• 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
Andalublue said:
She was acquitted by an appeals court, whose verdict needed ratifying by the higher court to be effective. The higher court threw out the acquittal. All a part of the same process, so no DJ. And as I pointed out, the extradition treaty makes no mention of DJ being grounds for a refusal to extradite.
Click to expand...

It may be part of the same process in Italy but it is not in the US. And an extradition may be refused on grounds other than those specified in the treaty.:peace
 
Jack Hays said:
And an extradition may be refused on grounds other than those specified in the treaty.
Click to expand...
I wonder if you could provide any evidence or precedent to back up that claim. I don't think that's true at all.
 
Andalublue said:
Read it again. No such clause exists in the treaty.
Click to expand...

No, but all US courts are empowered to act against a miscarriage of justice. In this case, I can easily imagine her attorney pointing out the absurdity of extradition for a crime of which she has been acquitted, and the miscarriage of justice that would represent.
 
Jack Hays said:
No, but all US courts are empowered to act against a miscarriage of justice. In this case, I can easily imagine her attorney pointing out the absurdity of extradition for a crime of which she has been acquitted, and the miscarriage of justice that would represent.
Click to expand...

That may be the way she succeeds in avoiding extradition, but it would be a violation by the letter and the spirit of the treaty. A number of different US courts may well decide that that is a violation worth making, but there may be consequences in the long run.
 
Andalublue said:
That may be the way she succeeds in avoiding extradition, but it would be a violation by the letter and the spirit of the treaty. A number of different US courts may well decide that that is a violation worth making, but there may be consequences in the long run.
Click to expand...

We'll just have to wait and see.
 
Andalublue said:
That may be the way she succeeds in avoiding extradition, but it would be a violation by the letter and the spirit of the treaty. A number of different US courts may well decide that that is a violation worth making, but there may be consequences in the long run.
Click to expand...

The US demands more extraditions from others countries each year than any other nation, so a lot will be put in jeopardy by our refusal to do so if Italy requests it. Furthermore, much more will play into any decision. Currently 23 CIA agents and other US personnel have now been convicted in Italian courts for abductions on their soil during the War on Terror. Their safe house villa was also recently confiscated and sold off to pay reparations to those families concerned. If the decision of the US State Department requires input from that agency for how they see the case, I don't think they will need more than 51 percent belief that she did it for them to recommend that Amanda should be sent back, if it is possible to get their agents off the hook. Even if that isn't in play, the United States risks losing a great deal of faith from others in regards to how they abide by the treaties they sign, especially since we ask so much, but are not willing to return the same when it can not be shown that the Italian courts did not act in good faith. Alan Dershowitz the Harvard professor of law and preeminent defense attorney has made this point as well. It might take a year or two, but it should be expected that she will be sent back. The question that should be in Amanda's mind is whether she would want to just go ahead and get it over with and possibly get out in a few years for good behavior, or continue to fight, only to be sent back, with very little sympathy left in Italy for her to ever stand a chance of getting an early release.
 
Last edited:
Here's the Full Massei Report and Summary in English, you can go and look at it and decide for yourself.

The Massei Report Summary

The Full Massei Report

It's also interesting to note Professor David Balding, a world renowned DNA Expert at University College London (UCL) and author of the book 'Weight-of-Evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles' suggested that there was significant DNA on the Bra Strap in an Independent Review of the Evidence on behalf of the Italian Authorities and dismissed cross contamination as highly unlikely in last night BBC 4's 'Is Amanda Knox Guilty??'

Professor David Balding recently published an analysis of the bra clasp DNA. It may be helpful to explain some terms found in this article. John Butler (Fundamentals of Forensic DNA Typing) defines the likelihood ratio (LR) as “The ratio of the probabilities of the same event under different hypotheses, and he explains that the prosecution’s hypothesis is usually the numerator, and the defense’s hypothesis is usually the denominator. A ban is a unit of expressing the weight of evidence (WoE). This scale is logarithmic; a likelihood ratio of three bans is equal to one thousand. Some months ago Dr. Balding was kind enough to answer some of my questions about this work.

Does Raffaele Sollecito¹s DNA fall into the category of low template DNA, and if so, should two separate amplifications have been run?

There’s no strict definition of “low-template” but broadly yes the peaks associated with Sollecito are low (but not those associated with Kercher, they are high). Conti-Vecchiotti discuss a threshold of 50 rfu below which a peak should not be relied on; in the UK, that threshold was used in the past but nowadays as techniques have improved the threshold is often lower, 25 or 30.

However that doesn’t matter here as all the peaks associated with Sollecito are well above 50: there is a 65, a 70 and a 98, all the 26 other peaks are above 100. So it is not extremely low template - many low-template cases are successfully prosecuted in the UK even when some peaks fall below the threshold and so are discounted. In this case all the peaks associated with Sollecito seem clear and distinct so I think there can be no concern about the quality of the result as far as it concerns him or Kercher.

Replication is generally a good thing and is nowadays done in most cases in my experience, but not all - one problem is that replication splits the sample and so can increase the chance of not getting a usable result. But although replication is desirable it is not essential. (In a sense there already is replication, because each of the 15 loci is an independent test.)

This is all a matter of weight of evidence, which Conti-Vecchiotti paid no attention to: if you measure the weight of evidence properly, that accounts for the extra assurance that comes from replication and gives a stronger result (or conversely gives a weaker result if there is not replication). But because Sollecito is fully represented in the stain at 15 loci (we still only use 10 in the UK, so 15 is a lot), the evidence against him is strong even allowing for the additional uncertainty due to non-replication

Are there contributors other than Raffaele Sollecito and Meredith Kercher to the autosomal profiles? If so, how does the presence of this additional DNA affect the bra clasp as evidence?

Yes, Conti-Vecchiotti identified a further 12 above-threshold peaks at alleles that could not have come from Sollecito or Kercher. They correctly criticised the scientific police for ignoring these: many do appear to be stutter peaks which are usually ignored, but 4 are not and definitely indicate DNA from another individual. The extra peaks are all low, so the extra individuals contributed very little DNA. That kind of extraneous DNA is routine in low-template work: our environment is covered with DNA from breath and touch, including a lot of fragmentary DNA from degraded cells that can show up in low-template analyses.

There is virtually no crime sample that doesn’t have some environmental DNA on it, from individuals not directly involved in the crime. This does create additional uncertainty in the analysis because of the extra ambiguity about the true profile of the contributor of interest, but as long as it is correctly allowed for in the analysis there is no problem - it is completely routine.
Click to expand...
 
Other experts disagree.

Hampikian and 19 other U.S. forensic experts reviewed the DNA evidence in the Knox case in 2009 and found it shaky. Their letter to the Italian judge outlined their concerns that police mishandled their collection of blood samples from a kitchen knife found in the apartment of Knox and Kerchner, as well as Kercher's bra clasp.

The U.S. experts' letter was not used in the original trial of Knox, in which she was found guilty. But its conclusions were upheld by two Italian independent experts who testified in the appeals trial in September. An eight-person jury found Knox and Sollecito not guilty on Monday.

Hampikian reviewed the case for Discovery News.

"What (the Italian forensic experts) found was that the knife recovered from Raffaele's apartment not only did not have traces of human blood, but it had not been cleaned in the way the prosecution said. They had said that Amanda bleached the knife. Instead, what experts appointed by the judge said was that the blade had potato starch on it. It was a typical kitchen knife. It was found in a kitchen drawer with other knifes. It wasn't well cleaned and it wasn't used as a murder weapon."

The Italian prosecutors used a DNA detection limit far below that of the independent U.S. experts or the FBI in determining the presence of blood DNA on the blade, Hampikian said, which made contamination a much more likely source of the genetic material.

The second piece of evidence was Kercher's bra clasp that allegedly had Sollecito's DNA but was inconclusive, according to Hampikian. Police investigators found no DNA from Sollecito or Knox on the rest of the bra, other items of Kercher's clothing, objects collected from Kercher's room, or in samples from her body. However they did find large amounts of DNA from Rudy Guede, a drifter from the Ivory Coast who was separately convicted of Kercher's murder and is serving 16 years in prison.
Click to expand...

How Dodgy DNA Freed Amanda Knox : Discovery News

So the physical evidence is not beyond reasonable doubt.

It was BBC 3 by the way.
 
Also, other experts interviewed by the BBC.

Another point of contention was the discovery that a third, unknown person's DNA profile retrieved from the bra clasp was overlooked by investigators. The appeal court subsequently ruled that the evidence could no longer be relied upon.

The precise mechanics of the process by which a person's DNA can be transferred from one object to another, without that person being present, is still poorly understood.

Allan Jamieson, director of the Forensic Institute in Glasgow, is keen to highlight this problem.

It is well known, he says, that DNA moves around very easily but "the reality is we don't know enough about DNA transfer to explain it".

When an object is found to have traces of several people's DNA on it, this says little about who touched the object last, Dr Jamieson explains.

"There's an unfortunate tendency for people in forensic science to want to be detectives and solve things, but that takes them beyond the science," he says.

"The science doesn't [necessarily] assist you in cases like this, because there's a known mechanism of transfer."

Jo Millington, a senior forensic scientist at Manlove Forensics, agrees. She says that "it's not really a case of who the DNA could have come from; it's more a question of how it got there".

She adds: "In the Kercher case in particular, there's not been due consideration given to how DNA can be transferred and that's rife across DNA analysis in the UK."
Click to expand...

BBC News - Kercher trial: How does DNA contamination occur?
 
Chatter said:
Here's the Full Massei Report and Summary in English, you can go and look at it and decide for yourself.

The Massei Report Summary

The Full Massei Report

It's also interesting to note Professor David Balding, a world renowned DNA Expert at University College London (UCL) and author of the book 'Weight-of-Evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles' suggested that there was significant DNA on the Bra Strap in an Independent Review of the Evidence on behalf of the Italian Authorities and dismissed cross contamination as highly unlikely in last night BBC 4's 'Is Amanda Knox Guilty??'
Click to expand...

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.
 
Chatter said:
Here's the Full Massei Report and Summary in English, you can go and look at it and decide for yourself.

The Massei Report Summary

The Full Massei Report

It's also interesting to note Professor David Balding, a world renowned DNA Expert at University College London (UCL) and author of the book 'Weight-of-Evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles' suggested that there was significant DNA on the Bra Strap in an Independent Review of the Evidence on behalf of the Italian Authorities and dismissed cross contamination as highly unlikely in last night BBC 4's 'Is Amanda Knox Guilty??'
Click to expand...

In the end, after reading the transcript in English (thanks Chatter), I now have a very good understanding of why the 2 professional judges and 4 lay judges came to the verdict which they did, which is covered in pages 357 to 397. These are just some of the things that the court established as fact in their ruling.

The court did find that Meredith's blood was in Filomena Romanelli's room, where the burglary was staged, and it was mixed with Amanda's DNA. Meredith's blood should never have been there.

The crime scene had been cleaned, though not everywhere.

Meredith did not know Rudy, one of her killers. She would have no reason to let him in the apartment. Amanda did know Rudy.

Amanda's behavior immediately after the murder was discovered as unusual. While at the police station with all of Meredith's friends and their boyfriends, she was cutting up, playing, laughing, kissing, and joking with her boyfriend Rafaele, while the others were solemn. At one point, they testified, she even said, "Meredith's in a wardrobe with a blanket over her head."

She repeatedly lied or changed her story.

They said she was at no time under undue coercion to say some of the things she came to say, such as naming her boss as the possible murderer when hearing her boyfriend had changed his story.

Meredith never locked her door, the room mate Filomena Romanelli reported. The killer would have no reason to lock it. I am not sure if they were trying to assert that Amanda was the only one to have a room key since Meredith's was still in the room.

Amanda's footprints were found in the apartment after cleaning which I believe they were trying to say had traces of Meredith's blood on them, or that they showed up under luminol. Not sure what they meant on that one.

The ashtray contained one cigarette smoked that evening, with Amanda's DNA on it.

Raffaele's DNA was on the bra clasp of the murder victim.

Amanda and her boyfriend Rafaele were at the plaza to the University before the murder. Rudy Guede was often there.

Amanda bought bleach early the next morning, the receipts for which were in her possession, though telling police she had slept at her boyfriend Rafaele's house until 10 am the morning after the murder.

The 2 cell phones of the murder victim were found disposed in a wooded area down the street. There was no reason to take just the phones, the judges hypothesized, except to prevent any unanswered calls from being heard in the apartment downstairs where the murder victim Meredith Kersher's boyfriend lived, making him thus curious.

Nothing was taken in the room that was supposedly burglarized, that of Filomena Romanelli. Rudy Guede was seen later that night, after the time of the murder at a nightclub. Who then did they ask would have the time and inclination to stage the burglary without suspicion of being there and clean up. Also, why clean up everywhere but the room of the murder scene for that matter?

Amanda did not stay the night as she said at her boyfriend Rafaele.

Amanda and her boyfriend Rafaele stood across the room and in the hallway, seemingly uninterested in what was about to take place as the other roommate, Meredith's friends, and the postal police readied to break down her door.

The postal police upon the door breaking down immediately told everyone to get out of the house (no one went in to contaminate as many have proposed).

Amanda admitted to watching movies and reading comics about sex with a violent nature the night before with her boyfriend.

The timestamp for Amanda's first meeting with the police after the murder was 125am. She had gone to the station with all the people that had initially been at the scene earlier. She went in at almost 11pm. Thus, her statement was finished much earlier than 125am. It is hard to see this as "sweating" her for a confession.

Amanda put herself at the scene of the crime when she stated her boss Patrick Lumumba had done it. She reaffirmed this outside of police custody with her lawyer present on several occasions within days of the event.

Meredith was a strong girl, and had trained in the martial arts. The court established as fact that it was more than one assailant that killed her. The knife wounds were of different sizes and showed different degrees of strength in their strikes.

There is a lot more that they concluded, but these are the items that caught my attention because I had read so much in her defense that said that none of this was true. The two judges in this case and the 4 lay judges are educated professionals in their fields. I do not wish to be one that will paint them as primitives, when as we all know, we send countless numbers of people to the penitentiary every year in the United States for a lot less than the evidence they concluded as being fact in their transcript.

It is sad that this happened. But what I am more concerned about is finding justice for Meredith Kersher, not defending someone who with this evidence presented, I am content to believe, as did this court, that she is guilty of murder...and one that was most heinous in nature.
 
Last edited:
No bleach receipts were presented in court. I mean, obviously it would be a slam dunk if that were the case.
Amanda did not know Rudy Guede, they were in the same room together once but did not talk.
There is no reason for the room to be locked no matter which version you believe so I'm not sure what to make of that.
Luminol is not specific for blood.
A cigarette smoked by a person who lived in the house is not unusual.
Amanda stating that Meredith was in the closet with a blanket over her head does not match how Meredith was found - it's more than likely Chinese whispers repeated by Amanda.
Even one of the prosecutions forensic experts said only one killer was necessary.
 
Andalublue said:
I think it would be naive to claim that The Guardian had a clear editorial policy on the matter having never published an editorial on the matter and having published just 2 opinion articles (Nick Richardson's on Jan 30 - clearly seeing room for innocence and guilt; and Andrew Gumbel's on Jan 31 - pro-innocence). The longest piece they have published on the subject is Simon Hattenstone's Feb 8 interview with Knox. It's a sizeable piece of work, is not unsympathetic to Knox, but certainly doesn't pretend to exonerate her. I really don't see where you're getting this idea from. Your Google search mainly linked to The Guardian's news reports.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm a bit more sensitive towards editorial bias than others. I'm not aware of a Guardian editorial where they have said a miscarriage of justice was taking place in an ongoing murder case in a Western country. Seems a major risk if new evidence appeared disproving their opinion. Easy for a tabloid to get away with, but not so much a broadsheet.

I shouldn't have stated it as a fact, but it is my opinion based on what editorials they have published and who they chose to interview.
 
Ben K. said:
Unlikely. He returned from a country with no extradition treaty with Italy for the retrial. His passport has now been taken.
Click to expand...

If he can get to the nearby Balkans with just a little money he'll have his choice of passports.:peace
 
And another convicted murderer escapes justice if they can afford it.
 
Manc Skipper said:
And another convicted murderer escapes justice if they can afford it.
Click to expand...

Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries
These, in the day when heaven was falling,
The hour when earth's foundations fled,
Followed their mercenary calling,
And took their wages, and are dead.

Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
What God abandoned, these defended,
And saved the sum of things for pay.

A.E. Housman:peace
 
Andalublue said:
That may be the way she succeeds in avoiding extradition, but it would be a violation by the letter and the spirit of the treaty. A number of different US courts may well decide that that is a violation worth making, but there may be consequences in the long run.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Europeans may hate us even more than they already do. Whatever will we do if that happens? Frankly, any American that goes to one of these Kangaroo Court countries in the future probably deserves what they get.
 
Wiggen said:
Yes, the Europeans may hate us even more than they already do. Whatever will we do if that happens? Frankly, any American that goes to one of these Kangaroo Court countries in the future probably deserves what they get.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess that Europeans will smart at the idea that their courts are all of the kangaroo variety, until they remember that they are not the only countries who regularly experience miscarriages of justice.

List of miscarriage of justice cases - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course, the Knox case could never have happened back home... :roll:
 
Well, that might happen in Europe too. Unlike us, however, they would just keep holding trials until they got a conviction. Apparently double jeopardy is only available here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom