Amanda Knox - Deportation?

Post Reply New Topic

Not with the (probably) innocent people looking at spending their best years in prison?

I think it bears noting that Italy, for all its shortcomings, is still a prosperous, industrialised, Parliamentary democracy. Rule of Law is evident within the practical application of the Italian Constitution. Appellate courts are not able to revisit findings of fact made by courts of first instance. Put briefly, the country works. Not as well as it might, perhaps, but it works nonetheless.

Now that's not to say that all is perfect--after all, our countries work in the face of flawed organs of state. Certainly corruption is a problem in Italy, but it seems to me that the vast majority of public corruption takes place within the Executive branch, rather than the judicial. Judicial corruption is not one of the aspects cited by Transparency International, for example.

I certainly don't think that it ranks with the Canadian, Australian or New Zealand courts. But neither does it fall to the level of many of the terrible systems out there.

Baloney.

If that were the case, why does the US offer asylum to foreign defectors who'd be executed if they were sent back home? Should we sent them back and acknowledge the sovereignty of the countries they fled? And it's not just banana republic dictatorships they escaped from, but some of our alleged allies as well, like Russian and Chinese defectors.

That said, in regards to Amanda Knox, I would simply tell the Italians, "You allowed her to return to the US. If you thought she was guilty, why did you let her leave Italy in the first place? Oh, you found her guilty afterwards when you retried her a second time IN ABSENTIA? Well, then, go to hell."

In regard to your quote, I´d say that the italians will simply laugh their ass off, because if she is now in prison or running around free in the US, will not matter for them. The cause for a judge and sending people to prison is to protect your people from potential criminals. So if you want her to run freely in your country, will not matter to them, as long as she dont run freely in italy. In the end you are saving the italians the costs for jailing her. ^^

Good.

If that's the case, then there's no need for the Italians to insist upon extradition in the first place, making this whole topic moot.

Amanda Knox will remain in the US, or only go to foreign countries that lack an extradition treaty with Italy. That way, the Italians (and their Austrian neighbors) won't have to worry about such a criminal running around in their territory.

I hope you're right and the Italians simply laugh. If they do end up demand extradition, I'll be sending you a PM asking what gives.

The problem is not Amanda Knox, but an country, signing inernational contracts and then pissing on them. Nobody cares for that Amanda Knox, as long as you keep her in your borders. But its simply causing diplomatic troubles if you agree to do a certain contract with an country, and afterwards dont care for it in general. It simply lets you look quiet bad. In asian terms you would say, that by doing so, the US have lost their face. Not caring for giving contracts, simply gives people the impression, that you are not trustworthy at all, when it comes to future contracts. This causes troubles, when negoatiating about other contracts, because its natural that you dont see much sense in doing contracts with a partner, that will not care for them or only if he benefits from them.

But Schneekugel, try to understand it from an American perspective:

The Italians had her. They agreed to release her. Then they turned around and decided she was guilty after all.

It's almost like she needs to seek asylum in her own country. If the Italians can't make up their mind and will change it on a whim, then no one should be subjected to such nonsense.

It makes the American want to reconsider why such a treaty was signed if this is how the other party (in this case the Italy) defines justice.

And let's not tiptoe around the issue, there is a clear anti-American bias on the part of Italy, the UK, and on other Europeans including yourself.

No, I'd staunchly refuse to send Amanda Knox back to Italy if this is how you people define justice. Let us "look bad" in the eyes of the world. Personally, I think the Italians look worse.

Having their own laws is differnt from "not doing up your mind".

As far as I remember it was that OJ Simpson process that was as well, very hard to understand for european people.

So there was an governmental process, where I think he was judged to be not guilty in murdering his wife.

And afterward there was an "private" process, when he was found guilty?

I could say as well, that this seems to me as if your law system, does not want to make up their mind, but its simply the way it is done in your country, and for you there will be a reason behind it. So as far as I understood you can be judged two times for the same stuff, because of one time it being an "official" process and the other time it will be an "private" process. That seems weird for me, but its the way of your law system, and if I do an contract about accepting that, then I should inform myself before that desicion, not afterwards.

So when I do contracts with your country, and I agree to respect your law system, that will not be an secret, but something that I can gather information about before doing the contract, it lets me look quiet bad, if I say afterwards, that I no dont want to respect your law system anymore, because of an issue, that I already knew when signing the contract.

Its nothing bad, if that italian system seems weird for you, as might some US law-system habbits might look weird for others. But then you should not sign contracts to respect that law-systems, if you dont plan to do so.

Her complice, tried to fled his judgement by going to Austria, and he is a non US-citizen. And the public oppinion about him is quiet similar, either he shall go to Italy into jail, or he shall go into his homecountry if they want him to run around in their neighborhood, but we are no safe-haven for official sentenced criminals. Being a non US-citizen, does not really have an impact about our public oppinion of giving an sentenced murders a home in our neighborhood.

I DO agree, that in italian, there can be lots of corruption in law processes and so on. The thing is that someone with influence must be paying for that, for getting a use for it, and you dont manage it by paying a chocolate bar. They are not that cheap, so we are talking about huge sums. As a neighborcountry of Italy, if it was about politicians, Mafia, knows hell whatever groups with an massive financial background, I´d absolutely agree that I would mistrust these processes.

But I dont see what benefit an italian group should get by paying enormous sums, for influencing an process about three teenagers and their druggie night adventures. O_o I dont see an criminal overlord trying to pay 100.000s of dollars to influence the italian law system to get as benefit an jailed US teenie? O_o I am sorry, but I dont think that your citizen would be even worth that for your own citizens.

It's quite clear you've decided that she is guilty - and not just guilty, but guilty of the tale that the original prosecution came up with without any evidence. Yes, she was on drugs on the night of the murder, that seems clear enough. But it's a very large leap from that to claiming that she went and murdered Kercher in the midst of an orgy. Considering that a break in by Guede, followed by rape and murder, is sufficient explanation for the evidence present, there is simply no need to invoke the hypothesis that Knox and Sollecito were involved. To reach a semi-plausible explanation involving the three of them, you have to stack up so many assumptions that you could resurrect Occam for the sole purpose of blotting you out from all reality.

Oh, and even if they were "probably" guilty (P(guilty)>0.5), it still wouldn't warrant imprisoning them, because the risk of imprisoning an innocent would still be unacceptably high.

i would agree.its the most bazare murder case ive ever heard of and yes she might be guilty but i still have to many doubts.

like for one.people who kill to satisfy a sexual fantasy like the sex game gone wrong that the Perugia police claim.why has she not re offended sadistic sex killers like dahmer,bundy or ridgeway were addicted to these crimes.paparazzi have not even spoted amanda at some kinky sex club for swingers.if amanda knox is really sexual sadist she would have reoffended or would be satifying her kinks in some swingers club,which being that she is famous,paparazzi would have seen.

I have grave doubts as to the maturity/intelligence of this woman. she ought not to be telegraphing her intentions to the media.

No, not I have decided, that she is guilty, but the law system of an western democratic system, has done so. O_o You wont believe it, if someone that was sentenced in the US for murder, stood before my door, I´d be as well not happy. Not because of me deciding that he was guilty, but because of your democratic law system, having done a trial, proofed the case, and found her guilty. Hope you dont mind me for trusting your law system, as long as its not about multi-million dollar corporations or powerful criminal organisations, that might have the necessary money in their purse to influence your law system.

*My* law system? My law system isn't implemented anywhere in known space. Yet.

If someone who was probably innocent, but was condemned by a court as being guilty of murder, because the prosecution have a personal vendetta against them/don't want to admit they're wrong, stood in front of my door, I'd welcome them in.

See my signature for more information about my stance. I don't recognise the judgements of the courts as being valid, except insofar as they concur with what a just court would rule. Or would you also have me accept the Chinese justice system as being valid? The Russian one? Perhaps Pakistan, or North Korea are more to your liking?

Quite frankly, the attitudes of people here [in the UK] towards this case show why trial by jury is such a bad idea - most people don't think critically about cases.

You are always repeating the same phrases, but when asked questions about, you ignore them.

So WHO should have such a grudge against that teenie girl, that he would be paying enormous sums of money, that is needed to influence the italian law system, out of an personal Vendetta?

Has she once spitted in Don Corleones drink, or what informations do you have, that makes you think that there was a person or organization, willing to use his influence/power/money, so that some random teenie gets jailed on purpose?

THATS simply the point, thats missing to me.

Lolwut? If the police decide that someone is guilty, no-one needs to pay them to get them to aggressively pursue the person. It's quite clear in this case that the police made up their minds (a sex game by Sollecito, Knox, and a third person), and refused to budge when no evidence for this turned up (they pursued that story line even when Lumumba was shown innocent, simply swapping him out for Guede). They don't want to admit that they have been wrong, and it's getting in the way of them actually doing their job.

I'm quite glad you're in Austria though. It means I don't have to worry about you sitting on a jury that's deciding my fate. I feel sorry if you have or will end up on jury duty though, for the poor guy who's case you're... well, I wouldn't call it "judging" exactly, because that presupposes an ability to judge...

But, to everyone here, you be the jury.

A jury of 6, however, especially when you add in a judge who's unstable and makes lurid claims about sex games and satanism, is not an adequate means of determining the probability of guilt.

Its not the police that is doing the processes. At least not around here. O_o