What do YOU think charging them with a crime accomplishes? I’m not seeing these folks willingly going to Italy to get punished. I’m not seeing the US government allowing an extradition.
Perhaps Italy can wrangle an apology and retraction from the parents in exchange for dropping the charges.
Nobody sees the US government allowing an extradition. It’s not really a reciprocal crime, so there can’t be one. That’s not the point.
I imagine the charges would be dropped immediately if the parents apologized, although I’m not particularly familiar with the case.
You appear to be making one big assumption here: that there would be a conviction. That’s totally unfair. There would be a trial.
If they were being genuine they would be going through the Italian courts instead of the press, in my opinion. A quick look, at the actual evidence in the case, shows why the press is a better choice. They haven’t a leg to stand on in court, she wasn’t railroaded, the evidence was there to convict.
Of course they don’t want to believe she’s guilty, and they don’t want her to serve her time in Italy. All understandable. But that doesn’t change that she was convicted on convincing evidence. Their media campaign has only reflected badly on how entitled they feel. It must be galling to them to know that if it was America, their influence and money, would be enough to get the whole thing reduced to a misdemeanor and she’d be doing some community service and probably not much else.
If you want to launch an international media campaign to slag an entire nation’s judicial system, you’d better be ready for a little push back.
Plus it seems counter productive really. How can pissing off the entire nation’s judicial system possibly help your daughter? I doubt she’s getting treated better because of it, more likely the reverse. And if, you were hoping, someday in the future, they’ll soften and release her to the US, it seems like pissing them all off delays that possibility.
Personally, I think they’d have been further ahead to do a little weeping for the cameras, (save the outrage and attack tactics), then lay low for a few months and let public interest in this case subside. Let it fall from the front pages of the world’s newspapers. That would then be the time to act quietly, behind the scenes, keeping the press out of it, to appeal to have her shifted to the US, (where, of course, the games of influence can then begin in earnest). The Italian’s could have complied without looking like they are being influenced, or playing favorites. It’s called diplomacy and tact. Loud, aggressive confrontation isn’t always the best way, though often the favorite ‘go to’ response of many Americans.
The post you quoted doesn’t have the word first it it, dear.
So it doesn’t. I should rephrase: it’s a stretch to characterize the charges as “the Italian government’s response”.
Why do you bring up their daughter’s conviction as their motivation? Do you have evidence of that? The parents clearly believe there has been underhanded treatment in this process. Either that, or they are deliberately lying. I’m choosing the former where you seem to be adopting the latter.
If they believe the treatment was underhanded, then it’s certainly should be their right to publicly address those concerns. If the Italian government is so fragile they can’t stand public criticism, then I have a new opinion of that government.
It’s not clear what they believe. Maybe they believe there has been underhanded treatment, and maybe they’re trying to generate sympathy in the US media to pressure the State Department to intervene.
No one has taken that right from them, it is just that the Italian legal system considers such unsubstantiated claims to be libellous.
A new opinion? There really is only one opinion to have, and that is shared by the majority of the Italian population. But beware. The Government is not necessarily the same as the justice system.
Really? Even though that’s illegal?
I would have thought that if they genuinely felt such treatment had occurred, they should have placed a formal complaint, in Italy, with the relevant authorities. The fact that there seems to be some pretty strong evidence that no such tactics as alleged by Knox actually occurred would, however, present them with some difficulties.
Unfortunately, as noted several times in this thread, their approach was always likely to antagonise, rather than assist, authorities - in fact right from their daughter’s arrest. The arrogance of assuming that other countries operate in a more corrupt or incompetent manner than one’s own is common, admittedly, but rarely helpful.
I disagree. When the result of exercising a “right” is prosecution for libel, then I’d be hard pressed to call it a" right."
I think the key word in Novelty Bobble’s quote is ‘unsubstantiated’. I don’t think it matters where you are, if you lie - especially about the integrity of others - and you can’t back that up at all, that’s likely to leave you open to a legally-based response.
Fair point. But if you take an action in one country in order to cause damage in another then I think the damaged party is fully within it’s rights to take action within it’s own borders.
No-one is seeking extradition here.
But it does apparently matter where you are.
There is no evidence that the parents criticism of the Italian authorities was in any way malicious. It is their belief that this treatment occurred. Of course, if the Italian authorities would be kind enough to come forward and substantiate their claims, then there would be no question, but that isn’t necessary in a country where prosecution is a tool to use against those who criticize.
Speaking of unsubstantiated claims- how do you know there isn’t any evidence?
Cart before the horse, if you want to charge someone with abusing you, then the onus is on you to substantiate those claims, not on them to demonstrate they didn’t.
The problem with that, as applied to this case, is the lack of witnesses. Assuming the authorities did what they are charged with, they are highly unlikely to come forward and admit it. So, the “victim” of their abuse now, due to an archaic law, lacks the ability to publicly speak because - why again - they can’t prove the abuse and are thereby subject to prosecution?
If you went to the police and accused someone of a crime, would they expect you to provide some evidence?
They claim she was beaten over the head. Kind of tricky to hide that sort of evidence.
That’s not what the issue is here. They are accusing the authorities of underhanded treatment, based on the word of a witness to the events.
A good “police” agency would investigate the charges and determine whether a law had been broken, and who were the parties of interest in the acts in question.
The parents repeating the story to the police would be evidence, albeit weak evidence, that there might have been a crime committed. The problem is how many people have truly been wronged by a system that prosecutes those who complain publicly about the treatment of the authorities, and how many have accepted that treatment for fear of the prosecution should they complain publicly?
@ RNATB
They also claimed that she was denied food and water. Pretty easy to hard that.
Rape is hard to prove too, rarely are there witnesses, that doesn’t shift responsibility to the rapist to prove he didn’t do it.
Huh? Sorry, doesn’t parse.