RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

eulero83 -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 12:20:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444


quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Talk about fucking reaching. Do you even grasp the difference between implicating someone for murder versus saying something bad about their housekeeping? Do you know what slander is?

DNA aside, exactly how would she have some idea where the body is is the door is locked and she couldn't get in?


its certainly not slander to say that someone is a murderer or committed some other crime here in the US, it happens all the time, thats what tip lines are for.. the investigators and prosecutors did their job extremely poorly.. they were the ones that asked Knox for a list of people that Kercher knew & they would have all been questioned by them, including Lumumba.. and they were the ones that threw Lumumba in jail with no evidence & when he had an alibi.. just cuz someone claims a person committed a crime doesnt mean they actually did.. the investigators/prosecutors certainly should know that.. witnesses are very unreliable, thats why I dont believe what anyone claims unless there is actual evidence to back it up.. this case is full of that and the media reports also are very unreliable..


First thing for italian law you are not charged for defamation if it's not proven you perfectly knew what you where telling was false, so if asked a possible list of names you can point your finger on whoever you want, even if she told something like "maybe lumumba did, he's kind of creepy when meredith is around" she would not be charhed, but after 30 hours she could not explain why she knew about things only who was in the room at the time of murder could knew, she said something like: "I when home with patrick lumumba my employer, he knew meredith and fancied her, I was alone in my room and he was in meredit's, during the night I heard a scream and there was patrick telling he didn't mean to kill her", so they arrested him because there was an evidence.... a material witness... amanda. About the dna it's impossible there was no amanda genetical material around IT WAS HER APPARTMENT TOO, it's just that dna isn't found on an object with date and time on it so you can't use as proof genetic material of the residents, than dna was found, raffaele's one on meredith body, and meredith's one on a knife in raffaele's appartment, but the appeal judges decided that as in some labs that amount was not enough for tests even if most of the time it is that was a reason to ignore this proof, what changed now is that during trial review "cassation court" decided appeal judges had no right to exclude dna and other proofs.

Anyhow I could also point out that in the usa she would be in jail now as she had been judget and found guilty and no new proofs were found after this so end of the game, but italian costitution gives the possibility to everyone to defend themself in a second trial and no reason are needed to ask for it. In the second trial new judges decided there was a reasonable doubt, this is not an aquittal as the verdict can be definitive only when reviewed but it was enough to be released, during review it was decided there was not such a reasonable doubt, but while if during review you are found not guilty you are not guilty for good when the opposite happends you are given another chance.



BamaD -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 1:32:48 AM)

quote:

as soon as the american prosecutor asks for a lifetime sentence instead capital punishment this person is sent back in the usa
to answer what you wrote before the example, as I wrote before it's since the roman repubblic time in italy there is a principle against double jeopardy, so this would mean impose a different criminal procedure and a different way to deal with defendant freedom during trial, article 3 of US costitution guarantee a jury trial, so an american citizen can get away from murder in any country who has a bench trial system?
Anyhow another thing the review court can't say if evidence where not good enough for a resonable doubt, but just that judges broke some laws during the appeal in favor of the defendants, so that evidence's examination was affected, this doesn't mean there is not a reasonable doubt, so she is free to go where she wants and come back as actually supposed (not for sure) innocent.


So you would agree that forgien law should take precedence over American law even in American courts?
Would you favor extrediting a preist to a Islamist country were it was against thje law to profess any religion but Islam as long as they promised not to execute him? Would you send someone back to face Sharia law.
The Italians will have thier chance to present thier case during the extradition process. They may send her back but not just because the Italians say they want another shot at her.

Are you equating overturned with a mistrial?



eulero83 -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 4:01:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

as soon as the american prosecutor asks for a lifetime sentence instead capital punishment this person is sent back in the usa
to answer what you wrote before the example, as I wrote before it's since the roman repubblic time in italy there is a principle against double jeopardy, so this would mean impose a different criminal procedure and a different way to deal with defendant freedom during trial, article 3 of US costitution guarantee a jury trial, so an american citizen can get away from murder in any country who has a bench trial system?
Anyhow another thing the review court can't say if evidence where not good enough for a resonable doubt, but just that judges broke some laws during the appeal in favor of the defendants, so that evidence's examination was affected, this doesn't mean there is not a reasonable doubt, so she is free to go where she wants and come back as actually supposed (not for sure) innocent.


So you would agree that forgien law should take precedence over American law even in American courts?
Would you favor extrediting a preist to a Islamist country were it was against thje law to profess any religion but Islam as long as they promised not to execute him? Would you send someone back to face Sharia law.
The Italians will have thier chance to present thier case during the extradition process. They may send her back but not just because the Italians say they want another shot at her.

Are you equating overturned with a mistrial?


I try to make it simple but there are some cultural differences, what I am telling is you consider a tiral closed when 12 random people agree with a verdict, we consider the trial closed when two different group of judges have examinated evidences and a review court agree with a verdict and find trial was fair, so she was not found guilty or not guilty for italian laws, she was RELEASED while WAITING for verdict, actually the "corte di cassazione" found her GUILTY but no-one will ask for her to be extradated now as the system is on the defendant side and so SHE and her boyfriend have another shot, than when eventually found guilty american court can say she never run away from italy but released according to italian rights of a defendant. I was also telling the "Ne bis in idem" principle or how you call it double jeopardy is all over the world apllied to a DEFINITIVE verdict as established by the criminal law in that country.

now speeking about moral issues I consider torturing a person on an electric chair till death no different than sharia law, and being asphyxiated in a gas chamber or being put down with a poison shot like a dog unusual and cruel punishments, then there are universal rights like freedom of professing a religion, not being charged by racial criteria or for political ideas, have a fair trial and right to defence, not facing torture or unusual and cruel punishments, other can't be imposed internationally.




Nosathro -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 6:52:43 AM)

When I was in the Military serving in Germany one of my duties was to conduct a class on Customs and Laws to new arrivals. One good example was in Germany the Police and stop and search you, if you are living in a house not Military Housing, they can come in and search, no warrant is needed, if they find something, it good under German law. Actually what the Italians are doing is not so far from our own. Remember, Amanda Knox was orginally found guilty. An appeals court reheard the case, and found her not guilty, then the case went to the Highest Court in Italy were they overturned the ruling of the appeals court. This happens in our system alot. I think it is best to remember it their country, their laws.



eulero83 -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 7:41:24 AM)

I understand it can happen also in the usa's system but in our it's the rule, she was never out of jeopardy do no double jeopardy can be assumed, but this also part of a system that protects defendant rights and being found guilty in a first level judice in italy in most of cases doesn't mean a conviction or loosing any rights as you are presumed innocent untill highest court has not given a verdict, being jailed as precautionary act is possible only for serious reasons, just consider many politician in our parlament have been found guilty during first level judice or appeal.



BamaD -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 8:26:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

as soon as the american prosecutor asks for a lifetime sentence instead capital punishment this person is sent back in the usa
to answer what you wrote before the example, as I wrote before it's since the roman repubblic time in italy there is a principle against double jeopardy, so this would mean impose a different criminal procedure and a different way to deal with defendant freedom during trial, article 3 of US costitution guarantee a jury trial, so an american citizen can get away from murder in any country who has a bench trial system?
Anyhow another thing the review court can't say if evidence where not good enough for a resonable doubt, but just that judges broke some laws during the appeal in favor of the defendants, so that evidence's examination was affected, this doesn't mean there is not a reasonable doubt, so she is free to go where she wants and come back as actually supposed (not for sure) innocent.


So you would agree that forgien law should take precedence over American law even in American courts?
Would you favor extrediting a preist to a Islamist country were it was against thje law to profess any religion but Islam as long as they promised not to execute him? Would you send someone back to face Sharia law.
The Italians will have thier chance to present thier case during the extradition process. They may send her back but not just because the Italians say they want another shot at her.

Are you equating overturned with a mistrial?


I try to make it simple but there are some cultural differences, what I am telling is you consider a tiral closed when 12 random people agree with a verdict, we consider the trial closed when two different group of judges have examinated evidences and a review court agree with a verdict and find trial was fair, so she was not found guilty or not guilty for italian laws, she was RELEASED while WAITING for verdict, actually the "corte di cassazione" found her GUILTY but no-one will ask for her to be extradated now as the system is on the defendant side and so SHE and her boyfriend have another shot, than when eventually found guilty american court can say she never run away from italy but released according to italian rights of a defendant. I was also telling the "Ne bis in idem" principle or how you call it double jeopardy is all over the world apllied to a DEFINITIVE verdict as established by the criminal law in that country.

now speeking about moral issues I consider torturing a person on an electric chair till death no different than sharia law, and being asphyxiated in a gas chamber or being put down with a poison shot like a dog unusual and cruel punishments, then there are universal rights like freedom of professing a religion, not being charged by racial criteria or for political ideas, have a fair trial and right to defence, not facing torture or unusual and cruel punishments, other can't be imposed internationally.



Unfortunatly you did not answer what may well be the most important part of my post.
Does this ruling under Italian law equate to a ruling here of a mistrial, that is, that the first trial did not count?



Mammiloveshergir -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 8:45:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

as soon as the american prosecutor asks for a lifetime sentence instead capital punishment this person is sent back in the usa
to answer what you wrote before the example, as I wrote before it's since the roman repubblic time in italy there is a principle against double jeopardy, so this would mean impose a different criminal procedure and a different way to deal with defendant freedom during trial, article 3 of US costitution guarantee a jury trial, so an american citizen can get away from murder in any country who has a bench trial system?
Anyhow another thing the review court can't say if evidence where not good enough for a resonable doubt, but just that judges broke some laws during the appeal in favor of the defendants, so that evidence's examination was affected, this doesn't mean there is not a reasonable doubt, so she is free to go where she wants and come back as actually supposed (not for sure) innocent.


So you would agree that forgien law should take precedence over American law even in American courts?
Would you favor extrediting a preist to a Islamist country were it was against thje law to profess any religion but Islam as long as they promised not to execute him? Would you send someone back to face Sharia law.
The Italians will have thier chance to present thier case during the extradition process. They may send her back but not just because the Italians say they want another shot at her.

Are you equating overturned with a mistrial?


I try to make it simple but there are some cultural differences, what I am telling is you consider a tiral closed when 12 random people agree with a verdict, we consider the trial closed when two different group of judges have examinated evidences and a review court agree with a verdict and find trial was fair, so she was not found guilty or not guilty for italian laws, she was RELEASED while WAITING for verdict, actually the "corte di cassazione" found her GUILTY but no-one will ask for her to be extradated now as the system is on the defendant side and so SHE and her boyfriend have another shot, than when eventually found guilty american court can say she never run away from italy but released according to italian rights of a defendant. I was also telling the "Ne bis in idem" principle or how you call it double jeopardy is all over the world apllied to a DEFINITIVE verdict as established by the criminal law in that country.

now speeking about moral issues I consider torturing a person on an electric chair till death no different than sharia law, and being asphyxiated in a gas chamber or being put down with a poison shot like a dog unusual and cruel punishments, then there are universal rights like freedom of professing a religion, not being charged by racial criteria or for political ideas, have a fair trial and right to defence, not facing torture or unusual and cruel punishments, other can't be imposed internationally.



Unfortunatly you did not answer what may well be the most important part of my post.
Does this ruling under Italian law equate to a ruling here of a mistrial, that is, that the first trial did not count?


as explained before - the first trial is not over yet - just suspended until the verdict is finally approved



BamaD -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 8:51:10 AM)

quote:

as explained before - the first trial is not over yet - just suspended until the verdict is finally approved


I am tring to find common terminology. It now seems that you are saying that a trail may not be over for months after the verdict comes in?

Why would they let her leave if the trial wasn't over?



tj444 -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 9:00:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

First thing for italian law you are not charged for defamation if it's not proven you perfectly knew what you where telling was false, so if asked a possible list of names you can point your finger on whoever you want, even if she told something like "maybe lumumba did, he's kind of creepy when meredith is around" she would not be charhed, but after 30 hours she could not explain why she knew about things only who was in the room at the time of murder could knew, she said something like: "I when home with patrick lumumba my employer, he knew meredith and fancied her, I was alone in my room and he was in meredit's, during the night I heard a scream and there was patrick telling he didn't mean to kill her", so they arrested him because there was an evidence.... a material witness... amanda. About the dna it's impossible there was no amanda genetical material around IT WAS HER APPARTMENT TOO, it's just that dna isn't found on an object with date and time on it so you can't use as proof genetic material of the residents, than dna was found, raffaele's one on meredith body, and meredith's one on a knife in raffaele's appartment, but the appeal judges decided that as in some labs that amount was not enough for tests even if most of the time it is that was a reason to ignore this proof, what changed now is that during trial review "cassation court" decided appeal judges had no right to exclude dna and other proofs.

Anyhow I could also point out that in the usa she would be in jail now as she had been judget and found guilty and no new proofs were found after this so end of the game, but italian costitution gives the possibility to everyone to defend themself in a second trial and no reason are needed to ask for it. In the second trial new judges decided there was a reasonable doubt, this is not an aquittal as the verdict can be definitive only when reviewed but it was enough to be released, during review it was decided there was not such a reasonable doubt, but while if during review you are found not guilty you are not guilty for good when the opposite happends you are given another chance.

I dont know (unless I read actual transcripts) what she said and what she didnt say or when or to whom.. the media is pretty good at screwing up info they report on as "facts".. I am not going to take anyones word on what has been claimed cuz very often what you read they said is very different from what they actually did say.. people and the media will create a story or a different version to suit themselves.. Like i said in a previous post, I didnt follow the case at all over the previous years so I have not read all the variations of what she supposedly said and so I have also not been tarnished/biased by all of that.. I am not going to blindly believe 3rd, 4th, 5th hand versions..

of course there would be her dna, fingerprints, etc in the rest of the apartment.. I am talking specifically about dna, fingerprints, etc on the murder weapon, the girls body and in her room.. there was plenty of Guede's dna, fingerprints, etc in the girls room and yet the prosecutors claim it was Knox that held the knife and murdered the girl.. if she actually did that then why nothing of her in that room? (but plenty from Guede).. as far as a minute amount of her dna on a knife.. she lived there & would have during the normal course have had previous occassions to use knives, etc.. they never found any dna of her boyfriend on the girls body, they found a small bit on her bra which was left laying around the apartment for weeks after the murder so likely easily contaminated.. at least that is what one article said and the apparent basis for appeal & their release.. And imo, if Knox & her boyfriend had been involved then Guede would have blurted that out when he was first interrogated.. again, he was the one that ran (cuz he was the one that actually murdered the girl)..

I dont know that she would have it worse in the US.. the whole innocent until proven guilty without a shadow of doubt thing would likely have gotten her off here too.. its the shadow of doubt that people would have, especially since Guede left his dna, fingerprints etc all over the scene and immediately fled the country.. to me there are too many holes in the case against her.. maybe there wouldnt be if the prosecutors and investigators hadnt bungled it all..



YN -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 10:08:22 AM)

The sad part is that due to the investigations failings, her guilt or innocence, will never be established, and further, nobody else can likely be properly tried for the killing either.

As Lafayettelady noted earlier, attempting to retry her and the other accused on what uncontaminated evidence is left will likely by a futile production, and accusing and then trying anyone else for the death would be hopeless. Only the sin of pride likely keeps the case alive at this point.

The losers are the English woman's family and the people of Italy.



eulero83 -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 10:47:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Unfortunatly you did not answer what may well be the most important part of my post.
Does this ruling under Italian law equate to a ruling here of a mistrial, that is, that the first trial did not count?


Yes it's the closest thing, I actually don't know what happens in the opposite way in usa's procedure, like if she was found guilty during appeal court and not guilty by review court she was declared innocent for good and it was all over for good, is ti the same when a mistrial is declared and the defendant was found guilty in appeal?



eulero83 -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 10:59:53 AM)

tj444 I could tell you my theory about what happened but it's worth nothing, anyway I still can't explain how a knife with meredith's dna was found in Raffaele's appartement, guede could run away because he had no connection to the victim so this could give him time enough to disappear, but telling she had no active part in the murder is way too much.



thompsonx -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 12:06:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

Can she be extradited? Possibly, it's a call from our government. Should she? Hell No. Some europeans have a hard on to punish any Americans they can to make up for their own shortcomings.


How would you compare this case with the u.s. efforts to extradite roman polanski?



BamaD -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 4:19:32 PM)

quote:

she had no active part in the murder is way too much.

(in reply to tj444)
Profile Report | Post #: 132


Here overturning a verdict is the same as a not guilty verdict, it is over right then and the defendant is free.
If a higher court declars a mistrial the guilty verdict no longer stands because it is as if the trial never happened and they have to start over again.
The prosecution does not get to appeal period.



YN -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 5:10:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

she had no active part in the murder is way too much.

(in reply to tj444)
Profile Report | Post #: 132


Here overturning a verdict is the same as a not guilty verdict, it is over right then and the defendant is free.
If a higher court declars a mistrial the guilty verdict no longer stands because it is as if the trial never happened and they have to start over again.
The prosecution does not get to appeal period.



It is as a mistrial would be in your country. She was not declared innocent, but her primary trial was made null and void, due to failings of certain evidence.

Knox could be retried. However certain key evidence may not be used in any new trial.

The magistrate may choose to try her again however certain aces and faced cards will be missing from the government's hand if they choose to do so.



eulero83 -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 5:33:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

she had no active part in the murder is way too much.

(in reply to tj444)
Profile Report | Post #: 132


Here overturning a verdict is the same as a not guilty verdict, it is over right then and the defendant is free.
If a higher court declars a mistrial the guilty verdict no longer stands because it is as if the trial never happened and they have to start over again.
The prosecution does not get to appeal period.


so for what I can understand by what you say here, it is slightly different in italy if the appeal judice was "guilty" than the higher court can confirm or reduce conviction or overturn verdict, if the appeal judice was "not guilty" they can confirm or declare a mistrial.
Do you mean prosecution can never appeal to oppose a "not guilty" verdict?



Nosathro -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 5:51:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

she had no active part in the murder is way too much.

(in reply to tj444)
Profile Report | Post #: 132


Here overturning a verdict is the same as a not guilty verdict, it is over right then and the defendant is free.
If a higher court declars a mistrial the guilty verdict no longer stands because it is as if the trial never happened and they have to start over again.
The prosecution does not get to appeal period.

Not true. Yes an appeals court can overturn a verdict but it can be appealed to a higher court. The Surpreme Court can overturn a verdict and that would be the last on that, however in some cases the verdict is appealed but the Surpreme Court can return the case back for retrial. As I have said before there are cases that are retried such well known case are like the Miranda case, yes the Surpreme Court did overturn his conviction due to the confession used agains Miranda but returned the case back to Arizona for retrial. Miranda was convicted again.



LafayetteLady -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 6:20:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

she had no active part in the murder is way too much.

(in reply to tj444)
Profile Report | Post #: 132


Here overturning a verdict is the same as a not guilty verdict, it is over right then and the defendant is free.
If a higher court declars a mistrial the guilty verdict no longer stands because it is as if the trial never happened and they have to start over again.
The prosecution does not get to appeal period.


That is not necessarily true. The appeals court could overturn a verdict but remand the case back to the lower courts for retrial. The appeal court turning over the lower court's verdict does NOT automatically mean it's over.



LookieNoNookie -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 6:22:05 PM)

She did it.



tazzygirl -> RE: Amanda Knox retrial? (3/29/2013 6:39:11 PM)

Italy screwed up giving her back her passport and letting her leave.



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875