Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend have been found guilty along with the third guy who volunteered for a fast track trial and was convicted last year.

Although I'm reasonably convinced that they were involved in some manner, the whole case is surely too messy for anyone to be a 100% sure. For this reason, I don't think you can find them guilty "beyond reasonable doubt".

What does the court of Dakka reckon?

Flashman wrote:So Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend have been found guilty along with the third guy who volunteered for a fast track trial and was convicted last year.

Although I'm reasonably convinced that they were involved in some manner, the whole case is surely too messy for anyone to be a 100% sure. For this reason, I don't think you can find them guilty "beyond reasonable doubt".

What does the court of Dakka reckon?

Can't say for Britian, but in the USA 'beyond a reasonable doubt' doesn't mean 100% certainty. I don't know, what is the standard in Italian Criminal Law? Is it the same? Apparently they had enough reason to believe she killed one of yer citizens.

The pair of them had guilt written all over them, IMO. I think Knox is a psychopath - she behaved very strangely and didn't show much emotion, considering one of her friends had been murdered and sexually assaulted.

As far as I can tell, the reasons amounted to;

1). Knox's DNA found on the presumed murder weapon, a kitchen knife

2). Her boyfriend's DNA found on the victim's bra strap.

3). They kept changing their stories.

With regards to 1). if the kitchen knife was from the flat Knox shared with Kercher, isn't likely that her DNA would be on it anyway?

EDIT - As I say, I'm reasonably convinced they were involved in some manner, I just think the conviction will start to look fragile when it comes to the Appeal.

There will be other forensic evidence - the force and angle of impact of the wound might have determined that a woman struck the killing blow. Haven't you seen 'Bones'? They seem to have come to the conclusion that Sollecito held her down and Knox stabbed her - I doubt they plucked that out of the air. Maybe Rudy Guede's DNA WASN'T on the knife? I'm not sure - haven't followed it super-closely.
I think the things you listed would probably have been enough to see them convicted in Britain or the States.

Maybe

I don't know if she is guilty or not (how could I?), but it seems that she has gotten an awfully bad wrap overall. The court case sounds a bit like a song and dance TBH. Hang em' high kind of thing...

I wonder if you'd be saying that if she was any other nationality than American...

We don't know the whole of the evidence.

The court would have considered opportunity, etc, such as whether there was any evidence for someone else having got into the flat and done it.

I agree it is not exactly strange to find a girl's DNA on the handle of her boyfriend's kitchen knife.

The bra strap thing is much stranger. It implies the boyfriend was fiddling with Miss Kercher -- could this have triggered Miss Knox into a jealous attack?

DNA evidence is not 100% reliable.

She was doing Cartwheels after they found her body.

She is either absolutely guilty or entirely fething mental. Either way, she is better off in Prison.

I hope she gets made the wing "bitch" by a large Italian woman. Being as she is clearly a sexual deviant she might actually like it.

Perhaps the Italian government will trade Knox for the chance to have one of the CIA kidnappers extradited?

Kilkrazy wrote:We don't know the whole of the evidence.

The court would have considered opportunity, etc, such as whether there was any evidence for someone else having got into the flat and done it.

I agree it is not exactly strange to find a girl's DNA on the handle of her boyfriend's kitchen knife.

The bra strap thing is much stranger. It implies the boyfriend was fiddling with Miss Kercher -- could this have triggered Miss Knox into a jealous attack?

DNA evidence is not 100% reliable.

no evidence is 100% acurrate, its when lots of evidence piles up, the DNA on a knife doesn't mean a few skin cells, it it was included as evidence there would be a significant amount of the accused blood on the blade and under the handle which is very common in stabbing cases, the evidence combined with the people involved did look very damning to bigin with at the start of the case and then it started piling on top of her more and more as the case went on

olympia wrote:Perhaps the Italian government will trade Knox for the chance to have one of the CIA kidnappers extradited?

Er, what?

Despite Italian courts asking for the same degree of proof as US and UK courts, it doesn't neccesarily stand that the same proceedures are followed, or that "beyond reasonable doubt" even means the same thing. Italian courts and Police are notoriously corrupt, and it is entirely possible they were looking to punish an American national in the wake of the whole CIA fiasco.

The evidence presented could have been very easily dismissed/explained in the UK by a skilled Barrister, especialy given that the three were all friends and the two girls shared a flat together.

1). Knox's DNA found on the presumed murder weapon, a kitchen knife Perhaps Knox helped the victim to cook or wash up. They probably shared use of kitchen utensils

2). Her boyfriend's DNA found on the victim's bra strap. Entirely possible that the girls laundry got mixed together and the boyfriend picked it up at some point by mistake. He could have been a bit kinky and had a thing for "using" the housemates underwear?

3). They kept changing their stories. This is incredibly common as certain Police interview techniques border upon interrogation/torture. Long periods of sleep depravation, intimidation, sudden exposure to bright lights or extremes of temperature, can all leave detainees feeling disorientated, confused and likely to say what the interveiwer wants them to

Personaly I believe that they are both guilty, but in a British court I couldn't see the standard of evidence used in this case being enough to convict.

As has been said, there was probably more evidence than that - the trial has been fairly lengthy, IIRC.

Knox was treated more than fairly by Italian police, bordering on overfamiliarity - some of the Guards had cutesy nicknames for her.

Knox's parents annoyed me the most, as they didn't seem to care about the fact a young girl had been brutally murdered and sexually assaulted, even though anyone with half a brain could see she was involved to SOME degree. All they seemed to care about was making sure their daughter 'got off'. Now her Dad has the cheek to criticise the Italian justice system! She would have been convicted in the States - not only that, she could have got the death penalty, couldn't she? I'm not sure what the circumstances have to be.

I hope they apologise to the Kercher family.

I'm waiting for the tv movie.

Evidence doesn't work work like "OH DERE IS DNA LETS USE IT". They would have made reasonably sure that there wasn't a more common explanation for the presence of it. If we could think of that you can bet the defense did to and apparently it wasn't as simple as perhaps she cut herself once.

squilverine wrote:1). Knox's DNA found on the presumed murder weapon, a kitchen knife Perhaps Knox helped the victim to cook or wash up. They probably shared use of kitchen utensils
Personaly I believe that they are both guilty, but in a British court I couldn't see the standard of evidence used in this case being enough to convict.

the standard of evidence is high, murder cases get alot of money spent on them to give the use of the best equipment (the cost of most instruments is about quarter of a million [a standard mass spec] plus the hundred or so pounds it costs to use them each time), to give the most irrefutable evidence analysis. You are using DNA in a very broad term, a DNA match gives identity but the origin of the DNA shows what happened, DNA can be taken and analysed from skin and tissue cells, saliva, semen, urine, fecal matter, sweat and blood and on top of that DNA degrades over time so from the state it is found you can determine the time it was transfered. From the evidence presented and the case in general she would be found guilty in the UK and USA

Albatross wrote:I wonder if you'd be saying that if she was any other nationality than American...

Why would Americans want other Americans who are murderers to come back to America?

If we keep them in Italy we can be all like "ha suckers, not our tax burden!"

I think Alba was trying to say that the only reason you doubt is because she's American and that were she Korean or British or Scottish or whatnot you'd be screaming guilty.

It was a racially motivated stab at you Orkeo. Rather ludicrous but that's Alba for you.

Honestly, it does seem like a weird case. IMO some of the DNA evidence seems circumstantial. 3 people live in one flat and DNA from 2 of the 3 people was found on an utensil. How strange that they would share kitchen utensils? DNA (obviously from his fingers) found on the girls bra strap? Again, not conclusive.

I'm not 100% certain that in an American court all 12 jurors would have found her guilty. It only takes 1 to result in a mistrial and then of course she can't be tried again for the rape/murder; they'd have to nail her on something else.

Doesn't say what the DNA was. I suspect the bloke had spunked all over the Bra, and Kercher's blood.

Seems pretty obvious they did it. THe one that was already convicted probably made some kind of bargain to implicate those two as well.

I think Alba was trying to say that the only reason you doubt is because she's American and that were she Korean or British or Scottish or whatnot you'd be screaming guilty.

It was a racially motivated stab at you Orkeo. Rather ludicrous but that's Alba for you.

My point stands. You illustrated it perfectly Fateweaver.

And 'racially-motivated'? - incorrect, hysterical and symptomatic of a persecution complex.


But that's Fateweaver for you.

Who knows? I just don't think it was that cut and dry. OJ wasn't that cut and dry (and yes, I thought a not guilty was a good call but I won't get into that here).

It wasn't even directed at Orkeosaurus.

Honestly Fateweaver, you knee-jerk so badly I'd be surprised if your ceiling wasn't embedded with laptops.

So the fact you said if she wasn't American we wouldn't be defending her is somehow not a personal attack.

Okay, race was the wrong word. Nationality would have been more appropriate.

It still gives that you claim because she is from the US that those of us questioning her guilt are only doing so because she is from the US. If that's not what you intended reword your post because that's what it looks like to me.

Fateweaver wrote:
It still gives that you claim because she is from the US that those of us questioning her guilt are only doing so because she is from the US. If that's not what you intended reword your post because that's what it looks like to me.

considering that many of the people questioning her guilt are frequent members of the "There must be blood!" brigade, the query is appropriate.

Though, honestly, I think it has more to do with the fact that she's a woman (and a cute one at that).

That and she did it.

I always figured here in the US if you are female you get off easier (no that's not sexist on my behalf, it's just what I've witnessed through life).

Maybe if she were male she'd have gotten life but her "bf" didn't so I can't see her sex having anything to do with it.

Good thought to ponder though Dogma.

considering that many of the people questioning her guilt are frequent members of the "There must be blood!" brigade, the query is appropriate.

Exactly. Please don't make me out to be anti-american, Fateweaver. It's just not true.

It still gives that you claim because she is from the US that those of us questioning her guilt are only doing so because she is from the US. If that's not what you intended reword your post because that's what it looks like to me.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Do you think Rudy Guede is innocent? Some of the evidence used in his conviction could be construed as 'inconclusive'. He's not American however. I don't see anyone protesting his or Sollecito's innocence, so you can see how I arrived at the opinion that there could be some biased Americans posting in this thread.

3 people live in one flat and DNA from 2 of the 3 people was found on an utensil. How strange that they would share kitchen utensils?

The knife was found at Sollecito's apartment, and had been bleached.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And she got 26 years, he got 25. Her sentence is longer because she falsely accused Patrick Luamba.

All that really proves though is that more Americans are paying attention to her case than that of Rudy Guede (I had to google it to even know who he is).

That doesn't mean that every American thinks she is innocent of at least SOME sort of wrong doing.

Also, of course her family is going to question the courts decision. Your family would have to hate your ass to NOT question a guilty verdict by a court and/or be 100% convinced you commited the crime. Her parents aren't 100% convinced and obviously don't hate her so of course they will question the verdict. Any loving parent would.

So yeah, you are right in that more Americans care about the Knox trial but that does not equate to every American automatically thinking she is innocent. I pointed out why I don't think it'd be so cut and dry in a US court but this isn't the US so my opinion has no weight obviously.