March 26, 2013
The Italian Supreme Court has thrown out the innocent verdict Amanda Knox received in October of 2011- which set her free- and has ordered her to stand trial yet again. The reason? They didn't give one yet- at least one that made any sense. Rather than review the details of the case, the Italian court looked only for an "error in procedure". This new trial is to take place in the city of Florence and not Perugia as in the first two trials.
For those not aware of the facts: Amanda Knox was found guilty of murdering her room-mate Meredith (a Brit who was studying in Perugia at the same time as Knox) along with Amanda's ex boyfriend Raffaele. Amanda was sentenced to 26 years and Raffaele to 25 years. The two spent four years in Italian prisons before their convictions were overturned on appeal in October 2011. Knox then left Italy and returned to her hometown of Seattle, and Raffaele returned to his home which is near Bari Italy. And all seemed well, with a great many people rejoicing that the Italian appeal court finally got the right verdict of not guilty and released the pair. The prosecution of course was none too pleased, and appealed to the Italian Supreme Court for a new trial. Shockingly, the Italian Supreme court overturned the innocent verdicts and now order both Amanda and her ex-boyfriend Raffaele to stand a new trial on the murder charge. This new turn of events is absolutely shocking, and completely ridiculous.
Actually- it's quite stupid, but I guess the Italian courts love a good show so much they just could not let such a juicy opportunity slip by. They are certainly peeing against wind on this one, as Amanda is an American citizen- safe in the U S- and in this country we do not try people twice for the same crime. It's called DOUBLE JEOPARDY! (and yes that is the legal term for it). I don't know what afflicts these prosecutors over there that they keep trying to convict two innocent people with no evidence, and when they already have the real murderer in prison. Well, I'm not going to spit nails over this foolishness, but I do think that THIS TIME the U S State Dept. needs to address this issue, and inform Italy as to the legal rights of U S citizens who have already been found not guilty....... Unbelievable.
16 comments:
As an Italian I fill a shame that our country has such a barbaric institution like double jeopardy.
I know extradition treaty between US and EU countries has a comma that barred the extradition of an American citizen in case of double jeopary. So Amanda can stay sure in US even if, in the worst case, she will never leave her country.
But Raffaele, who I retain innocent, now is facing a life sentence.
Right, they can't get their hands on Amanda but I do feel very bad Raffaele. Quite worried about him also. But I will keep posting on both this side and Raffaele's position also. Still, it doesn't mean that the prosecution is going to win the case, and hopefully they won't.
"They are certainly peeing against wind on this one, as Amanda is an American citizen- safe in the U S- and in this country we do not try people twice for the same crime..."
Not at all: it is true Amanda is safe, cause of a comma of extradition treaty, but in case of absolution, Italy would have to pay an huge amount of money in compensation for the wrongful conviction. If Amanda will be convicted in the next trial (I'm sorry but knowing how goes justice my country I'm almost sure it will be so)Italy has to pay nothing.
Well let's hope it doesn't go that way for Raffaele's sake. I am trying to find out if they are going to arrest him or if he will be allowed to stay free and attend the trial on his own.
Dear St. Michael,
may be intringuing for you to know that yesterday, they day before the overturn, there was another similar murder in an appartment of Perugia.
It is possible that the pressing of public opinion demanding safeness, may have influenced the Court.
This is the link: I'm sorry but it is in Italian
http://www.corriere.it/cronache/13_marzo_26/omicidio-perugia-ragazzo_b8446238-95df-11e2-9784-de425c5dfce0.shtml
"Well let's hope it doesn't go that way for Raffaele's sake. I am trying to find out if they are going to arrest him or if he will be allowed to stay free and attend the trial on his own. "
Unless he will make an attempt to escape abroad, he will be free until the supreme court will confirm a guilty verdict of the new appeal trial. It takes almost 2-3 years.
I think it is inhumane keeping people under jaopardy for such a long time.
This is the article that protect Amanda:
Article 6 of the U.S.-Italy bilateral extradition treaty states "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested." (source http://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/italy.pdf )
Thanks for the imput and thank God for article 6 : ) Unfortunately, there is no article 6 that will protect Raffaele. I'll be writing another post on that soon.
"Thanks for the imput and thank God for article 6 : ) Unfortunately, there is no article 6 that will protect Raffaele. I'll be writing another post on that soon."
Surfing on Internet I have read a lot of articles of people thinking double jeopardy cannot be applied in the case of AK.
I don't know way: the traty is very clear.
You know somthing about it?
Hypothetically- if Amanda were found guilty in this second trial and the Italians tried to have the U S turn over Amanda to Italy- which they may do- the U S State Dept would have no good gounds to comply with Italy's request for a variety of reasons. The main reason is the U S does not support foreign legal systems that practices 'Double Jeopardy' which is not practiced in the U S. The Italians know this- so this is just 'showboat tactics' used by the prosecutors in Italy in an attempt to save face. That's my opinion of course but one backed up by the facts.
As for what you are reading on the internet, I don't know who you are referring to but if it's not coming from legal experts- I wouldn't give it much credit.
Amanda was tried and convicted and then her conviction was overturn on appeal and she was freed. Italy trying to try her again on the same charge is simply 'double jeopardy' which is not allowed in the United States.
"if Amanda were found guilty in this second trial "
You can remove the "if" in your statement. I'm almost sure the next trial will end in a life sentence.
Clearing her and Raffaele, would mean implicitly admiting the whole system is deeply corrupted and completely unable to give justice.
"As for what you are reading on the internet, I don't know who you are referring to but if it's not coming from legal experts- I wouldn't give it much credit.
Amanda was tried and convicted and then her conviction was overturn on appeal and she was freed. Italy trying to try her again on the same charge is simply 'double jeopardy' which is not allowed in the United States."
I think you are right, but look at this link, please.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/26/justice/knox-extradition
I think that if Amanda is found guilty this time- then that simply proves the system is corrupt. There is no evidence to back a guilty verdict. Anyone who has followed this case knows that. There is no justice in convicting innocent people.
As to the link above from CNN there are only 2 opinions in that article- one for and one against Amanda Knox. The negative view is by Alan Dershowitz, and I am not surprised. While Dershowitz has the credentials I doubt if he has really studied this complex case as he has the most superficial reasons for backing up his opinions- some of which are rather offensive such as....Knox has supporters in the U S because she is not ugly. A quick look at Wikipedia tells you this guy was an advocate for torture of terrorist suspects who one journalist found- chillingly..Nazi like. Enough of Alan Dershowitz. Personally I don't take anything he says seriously. He is also known as a celebrity-lawyer.
" Enough of Alan Dershowitz. Personally I don't take anything he says seriously. He is also known as a celebrity-lawyer. "
He consider the first, the appeal and the retrial not separate trials but three phases of a unique trial.
I think he's wrong beacuse even in Italy there's a strong interanal debate on introducing something like the fifth emendament and reformig the judical system barring prosecutors to appeal not guilty verdicts.
But even if he argues it's all a unique trial, I think an US court can consider that an eight year long trial would violate defendant human right, far exeeding the reasonable time limit of a trial
Post a Comment