This thread’s just descended into people making shit up. What the fuck do you know about whether the matter was investigated or not? In actual fact the claims were investigated:
That was a simulpost with you, and wasn’t aimed at you, but Steve MB.
How do you know that the judiciary did not investigate these allegations? The fact that she will have a separate trial just related to these accusations in three months’ time seems to bely a lack of diligence on the part of the Italian authorities.
She will have her chance (again) to substantiate her assertions very shortly. I can anticipate the prosecutor in that trial making an argument somewhere along these lines:
“Knox made self-incriminatory statements to the police which she later tried to handwave away as the product of police mistreatment. The fact that she could not, at any prior time, substantiate these allegations is a rather clear indication that her motive was to have this evidence excluded or diminished, not to set right any actual wrong-doing by the police.”
Sorry about that.
I stand by my statement, though.
I have no particular opinion on whether Amanda Knox is guilty or not, but I do question the cheerleading “go team go” mentality of all the people who are so convinced she is guilty that they are defending the integrity of the Italian police. You wanna talk about how fat Kate Moss is when you’re done?
Who the hell is defending the integrity of the Italian police?
Not sure if you’re talking about me or not, but if so, you’re wrong.
I’m not “defending the integrity of the Italian police”, but rather attacking the integrity of the vicious, lying murderess, her contemptuous parents, and the various simpletons who rally to her “cause”. There’s your “go team go”, right there.
Sorry I missed your post earlier. Minor correction - I wouldn’t classify her parents as “rich”. From everything I’ve seen in the media, they’re solidly middle class, and the expense of defending their daughter is leading them straight to eventual bankruptcy.
Otherwise, spot on!
I’m not an American and I have no real idea if the woman involved is guilty or not; indeed, I haven’t perused the evidence of her case at all. As far as I know, your description of her parent’s actions are exactly right, and they engaged in a deliberate attempt to stir up political trouble.
However, that being said … prosecuting her parents for “criminal libel” of the police on its face appears contrary to basic principles of freedom of speech. It is certainly recognized in the common law world that questioning the acts of public servants like the police should, in the civil sphere, not in general be “chilled” through libel lawsuits (such statements enjoy a so-called “qualified privilege”). The same ought to go, but far more strongly, for accusations of criminal libel, as the power-imbalance of prosecutors, police and the state ought not to be enhanced by allowing it to shut down accusations of abuse by punishing the accusers for their accusations.
That seems an entirely seperate concern from whether the woman in Italian custody is in fact guilty, or whether she has been rail-roaded. Indeed, assuming that the Italians authorities are being subjected to untrue and unfair accusations of railroading in the court of international public opinion, it seems to me that by bringing these charges, they are playing into the parent’s hands - presumably, assuming that the courts in Italy are in fact honest, they would face a tough onus to prove their case (I assume they would have to prove some sort of malice on the part of the parents beyond a reasonable doubt); if they prove it, the parents will claim this as further evidence of the court’s corruption; if they do not, the parents will claim this vindicated them …
I consider Gary McKinnons case to be far worse as he could be extradited and spend many years in jail. The Knox’s? there is no danger of that.
As for freedom of speech? Well that always comes with responsibilities. Even in the USA you can’t say what you want about anyone you want. You run the risk of someone taking legal action against you. This case is no different.
If they have evidence then go to Italy and fight the case, if they have no evidence then they were stupid to make the allegations.
Herein lies the snag. When you play in someone else’s yard you play by their rules. So yeah, what you’re saying would definitely apply in America. Things aren’t the same everywhere. It’s their country and if they want to send a message to the parents that’s for them to decide. Whether it’s right or wrong is for the Italian’s to decide, not a bunch of foreigners, saying, “but it shouldn’t work that way!”
And I’m not sure they are so ‘middle class’, no one I’d classify as middle class can afford to send their child to take their uni in Italy. These people have an interest in appearing to ‘not’ be throwing around their money and influence, when, in fact, that’s exactly what they’re doing. They’re good at manipulating appearances and accustomed to getting their way. So much so, that they believe they can change this.
OK, again: I’m pretty sure that, if there is one group of human beings who I would trust to decide what is right and wrong, it is not the Italian police.
Just because you believe she’s guilty, or even taking for granted that she is guilty, that doesn’t mean that everyone who is anti-Amanda Knox is good and pure and motivated by the right things, just because they are on the right side of this case or agree with you. The corruption and cronyism in Italian government has been a punchline for a long time, and with good reason. There is absolutely zero reason to support this libel action or to become a moral relativist in order to do so, even if we take it as a premise that Knox is guilty of the crime.
Who is even advocating having the Italian police decide what’s right and wrong?
There is something in that, though I distrust this sort of relativism (by the same token, can one really criticize Iranians hanging gays?) - but, from what I understand, the parents did not commit the alleged crime in Italy, but in the UK.
The post I quoted immediately above my statement?
Nobody in this thread has claimed that the Italian police should be the arbiters of right or wrong. Certainly not the post you quoted. The judge will decide that.
It’s not really “relativism”, though, is it? I mean, the Italian law is just … different. Nobody has adequately explained why it’s wrong or the American law is superior. There’s been a lot of posturing about “freedom”, and so on, as if the accident of history that is US or UK libel law is the very model of liberty and justice. Ironic, given libel is one of the tools used to shut down debate in both the UK and US.
Well, I gave it my shot above.
In a single sentence - criminal libel accusations for allegations of police abuse create the potential for a particularly troubling form of “libel chill”, because if the very act of accusing the police of abuse can itself be a crime, the potential for abuses increases exponentially.
Certainly one could argue that, if truth is a defence to the charge, no real harm done. But “libel chill” works because the average person rightly fears the cost and inconvenice of defending themselves against such a suit. How much more serious is that fear, when the outcome is a criminal conviction and possibly jail time?
The post you quoted doesn’t have the word police in it, dear.
The power imbalance is significantly different in countries where a civil law system exists, since in those systems the inquiry isn’t done on behalf of the prosecution. Which means in theory at least that the power of the state, police, etc…benefits the accused as much as the prosecution (for instance, the state will have to engage expenses, assign police personel, etc.. in search for exculpatory evidences if required). In fact, the issue of power imbalance is one of the major criticisms of the common law system.
However, Italy’s legal system as evolved quite a bit afar from the “classical” civil law system. In particular, the inquiry is led by the prosecution, which is rather typical of a common law system. But there still is a magistrate in charge of overseeing it (as far as I understand).
So, I’m not sure to what extent your “power imbalance” argument applies to Italy’s criminal procedure. To give an example, I don’t know if and to what extent an accused in Italy can demand a specific enquiry, expertise, etc… to be implemented at the state’s expense (extremely roughly, he doesn’t have this option in a classical common law system, but benefits from it in a classical civil law system)
Maybe it’s a better system where people who make accusations like Knox’s parents are doing should be forced to provide evidence to back them up?
Sure, we could say that the Italian police should investigate their own once the accusations were made, but why do so without evidence of misconduct? Shouldn’t the one making the accusation have the burden of proof? The Italians are basically telling them “Put up or shut up” and I don’t really think that’s all that unfair given the circumstances.
Of course in the US, we err on the side of individuals and not the government. Anyone making an accusation against the government deserves to be heard, and investigations deserve to come out of it if there is even the slightest evidence of possible wrongdoing. I can see how that burden on the government, regardless of who’s making the accusation, makes for a stronger, personal civil liberties country. That’s fine for us. The Italians think different. They are not wrong, just different
There are times, especially now in this bitter partisan season, that I wish we could apply their laws to us. Punish anyone who accuses the government of misconduct if they cannot prove it in court. Would certainly make for more civility.