|
Post by Admin on Apr 12, 2014 21:07:25 GMT
Amanda Knox attended a conference organized by the Innocence Network, an international group of organizations that work to exonerate the wrongfully accused. Knox attended the Innocence Network event at the Portland Hilton Executive Tower as one of the 111 exonerated individuals spotlighted during the conference. “I’m learning a lot and I’m really excited to be here,” Knox told KGW.”I didn’t know what to expect, but I’m blown away by the kindness.” Knox said she had apprehensions about attending the event. “I was obviously very nervous to come down here,” Knox said. “It’s such a vulnerable thing to have experienced and then to expose yourself.” However, Knox said she felt welcomed and supported at the conference, where she has met individuals who similar experiences. “I was hated for so long,” Knox said. “Feeling accepted and feeling understood gives one strength to keep going and try to find your place. That's the whole point of justice, when something horrible happens, trying to reconcile that with life. It’s really helpful to see other people who have done that.” Despite that, Knox faces an uncertain future with the possibility of extradition to Italy looming over her head. “I'm very scared,” Knox said. “It's so hard being a single person and having a greater authority pressing down upon you. But I'm feeling less alone here. I'm gaining inspiration and knowledge here and I hope to be able to carry that with me as I continue.”
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 18, 2014 13:45:50 GMT
In October 2011, the Appeals Court of Assizes of Perugia acquitted both Knox and Sollecito after questions were raised by the defense regarding the protocol followed by the Italian police while gathering the forensic evidence that was used to convict them in 2009. The court’s judgment was also based on new scientific examinations that were previously requested by the defense during the first trial but were not authorized by the trial court. This evidence, according to the defense, would have disproved the presence of Knox and Sollecito at the crime scene. The appeals court concluded that the evidence that proved persuasive to the Perugia Trial Court of Assizes was obtained in a contaminated environment. More specifically, the appeals court concluded that (1) certain footprints initially attributed to Sollecito were also compatible with the size of Rudy Guede’s feet and (2) subsequent analysis on the 6.5 inch kitchen knife supposedly used to slit Meredith Kercher’s throat showed that the kitchen knife did not contain Kercher’s DNA and that the kitchen knife could not have been the murder weapon. 2013 – The Prosecution appealed that decision to the Court of Cassation (Supreme Court), which remanded the case to the Appeals Court of Assizes of Florence.Following the acquittal by the first appeals court in 2011, Knox left Italy and returned to the United States. In March 2013, the Prosecution in the Knox and Sollecito cases appealed to the Court of Cassation, Italy’s Supreme Court, which remanded the case to the Appeals Court of Assizes in Florence for reconsideration on the basis that there were discrepancies in testimony, inconsistencies, omissions, and contradictions in the ruling of the Appeals Court of Assizes of Perugia in 2011. The Court of Cassation upheld each of the grounds raised by the Perugia Chief Prosecutor. The Court of Cassation concluded that the Assizes Court of Appeals of Perugia, which reversed the murder conviction for Amanda Knox in 2011, had weighed the evidence in an inconsistent and piecemeal fashion. 2014 – The Appeals Court of Assizes of Florence overturned the acquittal by the Court of Appeals of Perugia for murder and affirmed the previous conviction of the trial court for murder and slander.The case was then assigned to the Appeals Court of Assizes of Florence, which, on 30 January 2014, overturned the acquittals of the Perugia Assizes Court of Appeal based on the Court of Cassation’s previous judgment. This appeals court convicted Knox in absentia and sentenced her to 28 years and six months of imprisonment and sentenced Sollecito to 25 years of imprisonment. The Presiding Judge of the Florence Court has 90 days as of January 30, 2014 to write his judgment (with reasons) on the ruling. Lawyers for Knox and Sollecito have stated that as soon as the judgment is filed, they will appeal it to the Court of Cassation. The judgment is not final until the Court of Cassation rules on the eventual appeal of Knox and Sollecito. EXTRADITION FROM THE UNITED STATES TO ITALYItaly is one of the few countries with this complex procedure, which it does not consider to be in violation of the constitutional prohibition of ne bis in idem (double jeopardy) reflected in article 649 of the Italian Code of Criminal procedure. The prohibition of ne bis in idem is included in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, but, so far, the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR) has not interpreted Italian law as violating the European Convention. Thus, the procedure described above has not been found to be in violation of ne bis in idem under the ECHR. The 1983 U.S.–Italy Extradition Treaty states in article VI that extradition is not available in cases where the requested person has been acquitted or convicted of the “same acts” (in the English text) and the “same facts” (in the Italian text). Treaty interpretation needs to ascertain the intentions of the parties by relying on the plain language and meaning of the words. Italy’s law prohibiting ne bis in idem specifically uses the words stessi fatti, which are the same words used in the Italian version of article VI, meaning “same facts.” Because fatti, or “facts,” may include multiple acts, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals applied the test of “same conduct” in Sindona v. Grant, citing international extradition in US law and practice, based on this writer’s analysis. Whatever the interpretation of article VI may be—“same act,” “same facts,” or the broader “same conduct”—Amanda Knox would not be extraditable to Italy should Italy seek her extradition because she was retried for the same acts, the same facts, and the same conduct. Her case was reviewed three times with different outcomes even though she was not actually tried three times. In light of the jurisprudence of the various circuits on this issue, it is unlikely that extradition would be granted. The US Supreme Court can also make a constitutional determination under the Fifth Amendment of the applicability of double jeopardy to extradition cases, particularly with respect to a requesting state’s right to keep on reviewing its request for the same acts or facts in the hope of obtaining a conviction. But, no such interpretation was given to the Fifth Amendment in any extradition case to date. Surprising as it may be, neither the Supreme Court nor any Circuit Court has yet held that the Fifth Amendment’s “double jeopardy” provision applies to extradition. So far, double jeopardy defenses have been dealt with as they arise under the applicable treaty. Conclusion: Amanda Knox’s extradition from the United States to Italy under existing jurisprudence is not likely.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 30, 2014 14:27:23 GMT
An Italian court says it convicted Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend of murdering her onetime roommate in part because of evidence showing that more than one person killed the British student. The Florence appeals court released its explanation Tuesday, less than three months after it convicted Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in Meredith Kercher's 2007 death in a retrial. In the more than 300-page document, the court said that a third person convicted in the murder, Rudy Guede, did not act alone, and cited the nature of the victim's wounds. Ruling Judge Alessandro Nencini, who presided over the second appeal in the case, said Kercher, 21, and Knox disagreed over the payment of the rent in the house they shared in Perugia and that "there was an argument, then an elevation and progression of aggression." I have stated from the beginning of this long ordeal that I am innocent of the accusations against me. I was found innocent by the only court in Italy that retained independent forensic experts to review my case. I want to state again today what I have said throughout this process: I am innocent of the accusation against me, and the recent motivation document does not – and cannot – change the fact of my innocence. The recent Motivation document does not – and cannot – change the forensic evidence: Experts agreed that my DNA was not found anywhere in Meredith’s room, while the DNA of the actual murderer, Rudy Guede, was found throughout that room and on Meredith’s body. This forensic evidence directly refutes the multiple-assailant theory found in the new motivation document. This theory is not supported by any reliable forensic evidence. The forensic evidence also directly refutes the theory that the kitchen knife was the murder weapon: The court-appointed independent experts confirmed that neither Meredith’s blood nor her DNA was on the alleged murder weapon, which experts also agreed did not match the stab wounds or the bloody imprint of a knife on her pillow. In fact, in the prior proceeding in which I was found innocent, the court specifically concluded that the forensic evidence did not support my alleged participation in the crime and further found that the circumstantial evidence was both unreliable and contrary to a conclusion of guilt. The recent motivation document does not – and cannot – change the fact that the forensic evidence still does not support my participation and the circumstantial evidence still remains unreliable and contrary to the conclusion of guilt. And the recent motivation document does not – and cannot – identify any legitimate motive for my alleged involvement in this terrible crime. No fewer than three motives have been previously advanced by the prosecution and by the courts. Each of these theories was as unsupported as the purported motive found in the new motivation document, and each of these alleged motives was subsequently abandoned by the prosecution or the courts. Like the prior “motives,” the latest “motive” in the new motivation document is not supported by any credible evidence or logic. There is simply no basis in the record or otherwise for this latest theory. I will now focus on pursuing an appeal before the Italian Supreme Court. I remain hopeful that the Italian courts will once again recognize my innocence. I want to thank once again, from the bottom of my heart, all of those—family, friends, and strangers—who have supported me and believe in my innocence. a
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 2, 2014 23:07:14 GMT
If she had been at the scene of the crime, forensic evidence would prove her guilt, but Amanda Knox says there is nothing -- no DNA, no hair, no footprints, no handprints -- to show she was there. Knox spoke in an exclusive interview with CNN on Thursday, two days after an Italian court released an explanation of her conviction.
In a retrial, Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, her then-boyfriend, were found guilty in the 2007 death of Meredith Kercher, Knox's onetime roommate. "I did not kill my friend. I did not wield a knife. I had no reason to," Knox said. "In the month that we that we were living together, we were becoming friends. A week before the murder occurred, we went out to a classical music concert together ... We had never fought."
Ruling Judge Alessandro Nencini, who presided over the second appeal in the case, said Kercher and Knox disagreed over the payment of the rent in the house they shared in Perugia and that "there was an argument then an elevation and progression of aggression." Knox dismissed those allegations out of hand. "If I were there, I would have traces of Meredith"s broken body on me. And I would have left traces of myself around -- around Meredith's corpse," she said. "And I -- I am not there. And that proves my innocence."
Claudio Hellman, the judge who tossed their convictions, lashed out at colleagues. "The Florence Appeal Court has written a script for a movie or a thriller book while it should have only considered facts and evidence. There is no evidence to condemn Knox and Sollecito," said the judge in a scathing statement obtained by CNN. Knox's conviction has raised questions about her possible extradition to Italy to serve her sentence, since she was in the United States and did not attend the retrial. She gets one more appeal -- to Italy's highest court.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 6, 2014 14:04:16 GMT
Amanda Knox 's alibi for the night of Meredith Kercher's murder has been thrown in doubt by previously unseen CCTV footage. The grainy images, released by Italian investigative programme Quarto Grado, appear to show a woman resembling Knox making her way through a car park in the town of Perugia at 8.53pm on November 1, 2007. Knox, who was found guilty of 21-year-old Miss Kercher's murder for a second time earlier this year , has always maintained that she was with her then-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito on the night the Leeds university student was murdered at their shared home. She claimed the couple spent the evening reading and watching a film before going to bed, and was never anywhere near the house on the Via della Pergola at the time of the killing. But the newly released images show a woman walking away from the Via della Pergola, taking a shortcut through the San Antonia car park to the city centre. The Times reports that Quarto Grado highlighted similarities in the way the woman in the footage walks with Knox's gait, and she is wearing jeans and a long coat similar to ones Knox was pictured in in the days after Miss Kercher's death. Two minutes before the woman is seen crossing the car park, another figure said to be Miss Kercher returning home also appears. Both the prosecution and defence teams in the case are said to have been aware of the CCTV, but it is thought that it was not helpful to either side so was not used in the trials.
|
|