Out of curiosity, how do you think Amanda Knox manipulated Rudy Guede (the actual murderer whose bloody fingerprints were all over the crime scene, and a known criminal who had been arrested only 5 days before the murder for breaking and entering) into committing the murder?
Did she use a voodoo doll to control his actions? Hypnotize him?
I get that you think she is a major figure in a 1500 year old Italian Satanic cult. But you should still come up with some actual mechanism by which she manipulated the killer. And then explain how she could be such a capable cult master when she could barely even speak the language and was too inexperienced to flee the country like her other roommates did (out of fear of false prosecution).
I am curious to see what emerges in the new trial. It may turn out that she’s acquitted. If so then I’ll certainly change my opinion on Amanda.
I know the investigation and trial was badly flawed. Maybe they’ll get it right in the new trial. I’m sure Rudy Guede’s involvement will be a big part of the case. Amanda’s defense has a lot more information to defend her with this time.
What evidence has you so convinced of Knox’s guilt? I only have a “read a few stories on CNN” level of knowledge about the case, but it didn’t make the evidence against her sound very convincing.
aceplace didn’t say it, but Knox’s prosecutor sure did. In fact, accusing defendents of being participants in satanic cults is apparently kind of that prosecutor’s modus operandi. I wish I were joking.
I honestly cannot fathom the minds of all these people convinced of her guilt. This shit is straight out of Arthur Miller.
As far as I could tell, from following the initial murder case when she was being tried, the main evidence against Knox was that her footprints were in the victim’s room. They were roommates, and if Knox had entered Kercher’s room to borrow her hairdryer or whatever, she would’ve left footprints. There’s no hard evidence connecting Knox to the murder, no motive (when they drag out the “satanic cult” thing, you know the prosecutors are grasping at straws) and the authorities contaminated the murder scene pretty thoroughly. Also, the media and the prosecution kept harping on what a slut and a bitch Knox supposedly was; even if true, being a slut and a bitch are not crimes. It’s like they were trying to character-assassinate her. I’m interested in what she has to say in her book.
I do, on the other hand, think Casey Anthony murdered her child, or at least caused her death via negligence. But I think the chances of Amanda Knox murdering her roommate are remote.
Maybe the fact that there is pretty much zero chance of American officials okaying an extradition based solely on an in-absentia re-trial of someone whose initial convictions were plagued by undeniable allegations of outrageous prosecutorial misconduct?
We can’t know for sure until it happens or doesn’t happen, I guess. But as far as I can tell, not even the “murderous skank” brigades calling for Knox’s sorcerous titties to be barbecued on a skewer seriously think a US-ordered extradition is a possibility.
Falsely accusing someone of murder should tell you something about this girl’s character. I don’t know if she had anything to do with the murder or not, but I don’t feel sorry for her.
Because if not, you don’t know what happened. In violation of their own policy and standard procedure, they declined to record the sessions, so the only people who know are the ones who were physically there.
Would it make you feel any different if the reason they kept the content of the interrogation under wraps was because they were lying, manipulating, and coercing their subject? Leading her and then intimidating her into agreeing? A subject who couldn’t even fully comprehend what was going on.
According to this article, it’s the text of the extradition treaty itself, which states that if you’ve already been convicted and served time for a crime, you can’t be extradited on a subsequent conviction for the same crime. The conviction did happened, even though the conviction was eventually overturned.
The argument against has been expressed earlier in this thread. The argument for says that our double jeopardy laws are irrelevant to the treaty.
So the motive changed from sex games and Satanic cults to “a heated argument over cleanliness in the Perugia apartment.” ? Those whacky Italian courts.
They do have Sollecito, though and if it’s really as flimsy as the people in this thread made it out to be, that’s a shame.
Mind you, after that incident with the seismographers, I don’t think I’d trust the italian judiciary to find their ass with both hands and a flashlight, as they say.
One complaint about the previous trial was that the prosecutor was terrible and ignored evidence. Being in America, we are naturally suspicious about things our laws prevent, like double jeopardy. But not having followed the trial, was this one more proper than the last one? Did the prosecution ignore or fabricate evidence? Basically, other than being pro-America, why do we think this is an unfair and injust outcome? Maybe Knox really did do it and it took a better prosecutor to nail her properly. I would hate to be the murdered girl’s parents, knowing that through bad luck, they got a bad prosecutor and now the murderer of their daughter gets to walk. This isn’t an Afghani tribal court here, what reason do we have to doubt that they properly convicted Knox?