Amanda Knox found guilty.

[sunshinehighway]

She sure acted guilty -- plus she made up a long litany of lies that even she could not keep track of. At the very least, she certainly knows what happened..

That's not a popular opinion here but I agree with you. She wasn't a doe eyed, innocent little thing.

 

[TLSnell1981]

I completely agree. Amanda Knox may be a lot of things but she isn't a murderer.

The evidence just isn't there.

Rudy Guede raped and killed Meredith Kercher. All the DNA evidence points to him and he has been tried and convicted.

Part of me is stunned...the evidence just isn't there. I don't understand, why they are still pursuing this case. The poor girl's killer is in prison. The Italian system is screwy, but this is unbelievable. IMO

 

[usnuzuloose]

I don't think they will either, under US jurisdiction no one can be tried on the same crime twice due to Double Jeopardy laws, and thats exactly what the Italian court system did.

Double jeopardy does not apply over there. They can keep going as much as they want. At some point their system needs things to change. He is using things that don't apply, his imagination is running wild.

 

[Tiramisu]

"No one remembers Meredith, while the two defendants write books, speak to the media and earn money."

That statement broke my heart because it's true.

I don't like Amanda Knox and I get the creeps when I look at her. I think she's a terrible person. Did she murder Meredith? I don't think she killed her, no, but I do think she knew what happened before the authorities did.

 

[Jennasis]

Yikes.

 

[lisaviolet]

This is just crazy these 2 innocent people were given 28 years and 25 years and the piece of garbage that actually committed the crime and was convicted of it, is eligible for parole in 2016.

Sickening.

He's eligible in 2016?

 

[Borishack]

That's the $64000 question. We have an extradition treaty with Italy but we also have double jeopardy laws, I'm not sure how they handle a case like this.

As far as double jeopardy, Knox is out of luck. The closest you have to such a clause in The U.S-Italy extradition treaty specifically states that an individual can't be extradited if they have been found innocent of a crime in one country but guilty of it in the other. Knox has never been charged or tried in the U.S. for the Kercher murder, so that clause won't help her.

Whether she gets extradited really comes down to whether the U.S. is willing to expend serious diplomatic capital to protect a convicted murderer if Italy requests extradition. IMHO, people here who are bashing Italy for the conviction and hence implying our relations with that country aren't important are quite niave. In the words of one former U.S. State Department legal official:

“If the U.S. ever wants to have any chance of extraditing an Italian murder suspect who has allegedly killed people in the U.S., you have to give to get.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/knox-could-face-return-to-italy-after-conviction/2014/01/30/4c7aaa6e-8a1a-11e3-a760-a86415d0944d_story.html

 

[EMom]

Both Knox and Sollecito should head for a country with no extradition treaty to Italy.

 

[Borishack]

She's in the US, so they can't touch her, anyway.

Wrong. Please learn the meaning of the term extradition treaty .

 

[Borishack]

Both Knox and Sollecito should head for a country with no extradition treaty to Italy.

Solecitto has already had to surrender his passport, so he isn't heading anywhere.

As far as Amanda, if she wants to go on the run, her options are limited: in addition to the United States, countries with extradition treaties with Italy include Argentina, Australia, Austria, The Bahamas, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Kenya, Latvia, Lithuania, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, The Vatican, Romania, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Sri Lanka, the United Kingdom and Uruguay.

That basically leaves the Middle East, the African subcontinent and most of Asia. Something tells me she isn't going to be interested in going to places like Iraq, Syria or Iran. Nor is Angola or Botswana going to be her cup of tea. The problem with most evolved regions or Asia (a continent I travel to frequently and know well) is countries there definitely frown on hosting fugitive expatriates. Hong Kong couldn't get rid of Edward Snowden fast enough.

 

[Borishack]

I don't think they will either, under US jurisdiction no one can be tried on the same crime twice due to Double Jeopardy laws, and thats exactly what the Italian court system did.

You are making the same erroneous assumption as many other people who clearly don't understand extradition law.

The U.S.-Italy extradition treaty doesn't mandate that the requesting party have laws that follow those of the requested party. Stated differently, Knox has been convicted under Italian law, not U.S. law, and the treaty doesn't state we can refuse to extradite her just because our laws are different. Likewise, if some Italian murdered someone here and then fled back to Italy, they couldn't refuse to extradite that person to the U.S. because our laws are different than Italy.

 

[bcla]

Wrong. Please learn the meaning of the term extradition treaty .

But it's never automatic. It has to go through official channels, starting with a request to the State Dept. Then it would have to be processed/approved by the Justice Dept and then forwarded to a US Attorney to be tried in a US District Court. Then there's a hearing before a judge. There are a lot of places where a request could be shot down.

A lot of countries have denied extradition requests, and often it's based on whether or not it would be "oppressive" or if the potential extraditing country feels that there is or isn't a reasonable basis to believe the person could be guilty.

If they wanted to extradite, they'd probably need to provide a summary of the trial proceedings, and from the sound of it, a US judge would probably take a day to read it and deny it on the grounds of flimsy evidence. The treaty says there needs to be a reasonable basis and I don't see how the flimsy evidence the Italians had that seemed to work in their court would work in front a US judge used to summarily throwing out cases for flimsy evidence.

 

[JanaDee]

Wrong. Please learn the meaning of the term extradition treaty .

Officials said the *last* time she was put on trial (after she was back in the US) they would not extradite her.

Italy's court system is a joke.

 

[low-key]

I think she is guilty but this isnt justice either, to keep trying her to they find her guilty, to look good to the world

 

[bcla]

You are making the same erroneous assumption as many other people who clearly don't understand extradition law.

The U.S.-Italy extradition treaty doesn't mandate that the requesting party have laws that follow those of the requested party. Stated differently, Knox has been convicted under Italian law, not U.S. law, and the treaty doesn't state we can refuse to extradite her just because our laws are different. Likewise, if some Italian murdered someone here and then fled back to Italy, they couldn't refuse to extradite that person to the U.S. because our laws are different than Italy.

I found a copy of the treaty:

http://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/italy.pdf

ARTICLE VI

Non Bis in Idem

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.

I'm having a hard time deciphering this though. I think this means that if convicted or acquitted in the US. I mean - would it be possible to simply try her in the US under US laws to provide an acquittal? There's no way that kind of evidence would stand up in a US court.

Also - could she be pardoned by the Governor of Washington or the President?

 

[Borishack]

I seriously doubt the US will extradite her.

She's got one appeal left. If her conviction is upheld and Italy requests her extradition, the experts at places like Harvard Law seriously disagree with you:

http://news.yahoo.com/us-likely-extradite-knox-italy-asks-000547631.html

 

[Borishack]

I found a copy of the treaty:

http://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/italy.pdf

ARTICLE VI

Non Bis in Idem

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.

Thank you for finding the clause that confirms what I said! The above states the person who is being sought can't have been tried for the same crime by the requested party (which in this case would be the U.S.). This means for Knox to be protected, she would have to have been charged and tried for the Kercher murder in both the Italy and the U.S.

People here who keep going on about our double jeopardy clause "protecting" Knox don't understand the law: Knox wasn't tried and convicted here. She was tried and convicted under the laws of a different legal jurisdiction and extradition is NOT based on the laws of the other jurisdiction being the same as or consistent with ours.

would it be possible to simply try her in the US under US laws to provide an acquittal? There's no way that kind of evidence would stand up in a US court.

Also - could she be pardoned by the Governor of Washington or the President?

To your first point: the murder was not of a U.S. citizen and did not occur in a U.S. legal jurisdiction. So how does a U.S. court have the authority to indict anyone and put them on trial for it? They don't, so that's legally D.O.A. from the get-go.

To your second point: an elected official can only pardon someone of a conviction if they have elected authority to do that in the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred. The Governor of Maryland can't pardon someone on death row in Texas, even if the convicted person is from Maryland.

Since neither Jay Inslee nor Obama has any elected authority in Italy, they can't overrule an Italian court (which is what a pardon is).

 

[Borishack]

But it's never automatic.

Automatic? No. Honored on a relatively consistent basis? YES.

The State Department would make the initial determination on whether Italy has a sufficient case for seeking Knox's return. That would basically be a formality, because what would factor very, very seriously in the process is the fact we absolutely don't want jeopardize our reputation in honoring extradition requests. The U.S. makes more extradition requests than any other country in the world, so we don't want to give any country the sense we arbitrarily decide whether to honor ones we get based on media pressure or public opinion.

So I would argue the State Department would quickly transfer the case to the Justice Department, which would represent the interests of the Italian government (not Knox) in seeking her arrest and transfer in U.S. District Court. And you are incorrect, at that court there is hearing, not a trial.

And what you are also incorrect about is "all sorts of opportunities for the request to be shot down'. American courts actually have limited ability to review extradition requests from other countries. You are particularly wrong about U.S. judges reviewing the foreign case. What they do is ensure the extradition request meets basic legal requirements. They don't as you imply go through summary trial proceedings and apply American judicial assessments to the actions of foreign courts. As it was put by Mary Fan, a former U.S. federal prosecutor who teaches law at the University of Washington in Seattle.

"The U.S. courts don't sit in judgment of another nation's legal system."

And that is the core problem with your logic. You think honoring an extradition request is based on our deciding whether a foreign conviction complies with our legal theory.

As we (and she) will find if Knox loses her last appeal, it isn't.

 

[aristocatz]

Dumb question, but what will happen to Rafael S.? Does he automatically go back to jail now until another appeal happens?

 

[Borishack]

Dumb question, but what will happen to Rafael S.? Does he automatically go back to jail now until another appeal happens?

Not a dumb question. Right after the conviction came through, the Judge revoked Rafael's passport. Reports seem to indicate he will be incarcerated during the appeal phase, but for the moment he is not.