I wasn't criticising you or anything, I just didn't understand the reference. 
22-year-old Amanda Knox found guilty
- Thread starter Flying Spaghetti Monster
- Start date
Everyone expects the meme that will follow that sentence.
But there was also the less-cool, and not as frequently cited Italian equivalent. So they're not exactly making stuff up out of their ass, though it's close.
Oh boy.
If the jurors were anything like any Italian I've ever met then they only read the sports pages anyway.
And the crosswords. We love our crosswords.If the jurors were anything like any Italian I've ever met then they only read the sports pages anyway.
I don't agree. Had similar evidence been used to convict someone in the US there would be a huge uproar.
Deckerd doesn't mean an Italian couple in the US, she means if Amanda Knox hadn't been American, none of you would have heard anything about it at all.
One thing is for sure, the only reason this case has the media spellbound is this: Amanda is a young girl and she is very very pretty, and her folks have given the media the impression that she is just as sweet and innocent as she looks.
She may well be.
But that's the only reason she is getting this treatment from the media. If she was a 22-year-old guy who was convicted, it would be a news bullet at best. Case in point is ber boyfriend, as it seems he is only mentioned as a reluctant foornote. It's so much more complling for CNN to show a piture of a cute, pretty face wikth bars in front of it, than to show the face of some dude.
She may well be.
But that's the only reason she is getting this treatment from the media. If she was a 22-year-old guy who was convicted, it would be a news bullet at best. Case in point is ber boyfriend, as it seems he is only mentioned as a reluctant foornote. It's so much more complling for CNN to show a piture of a cute, pretty face wikth bars in front of it, than to show the face of some dude.
I'm not sure I see the point of that criticism, since I doubt every case of questionable outcome in the US merits extensive coverage in Britain or Italy either without something that ties it back to those countries.
Of course it's going to get more attention in the US because it involves an American student, just as it's getting more attention in Britain because it also involves a British student. It's getting more attention in Italy because it involves an American student even. If this case involved only a few Italian kids it would still get coverage in Italy, but probably not the massive attention this case has received.
I can't speak for anyone else, but in the TNZ thread on the subject I said that I thought Sollecito got a raw deal too, since the physical evidence against him was weak as well (just the miniscule amount of DNA on the bra clasp which was found much later and could have been the result of cross-contamination). Even then, the evidence against Knox was even more flimsy than it was against him. So it's not like we don't care about the Italian kid potentially getting railroaded as well.
The other guy who fled to Germany barely merits a blip on anyone's radar since it seems pretty clear to me both from his actions and the physical evidence that he was most likely the actual killer. Knox and Sollecito were (rightly) considered possible suspects before the police even knew about this other guy, and yet after they caught him and built a strong case against him, the police and prosecutor never seemed to let go of their initial suspects, and sort of rolled them into one big case despite not having any conclusive physical evidence against the two.
Could they possibly have committed the crime? Absolutely. But from my reading of the case it seems like reasonable doubt was more than established. And it's not a knock on the Italian legal system in general or an assertion that Americans tried for crimes abroad be given special privileges, it's just my interpretation of the way this case was handled by this prosecutor in particular who has a very questionable background.
I was nice the see that there was a thread about this topic here.
It seems that the arguments made here are pretty similar than in many other message boards.
Now that the appeal trial(or whatever u want to call it) has started, I decided to continue the conversation.
About the re-trial here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12258935
Is Amanda Knox guilty or innocent victim?
I believe that she is guilty.
Why? There is more than enough evidence to support her guilt..thus she is proven guilty.
Many here seem to think that she is innocent, mainly because the some American media has stupidly spinned the story in a pro-Amanda Knox manner..and even ignoring clear evidence
Sadly creating the "Amanda Knox - Innocent girl" myth is far from over
Lifetime is releasing a movie about the topic, starring Hayden Panettiere(Heroes) called Amanda Knox: Murder on Trial.
Trailer here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO46MFEbzNY
(In my opinon there is only one victim in this case..and that is the murdered girl Meredith Kercher)
I really suggest that you at least read the Judge Massei report that gives a relativly good summary of the reasons and the evidence of why Amanda Knox and the others convicted of the murder
(download the pdf from the bottom of the page):
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=259
I would also recommend you all of checking out these sites/videos that offer plenty of material:
http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/index.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyUh5y_8efE
It seems that the arguments made here are pretty similar than in many other message boards.
Now that the appeal trial(or whatever u want to call it) has started, I decided to continue the conversation.
About the re-trial here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12258935
Is Amanda Knox guilty or innocent victim?
I believe that she is guilty.
Why? There is more than enough evidence to support her guilt..thus she is proven guilty.
Many here seem to think that she is innocent, mainly because the some American media has stupidly spinned the story in a pro-Amanda Knox manner..and even ignoring clear evidence
Sadly creating the "Amanda Knox - Innocent girl" myth is far from over
Lifetime is releasing a movie about the topic, starring Hayden Panettiere(Heroes) called Amanda Knox: Murder on Trial.
Trailer here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO46MFEbzNY
(In my opinon there is only one victim in this case..and that is the murdered girl Meredith Kercher)
I really suggest that you at least read the Judge Massei report that gives a relativly good summary of the reasons and the evidence of why Amanda Knox and the others convicted of the murder
(download the pdf from the bottom of the page):
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=259
I would also recommend you all of checking out these sites/videos that offer plenty of material:
http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/index.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyUh5y_8efE
Last edited:
I probably would have started a new thread for this.
Anyway, I have no idea if she's guilty or innocent. I know that, based on the evidence they had, they could have gotten a conviction in the United States as well. This isn't really a case of anti-Americanism.
Anyway, I have no idea if she's guilty or innocent. I know that, based on the evidence they had, they could have gotten a conviction in the United States as well. This isn't really a case of anti-Americanism.
This Swede have no problems with the Amanda Knox-case...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annika_Östberg <-- this was imho even worse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annika_Östberg <-- this was imho even worse.
She was involved in a police shootout while in the car of a police officer who had just been murdered. Do you really think that's a case of wrongful conviction? 
Well, you can see the divide even on Wikipedia, where the English Wikipedia is slanted towards one side, and the Swedish one towards the other.
As I understand it: She was there when the police was murdered, but the boyfriend committed the crime itself. The boyfriend killed himself before the trial and Annika had to take the whole blame. My view is that she deserved prison, but not 45 years (that length is insane. Just look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mattias_Flink for an example of how long a Swedish (mass) murderer is incarcerated)
As I understand it: She was there when the police was murdered, but the boyfriend committed the crime itself. The boyfriend killed himself before the trial and Annika had to take the whole blame. My view is that she deserved prison, but not 45 years (that length is insane. Just look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mattias_Flink for an example of how long a Swedish (mass) murderer is incarcerated)
She didn't commit a crime in Sweden. She committed an American crime in America. In America, you are guilty if you participate in a murder even if you don't pull the trigger. You're also guilty if you participate in another felony that results in death. Obviously, I can't read the Swedish page. What's the main distinction as far as the description of her acts?
EDIT: Google translation of the Swedish page says the first victim was shot during the robbery that they both participated in. That's felony murder. 25 to life is automatic. Some states, it's life without parole.
EDIT: Google translation of the Swedish page says the first victim was shot during the robbery that they both participated in. That's felony murder. 25 to life is automatic. Some states, it's life without parole.
Similar threads
