An Italian court has reversed the ruling of an earlier appellate court that found Amanda Knox not guilty in the murder of her roommate Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy. The latest court actually handed down a longer sentence against Knox who has remained in Seattle, Washington with her family. The case has drawn attention to a number of flaws in the Italian legal system and I have serious reservations over this ruling. I believe that there is evidence that Knox committed the crime but the evidence is highly circumstantial and much of the crime scene was contaminated by poor police work.
This is the fourth verdict in the sensational murder case. The earlier appeals jury overturned the convictions of Knox and Sollecito four years before that ruling. While it has shocked many, it was a victory for the rule of law given the lack of evidence and serious mistakes of police in the course of the investigation. We have previously discussed the problems in the physical evidence and false statements made in the case against the couple. We also discussed the ludicrous slander charges made against the parents.
The defamation claim stems from her accusing her former boss in a bar where she worked, Patrick Lumumba, in testimony. Later she said that the police pressured her into accusing Lumumba. The use of defamation to charge people for such testimony (considered privileged in the U.S.) is a terrible practice.
What is clear after this case is that the police investigators are virtually “libel proof” in light of their numerous and mind boggling mistakes. I fear great sympathy for the parents of Kircher. There was a foundation to suspect both Knox and Sollecito, whose testimony changed in fundamental ways and retained serious gaps. However, the police so bungled this case, the threads of evidence left ample doubt. The prosecutors relied on open speculation based on highly questionable forensic evidence such as Sollecito’s DNA on the bra strap. The evidence against Knox was even weaker. None of this dispels suspicions of the couple or their contemptful conduct before and after the murder. The earlier jury proved itself dispassionate and disciplined is separating speculation from fact in overturning the convictions.
The decision this week pushed aside those problems over the 2007 murder. It seemed to punish Knox for not appearing in Italy (which is her right) and gave her 28 years and six months in prison. Her former Italian boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito and co-defendant was sentenced to 25 years. She was previously given 26 years.
Her lawyer Knox’s attorney, Carlo Dalla Vedova qouted Dante in response noting that Dante reserved the lower circle of hell for those who betrayed trust in reference to the police. It was a curious choice since many people in Italy view that particular circle as made for Knox.
Knox issued a statement that she was “frightened and saddened by this unjust verdict” and “expected better from the Italian justice system.” Her counsel will now appeal but her domestic counsel will not to be prepared for an extradition demand. However, while Presiding Judge Alessando Nencini ordered the 29-year-old Sollecito’s passport revoked, he made no requests for Knox’s movements to be limited, saying she was “justifiably abroad.”
As I discussed on ABC News, extradition may be hard to fight even though this could still take years before she is faced by re-incarceration. It must first go to the Italian Supreme Court, then to the Foreign Ministry for an extradition request, then to the State Department, and potentially to a court to review the basis for extradition. However, that review is limited. While this case looks like double jeopardy with four verdicts, the Italians are likely to argue that the system is simply different and that no final stage was reached in the process until it was heard by the Italian Supreme Court. The Italian system has multiple fact-based proceedings of this kind. It is a system that has been heavily criticized for its inefficiency and inconsistency. However, a court could easily conclude that this is not multiple convictions for the same offense. In the end, this will become a diplomatic issue and the U.S. (particularly when it is demanding the extradition of Edward Snowden) is unlikely to refuse a close ally. We demand more extraditions from other countries than we sent to other countries. The issue is not likely to be a close one for the Obama Administration in ordering the U.S. Attorney in Seattle to carry out an extradition demand from Italy. However, that could be years away since the Italian system moves at a glacial pace.
Two Italian judges and six jurors reached the decision after about six hours of deliberation.
In the bizarre world of American celebrity crimes, the store of the conviction ran with the apparently equally important story that Knox has been dropped from the CBS reality show “Big Brother.” Knox had hope to win the $500,000 grand prize by being the last person evicted on “Big Brother.” Somehow a conviction for murdering your last roommate is viewed as a bar on participation with the roommates on the reality show. A bit too real.
Another example of this, applied in the reverse, is countries having no death penalty, and there have been several examples such as Canada and Brazil, will not extradite persons to the United States if the accused residing in those countries will face a death penalty prosecution.
There was the specific case in Seattle of Martin Pang, who was accused and later convicted in an arson of a warehouse back in 1995(?) After the fire Martin fled to Brazil, a state having no death penalty at the time. After Martin’s arrest in Brazil he contested extradition on the grounds he might face a death penalty. Under Washington Law, the crime alleged is applicable to Aggravated First Degree Murder under RCW 10.95.020(1) and (8)(b) and (11)(e) which is a Capital Offense punishable by Life in Prison or a Death Penalty. Brazil refused to extradite initially due to this. An agreement was reached to grant extradition if the death penalty would not be sought.
Also Barkingdog, of the extradition treaties I have read there has to be an equivalent crime in the United States of what the foreign state has accused the defendant in the US. For example, as you pointed out Insulting a government official is not a US federal crime so the US is generally not obligated to grant extradition. So in my view if the requirement of an alalogue statutory violation is required, constitutional issues guaranteed to citizens here are as well, and this is complimented with hte Reid v. Covert case. In my view that is.
Barking dog. Here are the long and short listings of Ried v. Covert:
http://www.constitution.org/ussc/354-001a.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_v._Covert
Zipster.
Your characterization of the FBI agent being howlingly false information and spin is misplaced. In fact the FBI agent characterized him, as specified in Justagirl’s quite, as a an experienced criminal. You state that he was never convicted of a crime, but in your research of translated Italian documents did you see that Guede was alleged to have committed burglaries, including one of a lawyer’s office through a second-story window, and another during which he burgled a flat and brandished a knife when he was approached. A Few days before Merideth’s murder, Guede was arrested in Milan after breaking into a nursery school, he was reportedly found by police holding an 11-inch knife. It is a bit difficult to be convicted a few days after the arrest before Merideth was slain. Spin? Doesn’t seem to be coming from the FBI agent.
You state that Amanda was ticketed for throwing rocks at a party. If that is true it does not equate to a person being capable of committing murder But the opposite is more probable with Guede committing a burglary armed with a knife just a few days earlier and evidence of the burglary in Merideth’s murder.
Common sense dictates that if you have two persons, who is more likely all things equal, to have committed a homicide, a person throwing rocks or a person arrested for burglary carrying a knife and who earlier menaced another person during another burglary? Any credible investigator is going to look more strongly toward the latter person.
Again, you make much effort of criticizing the sources that have been presented, yet it seems there is nothing coming from you . I would like to know where we could review these translated documents you aforementioned.
Vince: The Italian justice system of 2014 disgraced itself with the conviction of this woman based on apCray. Nuff said. If you want to discuss history we can discuss the Mussolini era.
The facts about Rudy Guede are that he had lived in Perugia since immigrating there when he was five, was raised by a well-to-do family and had an apartment 100 metres from Sollecito’s. Though he was known to the police he had never previously been charged with any crime or had any previous conviction, not even minor offences.
So in the middle of this ex-FBI “expert’s” analysis is a howlingly false item of information that he then spins into Guede acted alone.
The exact quote by the way was that:
“he was an experienced criminal, he had the motive (are you listening, Mr. Pisa? Ms. Nadeau?*”
To explain – this Pisa and Nadeau are two crime writers/journalists who have written articles suggesting that there is a lot of evidence against Knox and in Nadeau case also describing the behaviour of the Knox family publicists in trying to spin the story. Now the only point I want to make is that the highlighted language shows the source of justagrilinseattle’s little cut and paste – an earlier posting criticising reporting done in both cases by reporters fluent in Italian, form Perugia.
I have been trying to post a simple point – Guede, before the events in this case had no criminal record, had never been charged with a crime (while even in Perugia Knox had been ticketed and fined for a party at which rocks were thrown at passing cars.) A large part of the statement of the ex FBI agent is built on “Guede has the history; he was an experienced criminal,” but in fact he was not. That makes the entire statement unreliable.
what is apparent here…… is that NONE OF YOU WERE THERE especially the girl from seattle. and despite any sources any of you reference they werent there either.. its amazing to me that knox is innocent despite all the lies she told… even dragging innocent people into it… anyone rememberCasey Anthony lie.??? . that case where we all know she is guilty but the evidence was compromised, many lies were told and innocent people were dragged in and destroyed…….
Whats even more hilarious is that knox and her boyfriend were present when she was killed.. but of course that doesnt matter to those who OBVIOUSLY want knox to be innocent.. even if she isnt guilty of murder.. SHE IS INVOLVED. and that is called knowledge of. which makes her guilty.. if she were truly innocent there would have been no need for all the lies she told nor a need to drag in innocent people.. ESPECIALLY THE FAVORITE AMERICAN PAST TIME OF BLAMING THE BLACK MAN FOR ALL CRIMES!!!!!!!
is there a reason comments are not posting?
I would like to ask Darren to provide some more information regarding the case he referred to above as Reid v. Covert. I believe that it holds that the American with a Constitutional defense can trump a treaty provision that might for example say: extradite anyone. The case might be stronger here is say Russian wanted to extradite me for a crime of saying that Stalin killed more people than Hitler and they have tried me and convicted me. My defense would be free speech under the First Amendment. But Russia does not have a First Amendment. Here Italy does not have double jeopardy in the sense that we have it. Darren please provide more about the Reid case and perhaps a cite. My Westlaw wont work here on the Dogalogue Machine at the marina or I would try to look it up. Darren’s point seems to be the key here.
Hey, Ugly Americans! Ease up on the Italian justice system. It is the height of arrogance to criticize legal principles merely because they do not comport with contemporary American norms. The Italian criminal justice system is every bit as sophisticated and reaches results every bit as just as ours. Consider the following comparisons:
1. The Italian criminal justice system never ordered execution of witches.
2. The Italian criminal justice system never excluded participants because of their race.
3. The Italian peninsula produced the literary works of Livy and Ovid at a time when the rest of Europe was grunting.
4. The Italian forebears practiced democracy two thousand years ahead of Thomas Jefferson at a time when the rest of the world was electing leaders with the blade of a sword.
5. Two thousand years ago the Italians had a standard of living not reached again until the early 20th century.
6. The Italians had indoor plumbing at a time when folks in the Americas were, well, you know, like bears.
I am fairly sure that the Italians think it odd that a confessed murderer could beat a charge because a cop failed to advise the accused of rights the accused already knew he had. Or, how about this, criminals get released solely because Americans commit so much crime that prison populations exceed prison construction. Let us not be too critical of the institutions of others.
Tom:
I don’t have a lot of confidence the state department will do the right thing with regard to approving the extradition request either, whatever the reason might be. Politics I feel will be a part of the decision. I hope I am wrong . But it is sad that I have come to this opinion.
I suspect Amanda Knox may be thrown under the Italian bus by the USA to make up for the 23 Americans convicted in absentia for the CIA extraordinary renditions in Italy of a German citizen 6-8 years ago. I believe none of those convicted were extradited to Italy.
I’m also not surprised that the US sock puppet media hasn’t reminded American rubes of this. It’s never a good idea for Imperial Empires to remind the rubes that other nations don’t subscribe to the notion of Imperial Exceptionalism.
Charlton,
You are exactly right.
I don’t work in law enforcement, nor anything related.
However, I have ben reading books and watching crime documentaries
for as long as I can remember. from around the age of 12, I started reading books about Serial Killers and different murder cases.
With this case, one does not have to have a PhD in Forensic Science to
see what is wrong with this case.
As you mention, stabbings, as anybody who reads True Crime stories, is
MESSY, it is violent, it takes strength.
This is not a type of crime that people do in groups for fun, this is PERSONAL.
This man Guede has a history of robbery and burglary,
it is not a huge leap to think that this was just a stepping stone for Guede, that he graduated from just breaking and thieving, into rape and murder.
FBI Profiler John Douglas also mentions that an attack like this takes a
strong perpetrator. It is NOT easy to stab a person in this manner.
and just to drive the point home, stabbings like this, are NOT a group sport.
In my opinion, people do not like that Amanda is this woman who enjoys sex, and has had a few partners, I think a lot of this is sl*t shaming.
Here is a young woman whom people hear is sexual and has one night stands.
What kind of girl goes home with a man she meets in a bar and smokes pot? Of course she must be the kind of girl that would murder her roommate, No TRULY INNOCENT girl would act in this manner.
Pretty girls usually get away w/ murder. Seinfeld had a funny episode on that.
Here is an interview of former FBI Profiler John Douglas who also believes
as I do, that Knox and her boyfriend are innocent.
http://groundreport.com/unarresting-the-arrestedfbi-profiler-john-douglas-on-amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito/
JD: Based on my experience, the crime scene does not indicate the presence of three individuals in the room where Meredith was murdered, only one. What was done to the victim, the way in which the crime occurred, was not the result of three people. This can be concluded without a DNA test.
KE: And third suspect, Rudy Guede?
JD: Behavior reflects personality. And that behavior fits only Rudy Guede. Guede has the history; he was an experienced criminal, he had the motive (are you listening, Mr. Pisa? Ms. Nadeau?*) and all evidence points to him. It was a brutal, bloody homicide, and it’s a reflection of his personality. And that behavior was exhibited at the crime scene. That’s his “canvas”; the result is his “artwork” of the subject (victim).
You should be able to find other “canvases” of his like that – not necessarily homicide, but you should find a violent past in this person’s background. I know that he committed some robberies, but I’ll bet money there are more cases that he may have been involved which remain unsolved. I don’t know, maybe before he came to Perugia – whatever he may have been escaping previously.
KE: What was the motive?
JD: The primary motive was burglary. But we have an opportunistic offender here. And that opportunity was presented when Meredith came home, and she became the victim of the opportunity.
KE: There are many who’ve said covering Meredith’s body with a duvet proves the murderer was female.
JD: That’s absurd. There are different reasons why someone will cover a body. There’s a certain sense of wanting to undo the crime. Guede didn’t leave after the crime, but he doesn’t want to look at her. It’s not that he didn’t feel good about what he has done; I can see that because of the way he killed her and sexually assaulted her. He’s a sadistic individual with a violent past. He put the blanket over her because he was wandering around the apartment and didn’t want to see her.
Sadly, this was a very pedestrian murder. And that’s not to diminish this beautiful woman’s life, Meredith. It’s not that complicated, crimes are not so complicated. After a week, I would’ve said to the investigators on the case, “Are you kidding me? You mean you haven’t arrested the guy?”
KE: In your professional opinion, what went wrong?
JD: Let me first say, for the police in Perugia, may only have the opportunity to see a case like this in a career. Unfortunately here, we see homicides like this all the time.
The first investigators didn’t know what they were handling. The collections and preservation of evidence was done incorrectly and led to contamination. Luckily we have the video; not only photos. You can see all the mistakes that were done. If I was brought in on this investigation, I would have told them they were on the wrong track.
KE: The media have been very interested and involved in this case from the beginning: do you think their role helped or damaged the investigator’s job and the judge’s assessments?
JD: It absolutely damaged both. The media can shape people’s opinion. A single photograph seen out of context, can affect us. The investigators can also be responsible for leaking information to manipulate the media and thus, public opinion.
KE: Do you believe the investigators made mistakes that subsequently diverted the course of the investigation?
JD: Well, that’s the entire story, isn’t it? First, there were too many people in those rooms. They should have removed Amanda, Raffaele and anyone who was not part of the investigation team, and roped it off.
From the video taken from the crime scene, there were numerous mistakes. The investigators can be seen passing evidence, dropping it on the ground, using the same tweezers, not changing gloves, no protective caps to cover hair. Any insider can recognize these errors. What the investigators have done may seem right on the “outside”, they had their protective clothing, boots, but cross- contamination of the evidence was more than evident.
mespo,
You know how to tell who the murderer is in a stabbing? It will be the one who is completely out of breath and covered with blood. Stabbings are not one or two neat punctures as you see in the movies. Almost every stabbing case I have worked on, the victim was stabbed an average of about forty to fifty times.
AY
Yes, I agree with you on the state /US issue but in Amanda’s case she was subject to a US double jeopardy issue because she was retried post conviction in the original court under the same statutes as was charged in the original court. At that point there was a double jeopardy in my opinion. The question is whether, in my mind, a US District court is going to weigh this on a US double jeopardy standard.
Also Amanda was not tried in Italy and then the US so I don’t think this is applicable.