• 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
This is a very challenging situation for the US. More so politically than ethically or legally. Double jeopardy does not apply. And we also have a dark cloud hanging over our heads regarding a covert extraction by CIA off Italian soil recently. And Italy is pissed about that little event.

With that said. We probably should give her up if she is extradited by Italy. But don't think there is a chance in hell that Kerry at State (or Obama) is actually going to hand over a weeping pretty young girl to a foreign government.

Not an attractive idea politically.......
 
I don't think you're being entirely fair -- the US extradites both Britons and Americans to the UK all the time. There have been some high-profile cases, particularly to do with the IRA, that have aroused the ire of the UK about the UK-US extradition treaty, but if you read it, I think you'll agree it's pretty fair.

I agree with you that the US refusing to extradite some IRA members due to a very loose interpretation of what 'political refugee' means is pretty unstomachable. Equally, though, Britain flatly refuses to extradite murderers to the US unless the US promises not to go for the death penalty.

Britain is part of the EU in some respects. The European Convention of Human Rights protects the right to life and countries adopting it cannot send anyone to their death.

It's not just to US. Ref Abu Qatada and inability to allow extradition to Jordan in case they might torture him or some such...
 
I don't see why.

it's been long established that countries do not have to extradict if doing so violates their own civil rights protections. it's been brought up dozens of times this thread, but Canada won't extradict to the united states anyone charged with a capital offense unless the death penalty is taken off the table. (personally, I'm of the opinion that if another country refuses to extradict to us on that grounds we should just say "OK, he's yours, I'm sure our capital murderers will make a wonderful addition to your society" congradulations on a new canadian national!")

Brazil will not extradict a Brazilian citizen nor the mother of a brazilian citizen under any circumstances.

treaties are broad like that.

Well, Canada won't extradite people to executions in Pakistan or Zimbabwe or North Korea or other countries with the death penalty, either.
 
The wide world if the modern age is a place I have no use for. I am an Isolationist at heart and always will be. There's nothing outside the US that I need to see.



Don't leave the US and it's not an issue to begin with. Honestly, she shouldn't have gotten any aid from the US when she was tried originally but now that she's home there's no way the US should allow her to be sent back to a Socialist **** hole like Italy.

Too late for that. She went there and is accountable for her actions there.
 
Britain is part of the EU in some respects. The European Convention of Human Rights protects the right to life and countries adopting it cannot send anyone to their death.

It's not just to US. Ref Abu Qatada and inability to allow extradition to Jordan in case they might torture him or some such...

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is different to the EU, both EU Law and the ECHR take judicial precedents over our national laws.

The ECHR was established by the Council of Europe which covers 47 countries and 820 million people and the ECHR was signed by the UK in 1953 we didn't join the EU or EEC as it was known then until 1973.

Council of Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

47 Countries - 820 million citizens - Council of Europe
 
Last edited:
Well, Canada won't extradite people to executions in Pakistan or Zimbabwe or North Korea or other countries with the death penalty, either.

and that's their right... I'm saying that US prosecutors should adopt a policy "oh you think it's cruel to execute this child molester murderer who killed 3 children, show us how it's done, he's your problem now, he can live free and not in fear of the death penalty among YOUR citizens. buh bye"
 
Changing your story is not evidence of murder. There was no person (besides the originally accused) who pointed at her and said "she did it" either. She was probably scared out of her mind, being accused of murder in a foreign country with no family around to help her. God only knows how long they had interrogated the poor girl for.

No, no evidence at all exists...except:
  • Her own confession putting herself at the scene
  • The false accusation against her employer
  • The subsequent changes in her account as she was arrested
  • The mixed blood spots
  • The footprint
  • Her table lamp locked in the murder room
  • The different accounts of the locked door
  • Both cell phones turned off
  • The DNA evidence implicating her and her boyfriend
  • The staging of the murder scene..False break in..Moved body..Covering body
  • Her dubious account of her activity the morning after the murder
  • The witness who saw her and her boyfriend overlooking the cottage on the murder night
  • The shopkeeper who saw her when she claimed to be in her bed sleeping
  • The 3am call to her mother which she denied making
  • Her overall behaviour after the murder

Is Amanda Knox Guilty?
 
The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is different to the EU, both EU Law and the ECHR take judicial precedents over our national laws.

The ECHR was established by the Council of Europe which covers 47 countries and 820 million people and the ECHR was signed by the UK in 1953 we didn't join the EU or EEC as it was known then until 1973.

Council of Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

47 Countries - 820 million citizens - Council of Europe

And what? We are part of the EU in some respects (though not all).

ECHR Article 2 protects the right to life and 6 confers right to a fair trial, which I assume means they can't be extradited if it risks their life (as it would if extradited by US on murder charges depending on the State) and in the same way people may claim asylum if life is under threat.
 
Too late for that. She went there and is accountable for her actions there.

She was found not guilty by an appeals court if my memory serves me properly. Here in the US we gave something called Double Jeopardy.... It means you only get to try a person once for a particular crime. If the Italian courts messed up the first time that's their problem not hers.
 
No, no evidence at all exists...except:
  • Her own confession putting herself at the scene
  • The false accusation against her employer
  • The subsequent changes in her account as she was arrested
  • The mixed blood spots
  • The footprint
  • Her table lamp locked in the murder room
  • The different accounts of the locked door
  • Both cell phones turned off
  • The DNA evidence implicating her and her boyfriend
  • The staging of the murder scene..False break in..Moved body..Covering body
  • Her dubious account of her activity the morning after the murder
  • The witness who saw her and her boyfriend overlooking the cottage on the murder night
  • The shopkeeper who saw her when she claimed to be in her bed sleeping
  • The 3am call to her mother which she denied making
  • Her overall behaviour after the murder

Is Amanda Knox Guilty?

most of the evidence was investigated tailored on her "confession" which I don't consider voluntary because police have an interest in getting a suspect. they know how to manipulate people. people confess to things they didn't do all the time.

the only thing I have to say to police when investigated is "I want my lawyer" or if I'm abroad "in accordance with the Vienna convention I demand the United States Consulate be informed of my arrest and a consular officer be notified to obtain legal counsel for me"

if Knox was smart enough to say that I'm willing to bet the cops would've moved on to a different suspect.
 
And what? We are part of the EU in some respects (though not all).

The ECHR is a separate organisation to the EU, it's run by a separate organisation the Council of Europe which covers 820 million people compared to the 500 million covered by the EU.

Viv said:
ECHR Article 2 protects the right to life and 6 confers right to a fair trial, which I assume means they can't be extradited if it risks their life (as it would if extradited by US on murder charges depending on the State) and in the same way people may claim asylum if life is under threat.

I am more than aware what the ECHR's states in relation to it's articles and that it takes precedent over national laws.
 
No, no evidence at all exists...except:
  • Her own confession putting herself at the scene
  • The false accusation against her employer
  • The subsequent changes in her account as she was arrested
  • The mixed blood spots
  • The footprint
  • Her table lamp locked in the murder room
  • The different accounts of the locked door
  • Both cell phones turned off
  • The DNA evidence implicating her and her boyfriend
  • The staging of the murder scene..False break in..Moved body..Covering body
  • Her dubious account of her activity the morning after the murder
  • The witness who saw her and her boyfriend overlooking the cottage on the murder night
  • The shopkeeper who saw her when she claimed to be in her bed sleeping
  • The 3am call to her mother which she denied making
  • Her overall behaviour after the murder

Is Amanda Knox Guilty?

Followed the story some in months past.

Yeah. She may or may not actually be guilty of murder. But she very likely has some dirty hands in the event....
 
The ECHR is a separate organisation to the EU, it's run by a separate organisation the Council of Europe which covers 820 million people compared to the 500 million covered by the EU.

Obviously. Did I say other?

I am more than aware what the ECHR's states in relation to it's articles and that it takes precedent over national laws.

As am I, but you feel the need to inform me (of what, I'm not sure). :lamo

Just to try to clarify the point I intended to make, we are part of Europe and it's not always within our gift to make our own laws these days.
 
Obviously. Did I say other?

Actually yes you did, you started prattling on about the EU and our membership, when this has nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with ECHR.


Viv said:
As am I, but you feel the need to inform me (of what, I'm not sure). :lamo

Just to try to clarify the point I intended to make, we are part of Europe and it's not always within our gift to make our own laws these days.

It might well be within our gift as you put it, as the Conservatives have suggested leaving the ECHR and replacing it with a British Bill of Rights.

Britain may need to withdraw from European Convention on Human Rights, says Cameron - Telegraph
 
Last edited:
The wide world if the modern age is a place I have no use for. I am an Isolationist at heart and always will be. There's nothing outside the US that I need to see.



Don't leave the US and it's not an issue to begin with. Honestly, she shouldn't have gotten any aid from the US when she was tried originally but now that she's home there's no way the US should allow her to be sent back to a Socialist **** hole like Italy.

I feel a bit bad for you. I can't imagine what life would be like if I decided there was nothing new, exciting or wondrous in life out there in the wide world -- that I had everything I needed exactly where I was and didn't want anything else.

Besides evidently making you, in my opinion, somewhat offensive (Italy beats the US in a number of human development index and quality of life index areas), you're also wilfully shutting yourself off from so much culture, history, beauty and experience, not just physically but mentally and emotionally, by taking the stance that there's pretty much nothing out there that interests you.

Don't you find it oppressive and boring?
 
No, no evidence at all exists...except:
  • Her own confession putting herself at the scene
  • The false accusation against her employer
  • The subsequent changes in her account as she was arrested
  • The mixed blood spots
  • The footprint
  • Her table lamp locked in the murder room
  • The different accounts of the locked door
  • Both cell phones turned off
  • The DNA evidence implicating her and her boyfriend
  • The staging of the murder scene..False break in..Moved body..Covering body
  • Her dubious account of her activity the morning after the murder
  • The witness who saw her and her boyfriend overlooking the cottage on the murder night
  • The shopkeeper who saw her when she claimed to be in her bed sleeping
  • The 3am call to her mother which she denied making
  • Her overall behaviour after the murder

Is Amanda Knox Guilty?

Good Lord! She lived in the house! Your DNA, foot prints, etc. is all over your house too. The above list is some of the LAMEST evidence ever presented! I can't even believe there would be an indictment on that "evidence" as you call it.
 
Changing your story is not evidence of murder. There was no person (besides the originally accused) who pointed at her and said "she did it" either. She was probably scared out of her mind, being accused of murder in a foreign country with no family around to help her. God only knows how long they had interrogated the poor girl for.

she was also interrogated in a language she had very limited competence in.

The fact that a convicted (on several other crimes) loser who had absolutely no common interest with Amanda and her italian lover, was also convicted of the crime pretty well blows the Italian theory of her guilt out of the water
 
What Alan Dershowitz Professor of Law at Harvard University

The same guy who argued Claus Von Bulow was "innocent" and OJ was innocent. AD is a brilliant law professor but to say he is objective is a bit of stretch
 
Had she not been tried and found innocent once, I'd say yes. However, seeing as how this would be extradition for the sake of what appears to be double jeopardy, no.
 
she was also interrogated in a language she had very limited competence in.

The fact that a convicted (on several other crimes) loser who had absolutely no common interest with Amanda and her italian lover, was also convicted of the crime pretty well blows the Italian theory of her guilt out of the water

It's unbelievable. The whole thing is ridiculous, and I really don't think she did it.
 
It's unbelievable. The whole thing is ridiculous, and I really don't think she did it.

neither do I, and many of my colleagues discussed this issue at length. I don't recall anyone with a competence in Criminal trial or appellate law believing

1) the trial in italy met basic due process (Procedural and substantive) requirements

2) that the Italians had a plausible theory of motive

3) that the evidence was properly gathered

4) that she was actually guilty
 
neither do I, and many of my colleagues discussed this issue at length. I don't recall anyone with a competence in Criminal trial or appellate law believing

1) the trial in italy met basic due process (Procedural and substantive) requirements

2) that the Italians had a plausible theory of motive

3) that the evidence was properly gathered

4) that she was actually guilty

As far as I'm aware, the evidence is incredibly flimsy, and I can't believe they could get an indictment based on that evidence. I guess things are a lot different in Italy.
 
As far as I'm aware, the evidence is incredibly flimsy, and I can't believe they could get an indictment based on that evidence. I guess things are a lot different in Italy.

Its idiotic. Of course I have the benefit of having actually reviewed dozens of federal criminal trial transcripts, appellate briefs and attending 100+ appellate oral arguments on criminal cases. The more you know the more you realize how buggered up that procedure was in Italy
 
Its idiotic. Of course I have the benefit of having actually reviewed dozens of federal criminal trial transcripts, appellate briefs and attending 100+ appellate oral arguments on criminal cases. The more you know the more you realize how buggered up that procedure was in Italy

And what about the supposed evidence of the DNA on the knife? That is so stupid. Who is to say she didn't cut herself and throw the knife in the sink? I cut myself all the time when I'm cutting things.
 
And what about the supposed evidence of the DNA on the knife? That is so stupid. Who is to say she didn't cut herself and throw the knife in the sink? I cut myself all the time when I'm cutting things.

If the knife was one that had never been spotted in that living area it might be more convincing. But that wasn't the case.

remember-most people don't plan on what to do if they come upon someone they are living with being hacked to death with blood everywhere. ITs easy to sit back and say "if she isn't guilty why didn't she…..
 
Back
Top Bottom