Jump to content

Amanda Knox


islingtonclaret

Recommended Posts

Unsafe conviction from botched police investigation rightfully overturned.

She may have done it, but the evidence was IMO insufficient for a safe conviction.

She'll make a mint from this too, and if she is genuinely innocent, she'll deserve too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much compo do we think she can be looking forward to? £1m at least?

A lot of compo, plus probable newspaper deal, TV deal, book deal, film deal etc.

She's set for life. I bet soliccito doesn't get as many offers! :lol: :winkold:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much compo do we think she can be looking forward to? £1m at least?

No, she was found guilty of slandering her bar manager (she made up a story about him for being involved but turns out he had an alibi) and was given 3 years for it. Since she has been locked up for 4 years she only had an extra year on her sentance so she probably won't get so much money from the Italians.

The American media however...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Innocent or not, everywhere she goes that has some type of connection to the Western media will be unsettling for her. Everyone will have an opinion on whether she did or not, imagine living the rest of your life knowing that every time someone meets you or sees you in the street there's a good chance they'd think of you as a murderer/accomplice to one. Then again with one of those places being America the majority would most likely be the 'USA 1 - 0 Italy' crowd.

I guess for anyone who still thinks she's guilty or that things still don't add up one can always remember that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess for anyone who still thinks she's guilty or that things still don't add up one can always remember that.

I don't see how she could be guilty or how people could think it. I think that's why the Americans are so behind her on this. Surely a minimum requirement in a murder case is DNA proof - or any kind of proof, for that matter - that the defendant(s) were actually at the scene? Yet they could not prove that.

The original trial just proves it was guilty until proven innocent.

As for the Kercher family, I imagine Meredith would be ashamed of them. Her killer is behind bars and they're 'disappointed' and feel like they're 'back to square one' because they were unable to practically take the lives of 2 other young people for no reason or without proof? Hilarious they actually bought into the 'sex orgy gone wrong' idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sky said Knox would automatically get Euros250K for wrongful imprisonment for murder

IIRC she was found guilty of lying about the police slapping her about while in custody. THAT's what she got found guilty of and 3 yrs detention, which

she'd already served. The slander against the barman was a civil case not criminal.

In other Southern European countries the policing and justice system is an absolute joke, so I have no qualms with anyone questioning the police

investigation, their methods and the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how she could be guilty or how people could think it. I think that's why the Americans are so behind her on this. Surely a minimum requirement in a murder case is DNA proof - or any kind of proof, for that matter - that the defendant(s) were actually at the scene? Yet they could not prove that.

The original trial just proves it was guilty until proven innocent.

Not to mention the prosecution not, from what I can see of it, providing any form of motive and then claiming they didn't need to.

It's become trial by press and it's simply not right!

Just like the weird teacher/landlord in that murder case a while back who got persecuted by the press and then was shown to have been innocent

That Daily Mail article I saw on twitter last night... posted on here was an example of gutter press cheap journalism... it had reactionary quotes that were clearly fictitious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â