Posted on 03/27/2015 2:52:26 PM PDT by CaptainK
The highest court in Italy on Friday has overturned the murder convictions of Amanda Knox and her ex-boyfriend in the sensational 2007 stabbing death of her British roommate.
The ruling was the latest turn in an odyssey of international justice for Knox, who spent four years in an Italian jail after the killing. She has returned to the United States and vowed not to return to Italy.
She and the ex-boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, were convicted in 2009, then acquitted and freed in 2011. An appeals court overturned the acquittals and ordered a new trial, and they were convicted again last year. Knox was sentenced in absentia to 25 years in prison. Sollecito was sentenced to 28 1/2 years.
Knox and Sollecito were arrested after the roommate, Meredith Kercher, was found dead in a pool of blood in their apartment in the university town of Perugia, as many as 40 knife wounds over her half-naked body.
Prosecutors argued that Kercher was killed as part of a sex game. Knox and Sollecito said they were alone together on the night in question, watching a movie, smoking pot and having sex.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
There is no mix of her blood. Not true. Her DNA was not at the crime scene. Bloody footprints were linked to Guede. Why are we repeating lies?
Indeed,IIRC, that was the gravamen of the OJ defense team's case. They convinced the jury (LOL) that the cops had (a) "contaminated" the evidence, (b) probably "planted the evidence" anyway and (c) by not following proper procedures in the chain of custody, had mishandled and corrupted the evidence that they had probably planted. The jury (ROTFLMAO) bought it. OJ walked.
In OJ's case, police misconduct was not real. In Foxy Knoxy's case, it was real enough. Nevertheless, it's what got them both off in the end. BTW, many contributors on this thread may be a bot too quick to condemn Amanda's prosecutors. In the OJ case, the prosecution was equally corrupt and inept. The difference: Poor prosecution worked to his benefit, OJ walked right away. It worked against Amanda, so she had to wait to walk.
Knox's DNA was found mixed with the victim's in the bathroom, the hall, and another girl's bedroom (where the burglary was staged). Her boyfriend's DNA was found on the victim's bra clasp.
.
You need mental help.
.
Knox’s DNA was found mixed with the victim’s in the bathroom, the hall, and another girl’s bedroom (where the burglary was staged). Her boyfriend’s DNA was found on the victim’s bra clasp.
Now if this were my child, I would welcome her home for a lovely tea and a (1) scone, before whisking her off to begin her new life as Sister Clare at the Convent of the Poor Clares of County Clare.
Cartwheels, anyone?
Imagine if your daughter was in Italy, and she was murdered. The evidence points to three people. One is convicted. The other two walk free, even though the evidence points to their involvement.
How would you feel?
Or maybe it’s just convenient for Knox that she happened to live there.
Why was Knox’s DNA found mixed with the victim’s in a third girl’s room where the break-in was staged, but Guede’s DNA wasn’t found in that room? That doesn’t add up, either.
We’ll probably never know what happened that night, but everything points to all three being involved in some way. It’s so sad - this young woman Meredith (the real innocent in this case) murdered, and no justice for her or her family.
She was obviously innocent, but yes, a weirdo. Unfortunately for her, wrong place at the wrong time.
Obviously you have either a crazy imagination or no knowledge of the facts of the case.
The judges declared that the two did not commit the crime, a stronger exoneration than merely finding that there wasn’t enough evidence to convict.
you do realize of course that you and the others that are insisting guilt still after the TOTAL EXONERATION, are just showing yourselves as total A holes
sorry just saying it as gently as I know how.
There was Grace of God involved in this aquittal, so I believe you are all up against it here.
The only argument you have is to call us names.
IOW, you don’t have an argument at all. So I’ll be ignoring your posts from here on.
That’s just an opinion piece. It’s not an examination of the evidence or a serious discussion of the case at all.
Here’s a very close examination of the case right here:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Main_Page
Sounds more like an innocent kid worried about how skipping work on that night would make her look, and therefore getting tangled up in a web under intense pressure. Am almost convinced of the innocence in this case.
A key reason for the tens of thousands of wrongful convictions in the US every year (verified by studies) is that the age old fundamental precept of “beyond reasonable doubt” is not applied. The “he/she’s got to be guilty” has convicted myriads of innocents each year, and that goes against everything that conservatism stands for. It’s one of the worst phenomena of modern liberalism.
Fake Twitter account
Well said.
The assumption on this forum that this woman is innocent - and the unwillingness to even consider the evidence against her and her boyfriend - is really strange.
Ann Coulter had it right years ago when she wrote twice about how the evidence against these two people is damning:
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-09-07.html
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-04-03.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.