• 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!

Should Amanda Knox Be Extradited to Prison in Italy?

Should Amanda Knox Be Extradited to Prison in Italy?

  • Yes, in accordance with the US-Italy extradition treaty.

    Votes: 18 33.3%
  • Yes, she should be imprisoned somewhere, but maybe in the US.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, Americans shouldn't be extradited to foreign nations even if they're guilty.

    Votes: 6 11.1%
  • No, she isn't guilty.

    Votes: 30 55.6%

  • Total voters
    54
In the US the case would have ended with the appeals court acquittal.:peace

it never would have got past a grand jury in most states
 
I don't know if anyone has already mentioned this, but the first poll option is false. The extradition treaty has a clause for double-jeopardy.
 
I don't know if anyone has already mentioned this, but the first poll option is false. The extradition treaty has a clause for double-jeopardy.

I have mentioned DJ as the likely objection but I haven't seen the treaty text. Would you mind posting the relevant passage?:peace
 
I have mentioned DJ as the likely objection but I haven't seen the treaty text. Would you mind posting the relevant passage?:peace

I believe it has something to do with the treaty not being allowed to violate our Constitution, but my brief search only turned up references to the Constitution.

I could be wrong.
 
In the US the case would have ended with the appeals court acquittal.:peace

It depends where. The West Memphis 3 case was another bogus trial and conviction based on prejudices and first impressions more than evidence.
 
Last edited:
Just for balance's sake, here's a link to the Hellmann-Zanetti report which explains why the guilty verdict by the lower court was overturned.

Contents | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

If you want to be taken seriously in this thread you need to link to both and refrain from linking to highly biased websites. The entire case needs to be completely re-examined. Anyone with any shred of a sense of justice and who actually paid attention to the entire process, not just the initial trial, can't possibly come to any kind of conclusion about the guilt of these two people. It's utterly impossible to argue their guilt with any degree of certainty after reading extensively on the case.

I've read almost everything I could get my hands on with the exception of Meredith's father's book. If I were to recommend just one book on the case, John Follain's book "A Death in Italy" is one of the least biased reports on the case. It's required reading along with the Massei and the Hellmann reports.

And this bears repeating since there's a continual insistence that it was a "normal witness interview", Hellmann found that:

The obsessive length of the interrogations, carried out during [both] day and night, by more than one person, on a young and foreign girl who at the time did not speak Italian at all well, was unaware of her own rights, did not have the assistance of an attorney (which she should have been entitled to, being at this point suspected of very serious crimes), and was moreover being assisted by an interpreter who — as shown by Ms. Bongiorno — did not limit herself to translating, but induced her to force herself to remember, explaining that she [Amanda] was confused in her memories, perhaps because of the trauma she experienced, makes it wholly understandable that she was in a situation of considerable psychological pressure (to call it stress seems an understatement [appare riduttivo]), enough to raise doubts about the actual spontaneity of her statements; a spontaneity which would have strangely [singolarmente] arisen in the middle of the night, after hours and hours of interrogation: the so-called spontaneous statements were made at 1:45 am (middle of the night) on 11-6-2007 (the day after the interrogation had started) and again at 5:45 am afterward, and the note was written a few hours later.

In order to show that, in the days following the killing of Meredith, Amanda Knox was not at all disturbed at the police station, the testimony [deposizioni] of some police officials and other young women who had been summoned there was recalled: Amanda and Raffaele, they said, were displaying affection [si scambiavano delle effusioni], and Amanda had even engaged in a few gymnastic maneuvers while waiting.

In reality, however — beside the fact that the affectionate displays, simple tenderness of two lovers, could have been a way of finding comfort in the situation, and beside the fact that gymnastic exercises could also themselves be a way of relieving [esorcizzare, lit. "exorcising"] what was certainly an anxious and frightening environment for all involved — apart from all these considerations, it must be observed that this testimony refers to the beginning of the time at the police station and not late at night (1:45 am and 5:45 am) when the so-called “spontaneous” statements were made. Which, contrary to the prosecution’s assumption, serves [only] to demonstrate that Amanda Knox, who at the beginning had no reason to be afraid, went into a state of oppression and stress precisely as a result of her interrogation and the way it was conducted.

Calumny | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

Whatever the case with it not technically being DJ, I personally don't accept the logic that a higher court can come to a different conclusion on the case and a conviction going ahead on the basis of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Whatever it legally is, it seems highly illogical to me.

I thought she was guilty from the outset, primarily based on the media reporting incorrect details. It took an ass-kicking on this web site to change my mind.
 
And this bears repeating since there's a continual insistence that it was a "normal witness interview", Hellmann found that:



Calumny | The Hellmann-Zanetti Report

Whatever the case with it not technically being DJ, I personally don't accept the logic that a higher court can come to a different conclusion on the case and a conviction going ahead on the basis of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Whatever it legally is, it seems highly illogical to me.

I thought she was guilty from the outset, primarily based on the media reporting incorrect details. It took an ass-kicking on this web site to change my mind.

Yeah, to this very day, 6 years and 2 official documents, dozens of books, hundreds of articles later, I still read posts on this forum regurgitating so much old, faulty information on the case it makes me wonder what kind of research these people actually did. One of two things that is absolutely certain in this case is that Rudy Guede was there that night. His DNA and prints are everywhere, including on and inside Meredith's body. That is the ONLY actual, irrefutable fact. Everything else is speculation, circumstantial evidence, relentless character assassination, highly questionable interrogation procedures and very dodgy forensics.

I'm the first to condemn Amanda for implicating Lumumba. I understand she was confused, exhausted (people should remember she was questioned at all hours of the day and night for a total of close to 50 hours in the span of 4-5 days) and struggling to communicate in a language she was not fluent in, but there is no excuse for accusing an inncocent person. That is the only other irrefutable fact in this case and the only thing that she can be reasonably be punished for.
 


This is pretty close.

ARTICLE VI

Non Bis in Idem

Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested.

When found not guilty in Italy, she was effectively found not guilty in the US.
 
Yeah, to this very day, 6 years and 2 official documents, dozens of books, hundreds of articles later, I still read posts on this forum regurgitating so much old, faulty information on the case it makes me wonder what kind of research these people actually did. One of two things that is absolutely certain in this case is that Rudy Guede was there that night. His DNA and prints are everywhere, including on and inside Meredith's body. That is the ONLY actual, irrefutable fact. Everything else is speculation, circumstantial evidence, relentless character assassination, highly questionable interrogation procedures and very dodgy forensics.

I'm the first to condemn Amanda for implicating Lumumba. I understand she was confused, exhausted (people should remember she was questioned at all hours of the day and night for a total of close to 50 hours in the span of 4-5 days) and struggling to communicate in a language she was not fluent in, but there is no excuse for accusing an inncocent person. That is the only other irrefutable fact in this case and the only thing that she can be reasonably be punished for.

Yep. She served that time plus one year. Unfortunately, Solletico seems to have served that time for little reason.
 
This is pretty close.

When found not guilty in Italy, she was effectively found not guilty in the US.

Close, but no cigar. As she wasn't finally and irrevocably acquitted, the point is moot. The acquittal verdict of the appeal court always required confirmation by the Court of Cassation. All verdicts (guilty or not guilty) of the appeal court can in turn be appealed by the prosecution or the defence, hence a verdict isn't a verdict until confirmed by the Court of Cassation. If the CoCassation issues an acquittal, double jeopardy does apply and the defendant cannot be prosecuted again for the same offence.

She was never found not guilty in Italy, so she was never found not guilty in the US.
 
Close, but no cigar. As she wasn't finally and irrevocably acquitted, the point is moot. The acquittal verdict of the appeal court always required confirmation by the Court of Cassation. All verdicts (guilty or not guilty) of the appeal court can in turn be appealed by the prosecution or the defence, hence a verdict isn't a verdict until confirmed by the Court of Cassation. If the CoCassation issues an acquittal, double jeopardy does apply and the defendant cannot be prosecuted again for the same offence.

She was never found not guilty in Italy, so she was never found not guilty in the US.

It's not clarified in the treaty as "totally acquitted".

The wording used by the Perugia Court of Appeals:

DECLARES

Amanda Marie Knox guilty of the crime under Charge F, without the aggravating circumstance of C.P. Article 61 no. 2, and with mitigating circumstances equivalent to the aggravating circumstance under C.P. Article 368; and sentences her to three years of confinement; confirming, with regard to this charge only, the civil sanctions of the ruling under appeal, sentencing Amanda Marie Knox to the payment of court costs and attorney’s fees incurred at the present level [of appeal] by Patrick Diya Lumumba, in the total amount of 22,170 euros for rights and fees in addition to the reimbursement of general expenses and accessories of law;

ACQUITS

both of the defendants of the crimes attributed to them under Charges A,B,C, and D for not having committed the act, and of the crime under Charge E because the act did not take place; rejecting the request made against them by civil party Aldalia Tattanelli;

I don't think it's as clear cut as either of you think.
 
It's not clarified in the treaty as "totally acquitted".

The wording used by the Perugia Court of Appeals:



I don't think it's as clear cut as either of you think.

Clearly nothing in this case is clear cut, but it's not difficult to understand how the judicial process is working through the various courts of appeal. The big fallacy around this case is the idea that they were ever acquitted. Their appeal was granted subject to confirmation at the Court of Cassation. That's not a verdict, but an interim finding of an appeal court.
 
Clearly nothing in this case is clear cut, but it's not difficult to understand how the judicial process is working through the various courts of appeal. The big fallacy around this case is the idea that they were ever acquitted. Their appeal was granted subject to confirmation at the Court of Cassation. That's not a verdict, but an interim finding of an appeal court.

That court acquitted them. That leaves plenty of wiggle room in interpretation.
 
That court acquitted them. That leaves plenty of wiggle room in interpretation.

That court didn't have the authority to acquit them, just to find in favour of their appeal which was a decision that would always be finally confirmed or set aside by the Court of Cassation. Did anyone ever suggest that the finding of the appeal court would be the final word on the matter? I don't believe so.
 
Yep. She served that time plus one year. Unfortunately, Solletico seems to have served that time for little reason.

Pretty much. From what I've been able to gather, the traces found in the apartment that "implicate" him were:

1. The minute trace of his DNA on Meredith's torn bra clasp, which was initially found by the medical examiner when he lifted Meredith's body up, subsequently kicked around the room by who knows how many people and finally "found" again, a few feet from its original location, collected and passed around by forensic "experts" wearing dirty gloves and admitted into evidence 46 days after the murder. The DNA sample was too small to be retested and was deemed unreliable by the experts on appeal.

2. A faint foot print in blood on the bathroom mat that was attributed to him in the trial but again thrown out on appeal as unreliable.

3. His DNA found on a cigarette in an ashtray in the apartment, which could have been left there the previous day when he spent time there with Amanda.

4. A fingerprint on the inside of the fridge door, which again could have been left there any other time he was in the apartment with his GF.

Everything else they think they have on him is again speculation, weak circumstantial evidence or inadmissible evidence such as his two laptops whose hard drives were completely destroyed by whatever incompetent idiot worked on them to retrieve data.

Isn't it convenient how many "crucial" pieces of evidence in this case were either too small for retesting (DNA on bra clasp and kitchen knife), destroyed by police investigators (hard drives), left lying around for weeks (bra clasp) or simply missing (tapes of Amanda's interrogation on the night she implicated Lumumba)? Either the entire Perugia police department is filled with a bunch of incompetents or something stinks to high heaven here...
 
That court didn't have the authority to acquit them, just to find in favour of their appeal which was a decision that would always be finally confirmed or set aside by the Court of Cassation. Did anyone ever suggest that the finding of the appeal court would be the final word on the matter? I don't believe so.

Nope, but the treaty says what the treaty says. The courts statement clearly states that they acquit her.

If it comes to it, I imagine that will be the point of contention and it will be so for a long time cos law men love to get paid over semantics.
 
If it comes to it, I imagine that will be the point of contention and it will be so for a long time cos law men love to get paid over semantics.

True that. This has still got some way to run. I have to say I feel a lot more sympathy for Sollecito than for Knox at this stage of the proceedings.
 
That court didn't have the authority to acquit them, just to find in favour of their appeal which was a decision that would always be finally confirmed or set aside by the Court of Cassation. Did anyone ever suggest that the finding of the appeal court would be the final word on the matter? I don't believe so.

And in the end, she will be sent back. Italy has been more than honorable on too many occasions in regards to treaty with the United States.

In 1998 a US Marine pilot was allowed to be sent back to the United States after hotdogging through the mountains of Italy, in the process slicing through a cable car line that sent 20 people falling to their deaths. Once back in the United States, he was acquitted, though it was showed he lied and obstructed justice in the process. The Italians have still not forgotten that one.

The United States will send her back if the Italians ask because there is nothing to show that they have acted unfairly. Furthermore, the United States realizes that this is close to the last straw for most nations overseas. The United States asks for more extraditions from other countries than any other in the world, and yet is being more and more perceived as not honoring the very treaties and obligations that it initiates.

We would not have initiated this treaty if we had any questions of the Italian legal system. The US State Department puts out warnings otherwise to US citizens on what to be aware of in each nation. You flaunt them at your own detriment.

The court judges in Italy are educated professionals. We were not there to see the mountains of evidence that they saw. The pages of conclusion from 357-397 of the court transcript give very sound reason for why they found Amanda Knox guilty. It is available online in English. We send thousands to prison in the States each year for much less.

The only reason I have been able to see for the fascination with Knox is Jingoism, or a nation's belief that it's citizens can never do any wrong compared to others, or Hybristophilia, the fascination and excitement that comes from associating oneself with murderer's (e.g., Ted Bundy, Jeffery Dahmer, Richard Ramirez, et al.) In time, this will all pass, and she will be forgotten, and quietly sent back without very many even noticing.

The question for Amanda should be, go now and get out sooner on good behavior, or wait and make the Italians work at it, only to forgotten in prison.
 
And in the end, she will be sent back. Italy has been more than honorable on too many occasions in regards to treaty with the United States.

In 1998 a US Marine pilot was allowed to be sent back to the United States after hotdogging through the mountains of Italy, in the process slicing through a cable car line that sent 20 people falling to their deaths. Once back in the United States, he was acquitted, though it was showed he lied and obstructed justice in the process. The Italians have still not forgotten that one.

The United States will send her back if the Italians ask because there is nothing to show that they have acted unfairly. Furthermore, the United States realizes that this is close to the last straw for most nations overseas. The United States asks for more extraditions from other countries than any other in the world, and yet is being more and more perceived as not honoring the very treaties and obligations that it initiates.

We would not have initiated this treaty if we had any questions of the Italian legal system. The US State Department puts out warnings otherwise to US citizens on what to be aware of in each nation. You flaunt them at your own detriment.

The court judges in Italy are educated professionals. We were not there to see the mountains of evidence that they saw. The pages of conclusion from 357-397 of the court transcript give very sound reason for why they found Amanda Knox guilty. It is available online in English. We send thousands to prison in the States each year for much less.

The only reason I have been able to see for the fascination with Knox is Jingoism, or a nation's belief that it's citizens can never do any wrong compared to others, or Hybristophilia, the fascination and excitement that comes from associating oneself with murderer's (e.g., Ted Bundy, Jeffery Dahmer, Richard Ramirez, et al.) In time, this will all pass, and she will be forgotten, and quietly sent back without very many even noticing.

The question for Amanda should be, go now and get out sooner on good behavior, or wait and make the Italians work at it, only to forgotten in prison.

Its not like italy extradites their own thugs. I remember when they refused to extradite two marines that murdered two indian fisherman.
 
Its not like italy extradites their own thugs. I remember when they refused to extradite two marines that murdered two indian fisherman.

That is a totally different case, and still pending. Italy has not refused to send them back, only that the process be followed out, and that incident took place only last year. It is also important to realize that those.."thugs"...as you call them, were Marines on an anti-piracy ship combating bandits on the high seas. As of just days ago, the Italian courts ruled that they saw no reason in this case why they can not be sent back according to the law.

I suspect the Italians allowed Amanda Knox to be released pending determination of her case knowing that our government will be just as faithful in meeting its treaty obligations.
 
Of you think America will send her back you haven't been paying attention. They won't give two ****s about Italy being "faithful" in the past.
 
Back
Top Bottom