• 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
You'll continue to believe that while you cleave to ahistorical and outmoded ideals.

Yes I will continue to believe that, right up to my dying day. We'll see which one of us is Judged to be correct in our view at the moment of our deaths. I'm quite confident in my outcome, can you say the same?
 
Nonsense. If people putting in a full week's work hours (40+) are still having to claim welfare, it's because they are being underpaid and the selfishness is coming from the employer.
You mean like giving tax breaks to the wealthiest 1% or earners? Those don't just buy votes, they buy Super-PACs.

rejected as silly. If you are working 40 hours a week and really need welfare it is because you aren't skilled enough to make a decent wage. Look, I get that socialists think government should set wages but not the market but its the fault of the worker if he doesn't have enough value.

SO you claim that democrats get elected by giving breaks to the wealthiest 1%?

do you believe that the top one percent are almost all Republicans?
 
Yes I will continue to believe that, right up to my dying day. We'll see which one of us is Judged to be correct in our view at the moment of our deaths. I'm quite confident in my outcome, can you say the same?
Only one of us is guilty of intolerance, Tigger. He doesn't like that. ;)

And yes, I'm entirely confident. I don't promote beliefs I find to be unconscionable.
 
Only one of us is guilty of intolerance, Tigger. He doesn't like that. ;)

Your "He" and I parted company about a decade ago, when my eyes were opened to a much broader view of the Divine.

And yes, I'm entirely confident. I don't promote beliefs I find to be unconscionable.

Good for you. Best of luck with that.
 
Your "He" and I parted company about a decade ago, when my eyes were opened to a much broader view of the Divine.
I'd be extremely interested in hearing your perspective some time, if it's not too personal. Perhaps not in this thread, however. We'd be moving from derailing to outright rudeness. :lol:
 
I'd be extremely interested in hearing your perspective some time, if it's not too personal. Perhaps not in this thread, however. We'd be moving from derailing to outright rudeness. :lol:

I've discussed it before, so I'd be more than happy to do so again in the proper place, as you mentioned.
 
I've discussed it before, so I'd be more than happy to do so again in the proper place, as you mentioned.
It's a plan, man. I'll catch up with you there one of these days.
 
I think that "me, me, me" attitude started in the Eighties under Reagan and Thatcher, Gordon Gecko and "greed is good". We then had endless movements of anti-poor agitation; a systematic denial of the existence of community and society; the cynical, fallacious scam that was 'trickle-down' economics and the ever-widening, ever-more-extreme inequality of opportunity and income. Moral and ethical standards are certainly in a poor state, but it has nothing to do with the Sixties, hippies or free love.

Interesting leap...
 
Interesting leap...

You say leap, I say logic. The message of the Sixties counter-culture was the very opposite of self-obsession; it was about communal living, loving one another, peace and anti-materialism/anti-consumerism.
 
I see there is no point in discussing, as you don't receive, but I will try one last time. The points about EU and ECHR are related but different, giving background on our reasons for not extraditing people who may be sentenced to death and that this is not necessarily only relevant to UK, but to many EU countries who adopted certain ECHR articles.

Now you don't have to respond, I know you don't understand the point and it appears never will appreciate it is not addressed to you, as you are in Europe, but to anyone who might not have realised this about our legal process.

My point being that the EU and ECHR were separate organisations, and every EU country plus a lot of non EU countries have signed the ECHR. As for their functions and role, I am more than aware of that as well.


Viv said:
That information is in the news and has been for months and it's really, really unlikely I could have missed it even if I tried (for feck sake).

Thank you for confirming that at this time, whether you want to admit it or not, we adhere to certain ECHR articles (European not local UK only law) and that is why...bla bla bla how many times do you need it.

It's part of Consevative plans along with a national vote with regard to the EU., and it's you who seems confused and needed correcting with regards to the ECHR and EU.
 
There was plenty of DNA evidence in that house linking Knox to the knife and scene and none of it was ever judged to have been cross contaminated by the Italian Courts. It was also shown by forensic experts that there were numerous people involved in the murder rather than just one individual.

It's not right to say there is

The Murder of Meredith Kercher

The Evidence - The Murder of Meredith Kercher

Knox initially confessed that she was in the house on the night of the murder and that she heard Miss Kercher scream, identifying a Congolese bar owner, Patrick Lumumba, as the assailant. She told the court during the trial that the confession was made under duress but then repeated the entire account in a five page memorandum the next morning. She later claimed Italian Authorities beat her, something which was strongly denied by everyone involved in the inquiry.

Lumumba was promptly arrested and spent two weeks in jail and Knox seemed quite happy for him to remain jail . It was only by chance that a Swiss businessman read about the case and came forward to say he had been talking to Lumumba in his bar on the night of the murder — offering him a rock-solid alibi. Lumumba has also always claimed Knox was the one behind the murder that night.

Knox then changed her story saying she was far away from the scene with her boyfriend at his place that night and that they watch the film Amelie on his lap top.

Sollecito could not back up Knox’s alibi on the night of the murder. Whilst she claimed she spent the evening with him, smoking marijuana, watching the French film Amelie and making love. Sollecito told police he could not remember if Knox was with him that evening or not.

Even assuming his memory was hazy because of the drugs, it seemed odd that a young man who had just embarked on a new relationship could not recall whether he had spent the night with his girlfriend or not.

Sollecito claimed he used his computer to download and watch cartoons and Amelie. But computer experts told the court that there was no activity on his laptop between 9.10pm on Nov 1, and 5.32am the next morning — the time frame in which the murder took place.

Knox and Sollecito turned off their mobile phones on the night of the murder, from around 8.40pm, and turned them back on at around 6am, inviting further suspicion.

A bedroom belonging to one of Miss Kercher’s Italian flatmates was ransacked on the night of the murder, with a window smashed with a rock. But police said the break-in was staged - broken glass from the window was found on top of clothes scattered on the floor, suggesting the window was broken after the contents of the room were messed up. Prosecutors accused Knox and her boyfriend of staging the break-in to make the killing look like a burglary that had turned into rape and murder.

Knox claimed that she slept in late the next morning but this was contradicted by a local shop keeper who clearly saw her very early next morning following Meredith's murder, when she came in to his shop allegedly to buy cleaning products such as bleach.

Why Amanda Knox's story just doesn't wash - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Evidence against Amanda Knox makes conviction seem likely

Shopkeeper Says He Saw Knox After Murder - ABC News

Then there is the The 3am call to her mother which she denied making, her table lamp locked in the murder room, the different accounts of the locked door, the witness who saw her and her boyfriend overlooking the cottage on the murder night and numerous other such evidence such as the fact Amanda Knox made two statements to Meredith's friends that the police found suspicious because they contained details that Amanda Knox should not have known. Indeed Meredith's roommate Natalie Hayward and other friends of Meredith's in Perugia at the time such as Amy Frost and Robyn Carmel Butterworth have always claimed they believe Knox to be the murderer.

Amanda Knox Knew Details of the Crime She Shouldn't Have Known - The Murder of Meredith Kercher

Local News | Roommate testifies in Amanda Knox murder trial | Seattle Times Newspaper

Why I believe Knox killed my friend

Fellow student

Whilst Rudy Guede was sentenced to 30 years in prison for his part in the murder, but has had his sentence cut to 16 years and who is eligible for parole later this year has always maintained that it was Knox who was in fact the murderer, and it will be interesting to hear his views once he is released and has nothing to lose.

There are people in US Prisons serving life for murder on far less evidence than Knox and Knox has proved her self to be nothing more than a blatant liar in the past, even accusing a man she knew to be innocent. So cold is Knox, that I honestly think she would have quite happily have seen Patrick Lumumba serve a life sentence for something she knew he hadn't done, and her behaviour throughout the case has been extremely questionable.

I am also not the only one to believe there is significant evidence, Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard University School of Law also thinks there is significant evidence, as does fellow US Law Professor Julian Ku, and both agree that Knox should be extradited.



There is also a new motive for the crime been uncovered which further implicates Amanda Knox, with the Italian Courts to due to release this information shortly.

'Evidence of a motive' for the crime behind Amanda Knox verdict - Europe - World - The Independent

Finally the people I feel sorry for in all of this are the forgotten victims, Meredith and her family who have lost a much loved daughter and sister, and who have sat through the trial and having listened to the evidence fully support Knox's extradition.

Amanda Knox Weeps And Vows To 'Fight Till End'

 
The poll should have had the option, "No, I don't know whether she's guilty, but Double Jeopardy applies" and that's how I would have voted.
 
The poll should have had the option, "No, I don't know whether she's guilty, but Double Jeopardy applies" and that's how I would have voted.

It's dubious as to whether the US can use 'Double Jeopardy'. Furthermore the whole Italian system is based around three courts or grades.

The Telegraph said:
Some lawyers and supporters of Ms Knox have argued that having been acquitted in 2011, she would be protected under the US Constitution from “double jeopardy” – being tried twice for the same charge.

Yet the US-Italy extradition treaty only protects Americans from extradition to face prosecution again in Italy for an offence that has already been dealt with by the US legal system. “This is not applicable in this situation,” said Professor Julian Ku, who teaches transnational law at Hofstra University.

For extradition candidates like Ms Knox who have already been convicted, the treaty states that Italy must merely produce “a brief statement of the facts of the case,” as well as the text of the laws governing the crime committed, the punishment it would receive, and its statute of limitations.

Her conviction would “easily satisfy the conditions of the treaty,” said Prof Ku. “So it would be hard for the US to explain why she should not be handed over”.

What next for Amanda Knox? - Telegraph
 
The poll should have had the option, "No, I don't know whether she's guilty, but Double Jeopardy applies" and that's how I would have voted.

It's dubious as to whether the US can use 'Double Jeopardy'. Furthermore the whole Italian system is based around three courts or grades.

The Telegraph said:
Some lawyers and supporters of Ms Knox have argued that having been acquitted in 2011, she would be protected under the US Constitution from “double jeopardy” – being tried twice for the same charge.

Yet the US-Italy extradition treaty only protects Americans from extradition to face prosecution again in Italy for an offence that has already been dealt with by the US legal system. “This is not applicable in this situation,” said Professor Julian Ku, who teaches transnational law at Hofstra University.

For extradition candidates like Ms Knox who have already been convicted, the treaty states that Italy must merely produce “a brief statement of the facts of the case,” as well as the text of the laws governing the crime committed, the punishment it would receive, and its statute of limitations.

Her conviction would “easily satisfy the conditions of the treaty,” said Prof Ku. “So it would be hard for the US to explain why she should not be handed over”.

What next for Amanda Knox? - Telegraph
 
It's dubious as to whether the US can use 'Double Jeopardy'. Furthermore the whole Italian system is based around three courts or grades.

Hmm..... and she's still in the States why? Sorry, but if it were me, I'd be in Mexico, or another country that has no extradition.
 
It's dubious as to whether the US can use 'Double Jeopardy'. Furthermore the whole Italian system is based around three courts or grades.

So, that's the double jeopardy nonsense dealt with. Can we move on?
 
So, that's the double jeopardy nonsense dealt with. Can we move on?

Fine with me, although it's hard work trying to convince Americans that Double Jeopardy is not going to work in this case, as they entire Italian System is built around a three court process.

If Knox is not returned, it will be a political decision and may result in future extradition requests by the US being turned down and countries across the world citing the Knox case as a reason not to extradite to the US.
 
Fine with me, although it's hard work trying to convince Americans that Double Jeopardy is not going to work in this case, as they entire Italian System is built around a three court process.

If Knox is not returned, it will be a political decision and may result in future extradition requests by the US being turned down and countries across the world citing the Knox case as a reason not to extradite to the US.
The extradition treaty states,
Article 6 provides that extradition shall be denied when the person sought has been in
jeopardy in the requested State for the same offense.
The question becomes, Was Knox ever found not guilty in any Italian court for this offense?
Since the answer is yes, all other questions or levels of courts, become irrelevant.
To extradite Knox would be to expose her life and liberty to risk, a second time.
Also notice the language of the article, it does not say, extradition may be denied,
it says " extradition shall be denied".
 
The extradition treaty states,

The question becomes, Was Knox ever found not guilty in any Italian court for this offense?
Since the answer is yes, all other questions or levels of courts, become irrelevant.
To extradite Knox would be to expose her life and liberty to risk, a second time.
Also notice the language of the article, it does not say, extradition may be denied,
it says " extradition shall be denied".

I refer you to my post and the quote by US Professor of Law Julian Ku. :roll:
 
Tell Italy to stick their extradition request where the light don't shine and if Italy makes any attempt to grab the girl, send in a kill team to waste any Italian involved in such activity

A predictable conservative response. Italy does have a legitimate right in this case..We are not the world's supreme power, and never were.
Dude, I find your attitude to be reprehensible..
 
The poll should have had the option, "No, I don't know whether she's guilty, but Double Jeopardy applies" and that's how I would have voted.

Does Italy have a double jeopardy law? That was the court and laws she was convicted under.

We do, however, need to give some weight to honoring of extridition laws, I suppose. Otherwise, any mafioso hitman could just run to Italy for protection.

But, I do think it's more about politics than justice. It's also about the ego of an undefeated prosecutor getting his cherry popped for the first time. I think she was tried in a kangaroo court.

All that being said, here's my take on it. I think she should voluntarily submit to a, legally non-binding, polygraph test. She should be asked 2 questions and 2 questions only.

1. Did you kill the person?
2. Were you part of a conspiracy to kill the person?

If her answers are "no," to both questions and she passes the test, she should be protected by the full weight of the US government and even the military if need be.

If she answers yes to either question, she's on her own.
If she refuses the test, she's on her own.
 
It's dubious as to whether the US can use 'Double Jeopardy'. Furthermore the whole Italian system is based around three courts or grades.

If one is to assume that the Italian system does, indeed allow for Double Jeopardy, then why did they cut Ms. Knox loose before the entire process was completed? They had to know that she would immediately return to the United States, which was highly unlikely to extradite her for another trial after the Italian courts found her conviction to be tainted in the first trial.
 
If one is to assume that the Italian system does, indeed allow for Double Jeopardy, then why did they cut Ms. Knox loose before the entire process was completed? They had to know that she would immediately return to the United States, which was highly unlikely to extradite her for another trial after the Italian courts found her conviction to be tainted in the first trial.

The Italian system is based around three courts. There is the Court of First Grade, the Court of Appeal (Second Grade) and the Court of Cessation (Third Grade), which is the Court of Last Resort, therefore the final verdict in this case has not yet been announced yet under Italian Law. They let her out at the second grade stage, however under Italian Law, the final verdict is announced by the Court of Cessation. It's a very different system to the British or American system but should still be respected, and as I have pointed out before Amanda Knox is free in Seattle at the moment, so she owes a lot to that system, which is in fact very thorough. However the fact that a new guilty verdict has now been received and the case is due to go before the Final Court of Cessation changes matters, and should she been found guilty there, then the Italian authorities will be forced to seek her extradition.

If she is found guilty by the Final Court and the US refuses to extradite, then there may be future implication for diplomatic relations and extradition, whilst Miss Knox won't ever be able to travel to many countries outside the US.
 
Last edited:
The Italian system is based around three courts. There is the Court of First Grade, the Court of Appeal (Second Grade) and the Court of Cessation (Third Grade), which is the Court of Last Resort, therefore the final verdict in this case has not yet been announced yet under Italian Law. They let her out at the second grade stage, however under Italian Law, the final verdict is announced by the Court of Cessation. It's a very different system to the British or American system but should still be respected, and as I have pointed out before Amanda Knox is free in Seattle at the moment, so she owes a lot to that system, which is in fact very thorough. However the fact that a new guilty verdict has now been received and the case is due to go before the Final Court of Cessation changes matters, and should she been found guilty there, then the Italian authorities will be forced to seek her extradition.

So, if I understand this correctly, they let a foreign national with no real connections to the country go free BEFORE the final decision of the courts was handed down. That sounds about as nonsensical as most of what the US Legal System does. Why on Earth would ANY system allow a defendant who has had their case sent back to a lower court free? That makes no sense whatsoever.

If she is found guilty by the Final Court and the US refuses to extradite, then there may be future implication for diplomatic relations and extradition, whilst Miss Knox won't ever be able to travel to many countries outside the US.

Somehow I doubt Ms. Knox is interested in leaving the United States again during her lifetime. As for the potential political/international relateions implications.... as an Isolationist, that really doesn't bother me. The US and Italy have a cordial (at best) relationship due to any number of incidents over the past couple of decades so I doubt this will make any significant change in that, one way or another.
 
There was plenty of DNA evidence in that house linking Knox to the knife and scene and none of it was ever judged to have been cross contaminated by the Italian Courts. It was also shown by forensic experts that there were numerous people involved in the murder rather than just one individual.

It's not right to say there is

The Murder of Meredith Kercher

The Evidence - The Murder of Meredith Kercher

Knox initially confessed that she was in the house on the night of the murder and that she heard Miss Kercher scream, identifying a Congolese bar owner, Patrick Lumumba, as the assailant. She told the court during the trial that the confession was made under duress but then repeated the entire account in a five page memorandum the next morning. She later claimed Italian Authorities beat her, something which was strongly denied by everyone involved in the inquiry.

Lumumba was promptly arrested and spent two weeks in jail and Knox seemed quite happy for him to remain jail . It was only by chance that a Swiss businessman read about the case and came forward to say he had been talking to Lumumba in his bar on the night of the murder — offering him a rock-solid alibi. Lumumba has also always claimed Knox was the one behind the murder that night.

Knox then changed her story saying she was far away from the scene with her boyfriend at his place that night and that they watch the film Amelie on his lap top.

Sollecito could not back up Knox’s alibi on the night of the murder. Whilst she claimed she spent the evening with him, smoking marijuana, watching the French film Amelie and making love. Sollecito told police he could not remember if Knox was with him that evening or not.

Even assuming his memory was hazy because of the drugs, it seemed odd that a young man who had just embarked on a new relationship could not recall whether he had spent the night with his girlfriend or not.

Sollecito claimed he used his computer to download and watch cartoons and Amelie. But computer experts told the court that there was no activity on his laptop between 9.10pm on Nov 1, and 5.32am the next morning — the time frame in which the murder took place.

Knox and Sollecito turned off their mobile phones on the night of the murder, from around 8.40pm, and turned them back on at around 6am, inviting further suspicion.

A bedroom belonging to one of Miss Kercher’s Italian flatmates was ransacked on the night of the murder, with a window smashed with a rock. But police said the break-in was staged - broken glass from the window was found on top of clothes scattered on the floor, suggesting the window was broken after the contents of the room were messed up. Prosecutors accused Knox and her boyfriend of staging the break-in to make the killing look like a burglary that had turned into rape and murder.

Knox claimed that she slept in late the next morning but this was contradicted by a local shop keeper who clearly saw her very early next morning following Meredith's murder, when she came in to his shop allegedly to buy cleaning products such as bleach.

Why Amanda Knox's story just doesn't wash - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Evidence against Amanda Knox makes conviction seem likely

Shopkeeper Says He Saw Knox After Murder - ABC News

Then there is the The 3am call to her mother which she denied making, her table lamp locked in the murder room, the different accounts of the locked door, the witness who saw her and her boyfriend overlooking the cottage on the murder night and numerous other such evidence such as the fact Amanda Knox made two statements to Meredith's friends that the police found suspicious because they contained details that Amanda Knox should not have known. Indeed Meredith's roommate Natalie Hayward and other friends of Meredith's in Perugia at the time such as Amy Frost and Robyn Carmel Butterworth have always claimed they believe Knox to be the murderer.

Amanda Knox Knew Details of the Crime She Shouldn't Have Known - The Murder of Meredith Kercher

Local News | Roommate testifies in Amanda Knox murder trial | Seattle Times Newspaper

Why I believe Knox killed my friend

Fellow student

Whilst Rudy Guede was sentenced to 30 years in prison for his part in the murder, but has had his sentence cut to 16 years and who is eligible for parole later this year has always maintained that it was Knox who was in fact the murderer, and it will be interesting to hear his views once he is released and has nothing to lose.

There are people in US Prisons serving life for murder on far less evidence than Knox and Knox has proved her self to be nothing more than a blatant liar in the past, even accusing a man she knew to be innocent. So cold is Knox, that I honestly think she would have quite happily have seen Patrick Lumumba serve a life sentence for something she knew he hadn't done, and her behaviour throughout the case has been extremely questionable.

I am also not the only one to believe there is significant evidence, Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard University School of Law also thinks there is significant evidence, as does fellow US Law Professor Julian Ku, and both agree that Knox should be extradited.



There is also a new motive for the crime been uncovered which further implicates Amanda Knox, with the Italian Courts to due to release this information shortly.

'Evidence of a motive' for the crime behind Amanda Knox verdict - Europe - World - The Independent

Finally the people I feel sorry for in all of this are the forgotten victims, Meredith and her family who have lost a much loved daughter and sister, and who have sat through the trial and having listened to the evidence fully support Knox's extradition.

Amanda Knox Weeps And Vows To 'Fight Till End'



Belfast Telegraph?

None of this is convincing evidence. Why is Guede's DNA the only one at the murder scene? How does one professionally clean a scene to remove their DNA but not that of Guede? How did such an odd troupe of people turn out to be murderers? Why do they leave the guy they don't really know to masturbate on the body?
 
Back
Top Bottom