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 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 never said that it did. It IS interesting that you refer to it as the 'Knox trial' instead of the Meredith Kercher murder, though.

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.

If I had sexually assaulted a girl and stabbed her to death my family would disown me - rightly so. The very fact that she lied about aspects of the case and falsely accused someone-else would be enough to make my mother distrust me if I said 'I didn't do it'. Blind loyalty isn't necessarily a virtue, even when family are involved.

The more I read, the more it seems likely they'll win an appeal. The DNA traces on knife and bra were very weak and shouldn't have been considered strong enough. Some retracted statements shouldn't have been read out in court (or least wouldn't have been read out in the UK/USA).

It seems likely that all three defendants were at the flat at the time of the murder, as all three have at sometime or other confessed to being there. However, conflicting stories and weak evidence suggest nobody will ever know for certain what happened (except those three).

As for Knox's family, saw this bizzare shot of them taking photos of the courtroom. One for the family album?

No, just publicity hungry cretins who no doubt have a book deal in the pipeline about their suffering.

Disgusting parasites. You're daughter killed someone. In cold blood. Deal with it.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:No, just publicity hungry cretins who no doubt have a book deal in the pipeline about their suffering.

If they haven't, they'll need to get one fast. Think they have to pay 2 million euros to the Kercher's in damages. Bizzare system that, "Our daughter apparently murdered your daughter, have some money by way of compensation". Not sure I'd want to take it if I was the Kerchers.

I'd put it to Charitable use meself, perhaps setting up a fund to help less fortunate through University etc?

But thats just me being me.

I've never understood "wrongful death suits."

Take OJ Simpson. Found not guilty but 80% of every dime he ever makes has to go to the family, 80% of everything he owned (even his trophies which is just bullgak) had to be liquidated and turned over to the family.

I'm sorry they lost their daughter but I'm sure the initial lawsuit would have taken care of any suffering they felt.

Wrongful death should only be allowed if a person is found guilty of murder, not acquitted. I mean the justice system found that person innocent, what makes the civil court a more informed and higher authority?

MDG, maybe they just want to take pics of the courtroom interior for keepsakes reasons, not a movie or book deal. If they decide to make a movie of it the studio can get pics of the inside of the court very easily, amateur photos taken with 8-12MP cams won't cut it for movie purposes.

80% of OJs dimes isn't going to amount to much at the moment is it?

I know you can't say for certain until you're in the same situation, but pretty sure I wouldn't touch the cheque to throw it in the bin.

Fateweaver wrote: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.

That isn't what has happened.

Both Squilverine and I have expressed reservations about the case, who are both British.

So, just did a quick bit of reading on the case on the BBC.

Thought it was funny that a caption of the Prosecutor showing the knife was labeled "Prosecution displaying a knife that may have been used by Knox to kill Kercher."

Italics added for amusedness.

Were there really that many knives found in the house that had residually been stained with human blood or what?

I was reading it that Alba was replying to Orkeo that Orkeo was defending her because she is American.

Alba quoted Orkeosaurus when he made that comment that is why I figured Alba was taking a cheap stab. It's been sort of cleared up though I still feel that some are claiming us US posters are defending her because she is from the US.

No harm, no foul. I am not sure either way. It doesn't seem to jive and I'm fairly certain that it wouldn't have been deadlocked here in the states.

Kanluwen wrote:
Were there really that many knives found in the house that had residually been stained with human blood or what?

The confusion regarding the knife is because it doesn't match the wounds (or so the defence claimed) and it doesn't match a bloody knife print found on the bed sheets.

Gotcha.

Very interesting. So either the knife was dumped or it was in the possession of a fourth killer who hasn't been caught.

@Fateweaver - I was replying to Wrex - and it was more of a general wondering really....

@Flashman - From what I've read, a knife with Kercher's blood and Knox's DNA on it was found at Sollecito's apartment, and had been bleached.

Again, lots of loopholes if you stop to think about it.

I really couldn't see this leading to a conviction in the states, at least not in a state where the jurors aren't idiots.

Albatross wrote:
@Flashman - From what I've read, a knife with Kercher's blood and Knox's DNA on it was found at Sollecito's apartment, and had been bleached.

Yep, same knife. The defence said it was the wrong size to have caused the wounds (that's not to say they weren't talking rubbish) and it wasn't the right shape to have made the knife print on the bed sheet.

I reiterate that my feeling is they were involved in some manner, but like fateweaver if I was on the jury, I'm not sure I would have convicted them.

To be fair though, no-one here was in that court-room and heard all the evidence. Taken in isolation, a lot of evidence can be perceived as being ambiguous - that's all I'm saying.
The jury only took 13 hrs to reach a verdict - that suggests to me that the prosecution was fairly compelling.

I have my doubts and that's all it would take me to write "not guilty" on my piece of paper or raise my hand or however certain juries do it.

Sure I wasn't in the courtroom and didn't hear all the arguments put forth by the prosecution but I've studied it close enough that I had my doubts from the start.

Did ye knaa.....

That in Britain, if I was out with my mates, and one of them knifed another person, I can be tried for Murder as well? Not accessory to Murder, but Murder. Perhaps Italy is similar here? If they were present when the crime was committed, and did nohing to prevent it, then they could and probaby would be found guilty of it.

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

And I wonder if you would be saying that if I was British... oh, wait, no I wouldn't, because you didn't...

Albatross wrote:@Fateweaver - I was replying to Wrex - and it was more of a general wondering really....

Here, this will help you get the job done faster...

It's a tricky one, no doubt about it.

Obviously one doesn't want to let the evidence get in the way of one's prejudices.

At the same time, it is better for 100 innocents to go to prison than for one guilty person to walk free.

Kilkrazy wrote:It's a tricky one, no doubt about it.

Obviously one doesn't want to let the evidence get in the way of one's prejudices.

At the same time, it is better for 100 innocents to go to prison than for one guilty person to walk free.

I presume a joke because when 100 innocents go to prison 100 guilty people continue to walk freely.

Yes, welcome to British dry humour

On topic, it's interesting the way the case is being covered over here.

Normally once there is a conviction, the press start to print the prosecution case as fact with some appropriate embellisments i.e. "x is an evil individual who callously murdered y after luring her to z".

However, at the moment they are still writing it as "the prosecution argued that x murdered y at z".

How can you guys say your uncertain, she was DEFINATELY in that flat when Kirtcher was sexually violated and than had her throat slashed.

Are you mental?

Even when im trying to be quiet, if im banging my missus a wee bit too loudly my friends in the room next door hear it laugh about it the next day. What, she was getting fisted and cut up and they just didnt hear cos they were watching Jeopardy?

Utterly ridiculous.

And Knox has behaved like some sort of warped sexual deviant from the start, with her fething grin and her weird cartwheels outside the police station, plus she blamed some African barman in a classic case of "hide behind the coloured man"

Ridiculous.

I dont care if the rest of the evidence was inconclusive, gak, i wouldnt care if there was nothing else other than the fact they could place them both in the place at the time.

If someone gets tortured and cut from ear to ear, YOU HEAR IT.

And also, who the hell honestly believes that some bizarre percieved "loyalty" to a family member counts for anything?

If i slashed some chicks throat during some warped orgy, my dad would say NOTHING when i got banged up for it. In fact, he would either never speak to me again or kick my fething teeth in during the trial.

The fact that i listened to some ten minute call from her autnie saying she was "the most gentle girl in the world" makes me instantly loathe her family as well.

And did you see that picture of those freaks taking snaps in court?

I hope Knox gets roasted with a broomshank by the prison daddy. And her vile family end up at the bottom of the ocean.

Shame the Italians dont have the electric chair.

Flashman wrote:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:No, just publicity hungry cretins who no doubt have a book deal in the pipeline about their suffering.

If they haven't, they'll need to get one fast. Think they have to pay 2 million euros to the Kercher's in damages. Bizzare system that, "Our daughter apparently murdered your daughter, have some money by way of compensation". Not sure I'd want to take it if I was the Kerchers.

its not that bizzare, systems like this one are used around the world, in most high profile cases the money is used to create a foundation of some sort though.

Fateweaver wrote:Again, lots of loopholes if you stop to think about it.
I really couldn't see this leading to a conviction in the states, at least not in a state where the jurors aren't idiots.

you seem to have little knowledge of your legal system then, there are multiple cases, in multiple states were innocent people have been sentenenced to prision even with no real evidence (just look at the wayne williams case, a man said to be the most horrific child murderer in the history of the USA, but the prosecution didn't ask for the death penelty, maybe thats because there was no actual evidence and he has some pretty good allabies, one of them being he was in a police cell when one of the children died, and that former members of the kkk have said there organisation had a move to kill inter-racial and african american children) the list goes on and on when it comes to bad trails (but every country has this) remember there are 2 types of jurors' the ones that believe in the system and want to be jurors and the idiots to stupid to get out of jury duty (but its nice to know you think italians are stupid, at least compared to citizens of the USA).

the trail is pretty open and shut and would be in any country (if it happened in the US there would be nearly no media attention, its only because it was an american abroad), and the american media doesn't help much since as there is no mandate to actually present an unbiased view of the news most news channels in the states are nothing more that sensationalist tabloids. the majority of people stirring up are people with no knowledge of the legal system or of forensic science (only what they see on CSI) this case as presented in the UK or USA would have lead to the same result as in Italy

mattyrm wrote:How can you guys say your uncertain, she was DEFINATELY in that flat when Kirtcher was sexually violated and than had her throat slashed.

Don't get me wrong mattyrm, you and I are in roughly the same court of opinion. Something doesn't sit quite right with Knox and yes, I believe that she was involved in or was aware of the murder. However, I am not convinced beyond reasonable doubt, because the evidence available doesn't permit me to reach a definitive conclusion on what occurred.

Bear in mind that everyone was convinced that Colin Stagg murdered Rachel Nickell on Wimbledon Common, because he confessed to have been there that morning walking his dog, was interested in pagan rituals and an undercover police operation revealed a degree of sexual deviancy. However, it was only last year when Robert Napper was conclusively proved to have been the murderer, that everybody was obliged to eat a very large slice of humble pie.

Fateweaver wrote:Again, lots of loopholes if you stop to think about it.

I really couldn't see this leading to a conviction in the states, at least not in a state where the jurors aren't idiots.

Which state is that?

mattyboy22 wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Again, lots of loopholes if you stop to think about it.

I really couldn't see this leading to a conviction in the states, at least not in a state where the jurors aren't idiots.

Which state is that?

Imagination State

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.

Exactly, especially the part in bold.

Beyond reasonable doubt would be when them committing the crime is the only reasonable explanation for what happened. It's not exactly reasonable to say a ninja-burglar jumped through the window, stabbed Miss Kercher with a kitchen knife, and then planted DNA strands in incriminating places, ALL without being seen or heard by the three others in the apartment.

However, how do we know that all were part of it?
Maybe 1 just stayed out of everyones way, not wanting to get involved. If so, why would they change their stories?

Emperors Faithful wrote:However, how do we know that all were part of it?
Maybe 1 just stayed out of everyones way, not wanting to get involved. If so, why would they change their stories?

if so (the member of the group was there, witnissed but did not try to stop it) and a member withheld that from the police, then they would be equally guilty under the law.

mattyrm wrote:How can you guys say your uncertain, she was DEFINATELY in that flat when Kirtcher was sexually violated and than had her throat slashed.

Are you mental?

Even when im trying to be quiet, if im banging my missus a wee bit too loudly my friends in the room next door hear it laugh about it the next day. What, she was getting fisted and cut up and they just didnt hear cos they were watching Jeopardy?

Utterly ridiculous.

And Knox has behaved like some sort of warped sexual deviant from the start, with her fething grin and her weird cartwheels outside the police station, plus she blamed some African barman in a classic case of "hide behind the coloured man"

Ridiculous.

Amusingly enough, none of those things place the knife in her hand. You don't convict people of murder because you don't like them.

mattyrm wrote:
I dont care if the rest of the evidence was inconclusive, gak, i wouldnt care if there was nothing else other than the fact they could place them both in the place at the time.

If someone gets tortured and cut from ear to ear, YOU HEAR IT.

Hearing a murder is not tacit to the commission of one.

mattyrm wrote:
And also, who the hell honestly believes that some bizarre percieved "loyalty" to a family member counts for anything?

If i slashed some chicks throat during some warped orgy, my dad would say NOTHING when i got banged up for it. In fact, he would either never speak to me again or kick my fething teeth in during the trial.

That's your father. Not all fathers are the same.

mattyrm wrote:
The fact that i listened to some ten minute call from her autnie saying she was "the most gentle girl in the world" makes me instantly loathe her family as well.

Reading this makes me understand your open willingness to string facts together with emotion.

You are a textbook case for the existence of jury selection.