I don’t as a general rule comment on criminal cases and I’ve not mentioned the Meredith Kercher murder. However, a few thoughts here following the acquittal of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. When all this blew up, I recall thinking that the Italian police and prosecution service had done what such organisations do worldwide when faced with a high profile murder case – and, doubtless less high profile ones too – rushed to make what evidence they had fit the suspect before them. The police are under pressure to get a result and from the outset, it seemed that this one was flawed.
Given that, I was surprised by the convictions. Much of the evidence was circumstantial and there were causes for concern over witness testimony and the DNA evidence with subsequent appeals concentrating on these weaknesses.
It comes as no surprise, therefore to see the convictions overturned on appeal. Although I do think that the conviction of Knox for slander incurring a €20,000 fine and three years inside makes our libel laws look positively fluffy.
James Higham also comments on this and has done at some length over the past four years. He has his opinion on the guilt of the suspects. I disagree with his statement regarding vengeance as vengeance is not the purpose of a justice system. We do not know whether Knox was guilty of this crime. We can never know for certain. Conviction by a criminal court is not the same thing as guilt, as juries get it wrong and will continue to do so. The evidence is moot. The adversarial nature of justice systems can see the evidence presented in a way that can appear damning despite the reality of what occurred – and, naturally, the opposite. Either way, a good barrister will get a guilty person off or see an innocent one convicted and still sleep easy at night. Consequently, I do not automatically assume that conviction and guilt are the same thing.
I am ambivalent about Knox. I simply do not know. But I would rather she walk free if guilty than spend 26 years inside if innocent. Thankfully, the Italian appeals system is biased in favour of the defendant. So, yes, she may be guilty. However, if she is innocent as she claims, then a miscarriage of justice has been righted.
For the Kerchers, this will be a difficult time, but, again, if Knox is innocent, her incarceration does them and their lost daughter no justice.
In the end, though, only two words matter and those two words were recognised by the appeal jury:
Reasonable doubt.
Nice article above, keep it up man.. 🙂
It must be the right verdict because it is clear that there was reasonable doubt.
That said, and although I will admit that I don’t know all the ins and outs of this case, there’s something wrong about that girl and her actions. I can’t put my finger on it but it’s real. So, I suspect the Italian police will never find anyone else to charge in connection with this case.
Rudy Guede is still doing time for the murder. The question then, is if guilty, was he acting alone? if this was a Scottish case, I suspect a not proven verdict would have been reached.
With respect to Knox’s behaviour, well, she found herself in an unusual and highly stressful situation, so odd behaviour is probably to be expected. How would I behave if I faced decades inside for something that I didn’t do? One thing I do know for certain, I wouldn’t stop shouting it from the rooftops.
I along with most people are not able to judge on the verdict in this case ,but what has been totally unaceptable was the pressure on the Italian system to come up with the new verdict from the American media the Knox family ,backed it appears by everyone in the states and the condemming of a justice system from the people who found O J not guilty,how much this affected the outcome we dont know either but i suspect a little?
I don’t know. What I do know is that there was reasonable doubt. Therefore the verdict and the pressure that contributed towards achieving it was right.
I think it’s strange they made so much of her sexual behaviour, when she was probably a normal young girl enjoying life with her boyfriend.
They tried the same stunt with Rebecca Lieghton. Perfectly normal pictures of her out with her friends became portrayed as rampant hedonism.
LR said:
With respect to Knox’s behaviour, well, she found herself in an unusual and highly stressful situation, so odd behaviour is probably to be expected.
Cartwheels and splits while waiting to be interviewed by Plod? There’s odd and there’s odd.
As you also mention, the Scottish ‘not proven’ verdict would be a better one in this case, if it were available.
Having had to suffer life in Italy with spoiled, rich, white American kids who seem to think the continent is their personal playground, I was probably biased against Knox from the beginning. But the facts remain stubborn:
1) She confessed. I know she claimed that she had done so under duress (again- this is in Italy, not China, and when are confessions not made under some degree of duress?) but the next day she rewrote her account over five pages.
2) She blamed a completely innocent man who would now be in prison for life had he not had a cast-iron alibi thanks to a Swiss businessman coming forward after reading about the case.
3) Neither she nor her boyfriend could agree on what they had been doing that night. She claims she spent the night smoking up with him before having sex. He couldn’t remember! He, a young red-blooded Italian. He did claim that he had downloaded movies on his computer at the time, but computer records don’t support this. Both had shut off their phones conveniently at the very time of the murder.
4) And then, who was responsible for staging the break-in?
1 – the confession is meaningless. She retracted it. Police forces are always under pressure to get a confession and will pass that pressure onto the suspect. if the suspect subsequently recants, then the confession is unreliable.
2 – She was being interrogated for something she claims she didn’t do. I cannot say I am surprised that she blamed someone else to divert attention away from herself. Not good, but not evidence of murder either.
3 – None of this means anything. It certainly is not evidence of murder. I often switch my phone off. Does this mean anything sinister? Nope. I can often not recall accurately what I was doing and where I was. Does this mean I’ve been up to something wicked? Nope. All of these things could just have easily had innocent explanations.
4 – Who knows? it certainly isn’t evidence that these two committed murder.
Ultimately, there was reasonable doubt here – in bucket-loads.
If only Amanda had met Silvio: http://andreasmoser.wordpress.com/2011/10/04/a-match-made-in-italy/
Tom Chivers in the Daily Telegraph made a very provocatiove point today when he highlighted the “she devil” and “touched by Satan” aspects of the prosecurion case.
My own impression was that the worst ‘Foxy Knoxy’ was guilty of was being a bit of a slapper and mad as a box of frogs. But the incoptence of the italian police and lawyers might have had a lot to do with my forming that impression.
Are police interviews not tape recorded in Italy?
In the UK there are strict guidelines laid down concerning interview and access to the accused. The custody sergeant is independant of the investigation and responsible for the welfare of the accused..
Good summary LR. I have my suspicions about the case, and as AWM suggests, there’s something odd about Foxy Knoxy. However, based on the reports I’ve seen in the press, there never was enough evidence to justify a murder conviction.
Inappropriate cartwheeling in a police station isn’t, as far as I’m aware, an offence or proof of anything. Indeed, if she were guilty, and they’d been going to all the trouble it’s alleged they went to to cover up their involvment, make it look like a burglary, etc, then you’d think she’d have the sense to play the poor distressed flatmate.
I haven’t seen any reports as to whether the Italian police did any blood tests, but I have seen it suggested she was simply high, which is about as plausible as anything else.