems to think it is, then yes.
I wouldn’t go waltzing into North Korea for precisely this reason. If it’s so unfair in Italy, then I would expect one’s analysis to be the same. However, it’s not really that much more unfair than it is here, which is why I chuckle at the “ZOMG! She’s been railroaded” genuflection.
Like? no. Accept? 100% yes.
which is what many people can’t do in these situations.
It’s a question of degrees. Obviously nobody’s claiming that Italy is as bad as some despotism that will just disappear you off the streets and might give you a sham trial, but it’s apparent that the accused are not afforded the same protections they are in our system.
Does this create enough risk that an average person isn’t going to travel there? Probably not. But do we have to sit back and pretend that this trial was just as fair as one that would have been held under the US rules? Heck no, especially since this appears to be a situation where the differences in the system might have changed the outcome.
The example this has been compared to most in this thread is the case of the West Memphis Three, right here in the US. The problems that people have with the Italian justice system aren’t that it is completely unfair, but that the accused has fewer protections against a prosecutor determined to convict them. As far as visiting goes, it seems like a matter that only comes up in the incredibly rare event that one is falsely implicated in a serious crime, so it’s easy to roll the dice even if the result is far worse in the millions-to-one chance that you find yourself the target of an overzealous Italian prosecutor.
Can’t somebody just bribe the Mafia or La Cosa Nostra and spring her from prison?