To great controversy, Amanda Knox was freed by the same Italian courts that sentenced her, along with then boyfriend Raffael Sallacito, to 25 years in prison apiece due to the sexual assault and murder of Knox' flatmate, Meredith Kurcher.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/03/world/europe/italy-knox-appeal/index.html?hpt=wo_c1
For those not familar, Ill attempt to sum up the events that lead to Knox' conviction. Knox and Kurcher were both exchange students at the University of Foreigners, both studying Italian and creative writing there. On the afternoon of Novermber 2nd, 2007, Kurcher's body was found in her bedroom at her flat by another roommate and police, having been robbed, sexually assaulted, then stabbed to death.
Knox was formally charged for the murder of Kurcher after being interrogated by police. In her statement, she first said she was with Sallacito at his flat, and became worried when she attempted to call Kurcher, and got no answer. In what was called to be a grueling 14 hour interrogation(where her civil rights were later determined to have been violated as she wasn't read her rights, given a lawyer, or an a interpreter.) In the course of the same interrogation, Knox claimed to have been home and had to cover her ears to block out Kurcher's scream. She accused her boss, club owner Patrick Lumumba, of the murder. Knox later retracted her accusation of Lumumba and was charged with defemation when Lumumba's checked out. Knox later stated:
Knox was depicted by the police as promiscuous, manipulative, and a drug addict by the prosecution. Her alibi also failed to check out. She claimed she was at boyfriend Sallacito's flat, smoking marijuana, watching the French film Amelie and making love. But Sallacito claimed he couldn't recall if Knox was with him that evening. In my opinion, even if Sallacito's memory was hazy from drugs, he would certainly remember if Knox had been with him such an important night. Even more suspicion was placed upon the couple due to the tracking of both's computer and cell phone activity. Sallecito claimed he had used his computer to download Amelie, and Knox claimed she had called Kurcher that evening out of worry for her. Computer record showed no activity between 9.10pm on Nov 1, and 5.32am the next morning — the time frame in which the murder took place. Phone records contradicted Knox' claim of having called Kurcher, showing both 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.
Finally, police accused the pair of staging the murder scene. 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.
So with the lies, how was Knox' conviction possibly overturned?
From the Seattle Times:
Further, Ive seen no argument of true motive for Knox or Sallacito. Another man, Rudy Guede, was definitively convicted of being the rapist and the killer. In their final arguments, the prosecutor painted a picture in which a sex game and long-running hatred led to murder.Prosecutors said tensions between Knox and Miss Kercher had reached boiling point over disagreements about housework, hygiene and boyfriends. They claimed Knox was driven to rage by jealousy towards her British flatmate. But again, it's difficult to see Knox being lead to kill over relatively minor differences, and no motive whatsoever for Sallacito. As I said, Guede had already been convicted in a seperate trial, where DNA evidence was found on Kurcher and the knife that belonged to Guede.
Finally, the jury seemed to find reasonable doubt based on the discrepancies. No witnesses, the false confession ruled under durress, or the discrepancies over the murder weapon. The defence said that when Knox confessed to being in the house on the night of the murder and could remember hearing Miss Kercher scream, she was traumatised and acting under extreme psychological pressure after an all night interrogation by police. Or perhaps it was Knox's impassioned final speech:
Regardless of why, the jury found reasonable doubt to overturn both convictions. I followed this story closely four years ago, and I was convinced Knox was guilty. But I do see the reasonable doubt here, and do understand and believe there was sufficient doubt. Being familar with the case, I do
still believe Knox to be guilty, but the correct decision was made to free here. Let's see what you think:
How familar are you with the case? Do you believe there was sufficient reasonable doubt for her go free?
Looking at the discrepancies between Knox' stories, there seemed to be quite a few lies, especially considering uncertainty over where Knox was at the time, her accusation of the club owner, and the discrepancies between cell and computer records. Why would someone innocent tell so many lies?
Based upon what you've read or your knowledge of the story, do you believe Knox is guilty? Why or why not?
Any other thoughts or discussion are welcome here.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/03/world/europe/italy-knox-appeal/index.html?hpt=wo_c1
For those not familar, Ill attempt to sum up the events that lead to Knox' conviction. Knox and Kurcher were both exchange students at the University of Foreigners, both studying Italian and creative writing there. On the afternoon of Novermber 2nd, 2007, Kurcher's body was found in her bedroom at her flat by another roommate and police, having been robbed, sexually assaulted, then stabbed to death.
Knox was formally charged for the murder of Kurcher after being interrogated by police. In her statement, she first said she was with Sallacito at his flat, and became worried when she attempted to call Kurcher, and got no answer. In what was called to be a grueling 14 hour interrogation(where her civil rights were later determined to have been violated as she wasn't read her rights, given a lawyer, or an a interpreter.) In the course of the same interrogation, Knox claimed to have been home and had to cover her ears to block out Kurcher's scream. She accused her boss, club owner Patrick Lumumba, of the murder. Knox later retracted her accusation of Lumumba and was charged with defemation when Lumumba's checked out. Knox later stated:
Knox was depicted by the police as promiscuous, manipulative, and a drug addict by the prosecution. Her alibi also failed to check out. She claimed she was at boyfriend Sallacito's flat, smoking marijuana, watching the French film Amelie and making love. But Sallacito claimed he couldn't recall if Knox was with him that evening. In my opinion, even if Sallacito's memory was hazy from drugs, he would certainly remember if Knox had been with him such an important night. Even more suspicion was placed upon the couple due to the tracking of both's computer and cell phone activity. Sallecito claimed he had used his computer to download Amelie, and Knox claimed she had called Kurcher that evening out of worry for her. Computer record showed no activity between 9.10pm on Nov 1, and 5.32am the next morning — the time frame in which the murder took place. Phone records contradicted Knox' claim of having called Kurcher, showing both 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.
Finally, police accused the pair of staging the murder scene. 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.
So with the lies, how was Knox' conviction possibly overturned?
From the Seattle Times:
Further, Ive seen no argument of true motive for Knox or Sallacito. Another man, Rudy Guede, was definitively convicted of being the rapist and the killer. In their final arguments, the prosecutor painted a picture in which a sex game and long-running hatred led to murder.Prosecutors said tensions between Knox and Miss Kercher had reached boiling point over disagreements about housework, hygiene and boyfriends. They claimed Knox was driven to rage by jealousy towards her British flatmate. But again, it's difficult to see Knox being lead to kill over relatively minor differences, and no motive whatsoever for Sallacito. As I said, Guede had already been convicted in a seperate trial, where DNA evidence was found on Kurcher and the knife that belonged to Guede.
Finally, the jury seemed to find reasonable doubt based on the discrepancies. No witnesses, the false confession ruled under durress, or the discrepancies over the murder weapon. The defence said that when Knox confessed to being in the house on the night of the murder and could remember hearing Miss Kercher scream, she was traumatised and acting under extreme psychological pressure after an all night interrogation by police. Or perhaps it was Knox's impassioned final speech:
Regardless of why, the jury found reasonable doubt to overturn both convictions. I followed this story closely four years ago, and I was convinced Knox was guilty. But I do see the reasonable doubt here, and do understand and believe there was sufficient doubt. Being familar with the case, I do
still believe Knox to be guilty, but the correct decision was made to free here. Let's see what you think:
How familar are you with the case? Do you believe there was sufficient reasonable doubt for her go free?
Looking at the discrepancies between Knox' stories, there seemed to be quite a few lies, especially considering uncertainty over where Knox was at the time, her accusation of the club owner, and the discrepancies between cell and computer records. Why would someone innocent tell so many lies?
Based upon what you've read or your knowledge of the story, do you believe Knox is guilty? Why or why not?
Any other thoughts or discussion are welcome here.
