Yes, in accordance with the US-Italy extradition treaty.
Yes, she should be imprisoned somewhere, but maybe in the US.
No, Americans shouldn't be extradited to foreign nations even if they're guilty.
No, she isn't guilty.
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.
"The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión
"Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn
Calumny | The Hellmann-Zanetti ReportThe 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.
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.
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.
"Yes, but are you a Protestant atheist or a Catholic atheist?".- Northern Irish joke