|
Amanda Fox: Guilty? Or Innocent?
|
12-04-2009, 01:29 PM
jardster wrote: consider the source ? It's only been on the morning news at least once a week for the last two years and now that's the trial's almost over every morning. Is Seattle supposed to be some kind of unique bubble ?
12-04-2009, 02:36 PM
bizarre case, I have been following it for a bit but cannot form an opinion on guilt or innocence based on what I've read in the news. my gut tells me she knows more than she is letting on (she changed her story from the outset) but is not guilty of premeditated murder. but I don't know, of course, and you don't either.
12-04-2009, 03:53 PM
She is majorly hot in my book...so if she's found guilty and the Italians want to sentence her to house arrest, she can move in here with me. I WILL hide all the sharp cutlery!
12-04-2009, 04:01 PM
Thanks for the correction, I see I screwed up Knox's last name, a typing error. Amanda's childhood soccer name and facebook nickname "Foxy Knoxy" has been echoed by the tabloids and news shows, and contributed to my mistake, mixing up knox/fox. I wish I'd corrected the subject heading so it didn't have the misleading title referring to an Amanda Fox. I'm an idiot.
:nuts: I just saw an update on ABC News this morning, no verdict yet, but it might come today... DRR wrote: It's not really different in the U.S. and Italy, it's fundamentally the same in both nations. I wasn't being legalistic, I was being literal. Most outside observers, reporters, analysts have concluded that Knox wasn't even there. No real evidence places her at the scene. The victim was stabbed in the throat by Rudy Guede, who left abundant evidence at the scene, and was convicted of the murder in a separate trial. In this case, it's not ambiguous, and has no special regional legal shadings. Knox is 100% guilty or 100% not guilty of the charge of murder. I hope it's the latter!
12-04-2009, 05:14 PM
Can't say. The article you posted was an editorial, not a news report. No way would I trust it to represent both sides of the case objectively.
12-04-2009, 05:44 PM
SEND HER TO ME AND MY PRISON!
(trust me... living here is like a prison) I'll make a dishonest woman out of her when all is said and done! I'll make lots of things out of her! One of them will not be, however, "knocked up."
12-04-2009, 07:58 PM
Who knows?
Knox initially implicated her boss (he was jailed for some time), changed her story several times, and there is DNA evidence against her.
12-04-2009, 08:36 PM
It also looks like she was slapped around and intimidated by the police during interrogation. The DNA evidence is apparently slim and questionable. I have done some reading on it, and from what I can tell it is very unlikely she and her boyfriend were involved. Lots of evidence Rudy Guede was involved, and virtually none for the other two. I have trouble believing that in such a violent action that only Guede's traces would be found.
One writeup I saw, I think from the Daily Telegraph in London, said that the prosecutor had already declared the case closed before Guede came on the scene. At that point he should have started again with the investigation of Knox, but because of all the publicity she'd already been tried in the court of public opinion. The article pointed out that in Britain the prosecutors don't make a case in advance, in public. (Much as in the U.S.) The case against Knox almost certainly should have been dropped once they found Guede. - W |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
