I wonder if she is in fact guilty or innocent?

It's always difficult to get "young attractive women" convicted of anything once the media get hold of it and broadcast her pictures.
It obviously happens but not without a lot of "public opinions" being voiced. :rolleyes:

The opposite was true. Her looks (and being a -tagged callous- American) made her the poster-child of Italian HATE for years. (lots and lots of papers sold in Italy)

Is there a possibility? Sure. Was there proof to convict? The Italian police messed up the investigation from the start to the extent that we may never know.

All the more reason not to extradite her!!!

Her lawyer wouldn't have to work hard to stop that happening.

Well when the US wants someone they figure is guilty they just invade (Remember Manuel Noriega? ). Maybe Italy will invade Seattle? :) <---That's all in green BTW

She was found guilty, so she's guilty. That doesn't mean she did it. A guilty verdict just means the state proved their charges. OJ was found innocent. He did it, but the state didn't prove their charges.

I really think the US would have a hard time not extraditing her to Italy to serve out the rest of her sentence while she, no doubt, continues with appeals. I don't know if she did it. Seems like a real stretch and there are some other shady characters involved who would be more likely perps. It's just hard to see a young college woman killing another one unless it were for a really good reason, which there doesn't appear to be in this case.

I'm not diggin her new hairdo. Makes her face look too round, "Charlie Brown Head" territory.

Ditto. Extradite her ass!

Here's the confusion.

Acquittal means the person is innocent of the crime. That decision comes from the jury after a trial. Once acquitted, double jeopardy forbids retrial on the same crime. End of case.

Freed by appeal means the conviction by the jury is invalid due to some irregularity in the trial. Because the trial was invalid, the person is neither guilty nor innocent and could face a new trial if the prosecution feels they can convict following the rules set by the appeal. Double jeopardy applies only if a person has been acquitted.

In the Knox case, she was found guilty. Upon appeal, the court found her factually innocent. She was acquitted. In the U.S., that's the end but in Italy, the decision of the appeals court can be appealed further-- there is no double jeopardy protection. She was, in fact, acquitted, but was tried again and found guilty, again.

As far as the last part of your post ( two guilty verdicts, etc.), of course there is a possibility of guilt but the quality of the trial is essential. Google Michael Morton to appreciate my point.

This is the crux of the debate. In the U.S., an acquittal is an acquittal, be it by a jury or an appeals court (though that's not a function of U S appeals courts) and is the end of the case. An acquittal cannot be overturned, period..

Not so in Italy.

According to what was said last night on CNN:

The Italian prosecutor asked for an arrest warrant immediately after the trial and was turned down by the judge. That's because according to Italian law she gets THREE chances to challenge the verdict. Until all 3 have expired, she is in no danger of being arrested.

Also - an American scientist who was part of the case from the very beginning did DNA testing and said his conclusions were she could not have been guilty. But - the Italians were after a conviction and they manipulated the evidence to achieve their conviction. The reason that first verdict was overturned is they decided to set everything aside and take a fresh look at the evidence by 2 independent investigators with DNA experience - and after they looked at all the original evidence - and with their testimony - she was found innocent.

This second trial was a joke more or less.

I can personally only conclude that politics are in play here.

But for now - she is in no danger of arrest.

I'd say leave the poor girl to live her life.

It sounds like this is par for the course for the Italian judicial system but won't this be an endless loop now? The lower court found her guilty, the Italian supreme court said she was innocent, the lower court again found her guilty and now the appeal will go back to the supreme court...so if they find her innocent again, doesn't the whole process continue indefinitely?

Also, what use is there to have a supreme court if their say is not final? They RULED she was innocent, but it get's appealed back to the lower court??

Vexing case. Interesting read here: The Trial of Amanda Knox - Dateline NBC - Crime reports | NBC News

Motive just seems weak, though Knox comes off as very unsympathetic. The fact that they have a guy convicted for the crime, in prison, who placed himself with the victim on the night of the murder, his DNA all over the room, and on the victim, with a silly "I saw some shadowy guy commit the murder" story, should really suffice. Knox's behavior afterwards, her changing story, and her admission to being there while the crime was committed, is puzzling. Police pressure, yada, yada, yada - sure. Evidence of her and her boyfriend turning off their phones two hours prior to the murder, not downloading movies at his place like they said, him not backing her story that she was with him all night, etc., just doesn't add up. There would be no reason to lie of such things unless they were trying to coverup something...

Seems interesting that the convicted guy, once convicted, doesn't implicate Knox, if indeed, she was involved.

Yeah. 2/10. Would not bang.
:)

You've got it a little off, but that's understandable given the Italian system is different from ours.

The lower (trial) court found her guilty.(1st swing)

The appeals court (not the Supreme court) declared her innocent--acquitted.

The Supreme Court overturned the appeals court acquittal and ordered a new trial.

The trial court found here guilty a second time. (2nd swing)

The Supreme Court will handle the final appeal (3rd swing). If it upholds the conviction, she's toast. If it overturns the conviction, she is finally and permanently free from the charges.

So, it's not quite an endless loop though it seems so when compared to our system where the government gets one and only one swing at a defendant and if it misses (acquittal) that's the end of government's attempts to put someone away.

The family of Meredith Kercher (remember her? She is the girl that had her throat slashed) certainly think Knox is guilty.

Based on what evidence?

-Her and her boyfriend turning off their phones two hours prior to the murder (This wasn't the norm)
-Not downloading and watching movies at his place like they said they did - they didn't
-Boyfriend not backing her story that she was with him all night, etc.
-Her admitting that she was in fact there when the murder took place and she heard the screams
-Knox implicating her boss as the killer, when in fact, DNA pointed to someone else
-Knox blood and victim's blood mixed in the sink drain
-No transfer blood on the comforter that covered the victim (She was covered with the blanket after the blood had dried)
-Knox and her boyfriend told police they had called police when they found the victim when they hadn't
-Knox changed her story several times - why?

All circumstantial. There's more. Mostly it appears evidence of her lying has done her in. Also, if you watch videos of her interviews, at least the ones I've seen, there's hardly a mention of sympathy for the victim. A lot of self pity, narcissistic stuff.

Source: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/28057560/ns/dateline_nbc-crime_reports/t/trial-amanda-knox/#.Uuv60vldVmh