• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Italian court convicts Amanda Knox of murder

They did. Along with bloody footprints, and on the handle of a knife with her flatmates' blood on the blade.

If the knife was native to that flat, her finger prints can be explained away as ... the knife was in the apartment and used by both residents on a regular basis.

The knife evidence is nothing. It proves she once held the knife ... nothing more.

I want to see evidence that proves those were in fact the alleged defendant's foot prints.
 
what is the penilty in italiy is it death?









Click Me Please
 
Its sounds like most people based it on her behavior only, but I want to see more evidence tying her to the crime than just the knife. >.< They didn't say much about what they had the way of evidence over here..."
 
Last edited:
Of course not. There are no countries in Europe that have the death penalty any more.

thanks i didn't know that and it is really to bad it is the best way really







Click Me Please
 
thanks i didn't know that and it is really to bad it is the best way really

Hardly the best way. For one it is not preventive in any way and secondly there is a chance of executing the wrong people (not saying she is innocent but in general).

The death penalty is nothing but vengeance.
 
Hardly the best way. For one it is not preventive in any way and secondly there is a chance of executing the wrong people (not saying she is innocent but in general).

The death penalty is nothing but vengeance.

it is bible condoned and the most cost effective way




Click Me Please
 
I fully support this conviction. I watched the news reports on this trial. They showed Amanda Knox smiling and laughing in the court room. Excuse me? You're on trial for murder and you can't stop smiling?

So she's a narcissistic bitch. That doesn't make her guilty of murder.

aps said:
Sorry, but someone who was truly innocent, wouldn't be looking at these charges lightly, IMO. She cried when the verdict was read. Oh brother. I'm not sympathetic.

Her behavior in court is no substitute for actual EVIDENCE against her.

Mark the time and the date...I actually agree with my left wing friend aps (Virginia elected a Consvative for Governor, must be killing her).........I have been following this case since day one and Ms. Knox is guilty as hell.......She is a disgusting individual and should have been given the maximum sentence life without parole............

Whether or not she is a "disgusting individual" has no bearing on whether or not she committed murder. There is NO solid evidence linking her to the crime scene. None.

They did.

They did NOT find any of her DNA at the crime scene.

Manc Skipper said:
Along with bloody footprints,

Geude's footprints...not hers.

Manc Skipper said:
and on the handle of a knife with her flatmates' blood on the blade.

...which apparently did not match the knife that was actually used in the murder. Is it really so unbelievable that two people who live together could have pricked themselves with the same knife?

I am very disillusioned with the Italian legal system right now. There is no way she would have been convicted in an American court, and rightfully so.
 
Last edited:
I hope they put her in a men's prison. :2razz:
 
So she's a narcissistic bitch. That doesn't make her guilty of murder.



Her behavior in court is no substitute for actual EVIDENCE against her.



Whether or not she is a "disgusting individual" has no bearing on whether or not she committed murder. There is NO solid evidence linking her to the crime scene. None.



They did NOT find any of her DNA at the crime scene.



Geude's footprints...not hers.



...which apparently did not match the knife that was actually used in the murder. Is it really so unbelievable that two people who live together could have pricked themselves with the same knife?

I am very disillusioned with the Italian legal system right now. There is no way she would have been convicted in an American court, and rightfully so.
The American legal system is a bunch of puzzies who let proven convicts go if the evidence was collected in such a way that it "violated their privacy".
 
The American legal system is a bunch of puzzies who let proven convicts go if the evidence was collected in such a way that it "violated their privacy".

And that has what to do with this trial? What is the evidence that proves she committed murder?

I was shocked to learn about the Italian criminal justice system. The amount of abuse of power, and the lack of accountability to the elected government, is truly appalling for a modern country.
 
Last edited:
I find it amusing how much attention US Media has given to this case. Why not focus on the undoubtedly thousands of innocent individuals still in US jails?

Either way. I hope Knox stays in jail. I hope she gets every bit of her money taken from her when the poor man sues her for defaming him and claiming he did it and taking it back after he is proven guilty.
 
Last edited:
I do not understand why some in the US media see her as innocent. There is even a defense fund for her.

No physical evidence proves that she is guilty. Those in the US prefer to have that. Otherwise it's called circumstantial evidence and should never ever be enough to convict someone.

The knife: The knife that the prosecutors say was used is a common household knife. Considering that the victim and the defendant were roomates it's not hard to imagine either one's dna being found on it. For no reason more than because they lived together. The defense also showed through an expert that the dna that was on the knife was too small to be "definative". The defense also said that the knife did not match the wounds on the victim.

The bra clasp: Apparently it had been left at the crime scene for weeks before it was picked up. Any evidence gleaned from it would no doubt have been contaminated. It was also shown via crime scene videos that the crime scene investigators did not use gloves, hair coverings and even poking fingers into the stab wounds on the victim during the initial examination of the room. Contamination galore in this case apparently.

Footprint. Was not hers. The prosecutor tried to claim that it was Sollecito's footprint. According to the experts that the defense brought in that was not possible as Sollecito has a hammer toe it would not have would not have left an imprint like the footprint that was shown.

Shoe Print: Rudy Guede had a shoe box for those exact type of shoes. The defense wanted further examination of this evidence.

Broken window. Defense attribute's it to Rudy Guede.

That answer your question?

Now I must ask. How many here are saying she is guilty on such dubious evidence supported Roman Polanski getting away with child rape?
 
Last edited:
I find it amusing how much attention US Media has given to this case. Why not focus on the undoubtedly thousands of innocent individuals still in US jails?

Because if this is an example of how court proceedings go in Italy then there have to be thousands of innocents in their prisons also. More per capita than what is in the US since the US does have higher standards in the court system than Italy does. As is evidenced for the very simple fact that juror's were not sequestored in Italy (just one example).
 
Now I must ask. How many here are saying she is guilty on such dubious evidence supported Roman Polanski getting away with child rape?

I actually supported him being deported to US to face jail.

Her and her partners lying and changing their story countless times and contradicted each other many times on their whereabouts.
Knox's own statement putting herself at the house the night Kercher was slain
A small sample of her DNA is found on the handle of a knife which has Meredith's on the tip, which is found at her boyfriend's flat next day and has been wire brushed clean and bleached and matches the wound.
She has changed her story completely in terms of her location. Firstly claiming she was there and that her boss at the local bar did it all! (destroying his business and putting him through hell I might bloody add, he is later proven to have rock tight alibi but not before the callous bitch tried to pin it on him) despite this alibi she stood by this statement and then later took it back.
She now claims she was at her boyfriends the whole night, but is still foggy on the details. A story she stands by, despite CCTV evidence strongly to contrary.
The couple are discovered the next day outside the apartment with a mop and bleach and other cleaning equipment which she just bought and was said to be startled at being caught. Police and forensics state the apartment smelt of bleach and had been subject to vigorous cleaning activity, despite none of the blood being cleaned up.
Stefanoni, a forensics expert who testified in the hearing in May, suggested that it was Kercher's DNA on the tip of the knife and that the way the genetic material was positioned indicated the knife had probably been used to puncture the skin.
The staged 'break in' where nothing was stolen, designed to make it look like a robbery/rape, linking Knox's blood to other room. Undoubtedly trying to cover her tracks and divert attention away from her.
The stab wounds with two knives and 40 bruises found on her body numerous other pointers which can only be explained with multiple attackers contradits the claim that only one person was involved. Amanda wanting to pin it on a innocent man.

If I was on that Jury, I would have voted guilty. If she was innocent she did everything possible to make herself look guilty and has no one but herself to blame.
I am not saying the prosecution is not without faults or rather I can criticise them on some things but to somehow say that by being a 'nice person' in the US now means she is incapable of murder is ridiculous to me.
 
Last edited:
No physical evidence proves that she is guilty. Those in the US prefer to have that. Otherwise it's called circumstantial evidence and should never ever be enough to convict someone.

The knife: The knife that the prosecutors say was used is a common household knife. Considering that the victim and the defendant were roomates it's not hard to imagine either one's dna being found on it. For no reason more than because they lived together. The defense also showed through an expert that the dna that was on the knife was too small to be "definative". The defense also said that the knife did not match the wounds on the victim.

The bra clasp: Apparently it had been left at the crime scene for weeks before it was picked up. Any evidence gleaned from it would no doubt have been contaminated. It was also shown via crime scene videos that the crime scene investigators did not use gloves, hair coverings and even poking fingers into the stab wounds on the victim during the initial examination of the room. Contamination galore in this case apparently.

Footprint. Was not hers. The prosecutor tried to claim that it was Sollecito's footprint. According to the experts that the defense brought in that was not possible as Sollecito has a hammer toe it would not have would not have left an imprint like the footprint that was shown.

Shoe Print: Rudy Guede had a shoe box for those exact type of shoes. The defense wanted further examination of this evidence.

Broken window. Defense attribute's it to Rudy Guede.

That answer your question?

The answer me this. Why was she seen doing cartwheels the day after the murder? Why did she first confess, then retract? Why did she blame an innocent man? Why does her diary show a very different picture of the "sweet" Amanda the American media are trying to portrait?

I dont defend the prosecution team one bit, or how the case was handled overall. I find the whole case as amateur hour and hope that an appeal to a more professional court (remember this was a local court in a small town) will get to the truth, but the actions of her and her lover after the murder (buying cleaning materials....wtf) really do not show her in a good light. They were photographed kissing each other passionately for god sake only hours after finding the corpse and that is not normal.

Now I must ask. How many here are saying she is guilty on such dubious evidence supported Roman Polanski getting away with child rape?

So you are comparing a cold blooded murder with sex with a minor? I see... :roll:
 
A small sample of her DNA is found on the handle of a knife which has Meredith's on the tip, which is found at her boyfriend's flat next day and has been wire brushed clean and bleached and matches the wound.

Do you not see the contradiction here? How can the knife have been wire brushed AND bleached cleaned and still have both of their DNA on it? While I could see some dna surviving a wire brushing if it's done sloppily I cannot fathom how it survived a bleach bath. Bleach destroy's DNA to the point of it not being useable. And then there is still the question of the knife fitting the wounds of the victim. Which it apparently did not.


The couple are discovered the next day outside the apartment with a mop and bleach and were said to be startled at being caught. Police and forensics state the apartment smelt of bleach and had been subject to vigorous cleaning activity, despite non of the blood being cleaned up.

Sorry but this isn't even slightly believeable. Anyone with even half a brain would first dump the body and then clean up the blood first and foremost as it would be the first noticeable thing that something bad had happened. And considering the Univeristy that Knox was attending I wouldn't exactly say that she has less than half a brain.

Stefanoni, a forensics expert who testified in the hearing in May, suggested that it was Kercher's DNA on the tip of the knife and that the way the genetic material was positioned indicated the knife had probably been used to puncture the skin.

Read my above paragraph about the knife.

The staged 'break in' where nothing was stolen, designed to make it look like a robbery/rape, linking Knox's blood to other room. Undoubtedly trying to cover her tracks and divert attention away from her.

Is there evidence that Knox broke the window? Or is it just speculation that she did?

The stab wounds with two knives and 40 bruises found on her body numerous other pointers which can only be explained with multiple attackers contradits the claim that one one person was involved. Amanda wanting to pin it on a innocent man.

As far as I know there was only one knife provided as evidence. Where'd you get two from?

As for 40 bruises..well not hard for one person to make that many bruises. I've heard of one person making over 100 bruises before.

What are the other pointers?

If I was on that Jury, I would have voted guilty
Maybe next time she ought to kill someone in the United States where she may have had a better chance of getting away with it.

You would have convicted someone on purely circumstantial evidence.

Much of the rest of your post is about her changing her story. This does not show that she murdered her roomate. It does show one of two things. One she's a chronic liar. Two that she was either pressured into saying such things or that she doesn't know exactly what happened and is just assuming things.
 
The answer me this. Why was she seen doing cartwheels the day after the murder? Why did she first confess, then retract? Why did she blame an innocent man? Why does her diary show a very different picture of the "sweet" Amanda the American media are trying to portrait?

She was seen doing cartwheels? By who?

There could be any number of reasons to confess. Being pressured to do so being one of them.

Apparently she blamed that innocent man because she was pressured. Mind you that bit was thrown out of the court.

Diary: Does the diary mention anything about killing her roomate? If not then doesn't matter. I don't know about you but I've met a lot of A-holes and female dogs in my life...none of them have killed anyone. Convicting someone just because they are A-holes is, for lack of a better term, wrong.

I dont defend the prosecution team one bit, or how the case was handled overall. I find the whole case as amateur hour and hope that an appeal to a more professional court (remember this was a local court in a small town) will get to the truth, but the actions of her and her lover after the murder (buying cleaning materials....wtf) really do not show her in a good light. They were photographed kissing each other passionately for god sake only hours after finding the corpse and that is not normal.

People do strange things when they are under stress.

So you are comparing a cold blooded murder with sex with a minor? I see... :roll:

Not sex with a minor. Rape of a minor. Rape is one crime that cannot ever have a valid excuse for it. Because of that, rape (especially rape of a child) is far worse than murder. At least in my opinion.

But to answer your question yes I am. But not exactly either. I'm comparing the evidence between the two. The evidence against Polanski is far less circumstantial than the evidence that I have seen against Knox.
 
The only fascinating thing that I find about this case is that it might proove that the devil comes in multiple faces and so does the angel.

(I say "might" because I never follow murder cases and cannot state my opinion whether she's guilty or not)

If instead of her angel face that looks like the nice girl's next door she would have been a bearded man with piercing evil eyes, not much attention would have been paid to this case.

I might be wrong... don't know really, but this was the first thought that came to my mind when I saw her face.
 
Back
Top Bottom