Amanda Knox 2009-12-07 CNN - Larry King Live Part.1/4

[BigTrollShaman]

THE NIGGERS DID IT U DUMB NIGGERS

[LaSerpentaCanta]

Why are these scumbags lying about evidence? pathetic.

[terrorsquadlith]

this is bias shit.. they couldve found a video tape of amanda committing the murder and the parents wouldnt believe shes guilty

[popper1966]

And the prison is more like a hotel.....falsehood after falsehood they have no idea....AK has the right to fight on but she was convicted with strong evidence against her, this is not controversial, disgraceful program which makes people think the opposite and does not mention the name of victim whose murder she has been convicted for

[popper1966]

This is not a case of murder where the victim is remembered and convicted killers blamed....the world is upside down. Victim is not mentioned. A killer convicted with huge evidence against her is the hero..DISGRACEFUL. The convicted murderer left an innocent person rot in jail as she accused him of the murder, she confessed to be on crime scene, lots of forensic evidence, another person confessed she was there, lied repeatedly to the police....Read the 427 page report motivating the sentence.

[336beau]

@popper1966 Will do u get this the police saw the message she sent her boss about not coming to work. She texted him saying "ok see you later have a good evening" which means here in the U.S. "see you next time" or "goodbye" does NOT mean literely "see you in a few" which the police took as and that is when they became abusive because they thought she was lying because they found African Descent hair in Meredith's hand and figured Amanda was protecting somebody, but she wasn't.

[sharonmyk]

a year or two ago I would maybe have posted a comment about a trial such as this in a fleeting and blase fashion born out of the belief that what you read and what is reported equals the truth.

Since being involved in my own husbands trial in Greece where the media has played such a huge defining role and plus the fact that the police work intially was so lacking I now watch and read other peoples cases with so much more empathy and horror. Sometimes media and lawyers can seal your fate.

[luchpockets]

Direct and circumstantial evidence must prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of a criminal defendant in order to elicit a conviction.

[mjjd12]

hey dad ! jail is not suppose to be pleasant ! ..... anyways her parents seem pretty much in denial... i feel bad for them.....

[zeebo296]

The Italian police have behaved in rather an unusual way. Sollecito claimed he was using his computer at home on the night of the murder. Amanda was with him. His computer would "prove" he was at home and at what time. So why did the police "destroy" the hard drive off his pc??

I also read an account that Amanda was "asked" "encouraged" to perform a cartwheel, by a police officer. It is a DISGRACE that the media are trying to imply she was doing acrobats out of disrespect for Meredith.

[lauderette]

How convenient to say there was no powerful evidence!

The 2 judges and the jurors who judged the case have a different opinion - haha

Anyways, people seem to forget that dna is a fairly new resource used in courts of law. Crimes have been solved for thousands of years before dna's introduction.

Circumstantial evidence in this case is very powerful indeed. Physical evidence is also very strong despite the attempt to destroy it by the culprits

[scream6902]

Italian court does not require a unanimous vote - not all jurors voted guilty. I'm not sure what physical evidence was proven to be destroyed? Luminol suggests blood was there at one point in time, Luminol can pick up lots of things such as Fruit Juice as well.

[RoLexus]

The jury in this case voted unanimously that she was guilty, the only thing they argued about was the fact whether to give her life or not.

[crispiva1]

@scream6902

FYI, in this case all the jurors voted guilty - the only thing they had some disagreement over was the LENGTH of the sentence.

[lauderette]

@scream6902

Italian courts do not require a unanimous vote BUT in this case ALL JURORS vote for the conviction of Amanda because they KNEW Amanda IS guilty AND staged a burglary to hide her heinous crime.

Do you really want to know how the jurors knew that? The clothes that were scattered all over Philomena's room by the alleged burglar were covered with glass. Knoxy is not so foxy - she should have broken the window BEFORE she scattered the clothes HAHAHAHAHA

[dcryan77]

SO DELUDED

[scream6902]

I realize that this is an Italian court but I think people forget its innocent until proven guilty. Not guilty until proven innocent - you have to PROVE with SOLID evidence beyond reasonable doubt or be set free. Innocent or Guilty if the proof ISN'T there you can't risk false imprisonment. You have a lot of circumstantial evidence here thats all.

[RoLexus]

@scream6902 What makes you think you're guilty until proven innocent in Italy? Give me a break, Italy has a very matured judiciary system, stop feeding in Knox's family PR. In the US, there are many cases where people are convicted even without evidence on strange behaviour alone. So stop painting the Italian court for what its not.

[scream6902]

Sometimes I wonder if you are reading anything I'm posting or maybe you just can't interpret anything. What I'm saying is you need to be proven guilty, proven - that means with proof. There is no PROOF, there is tons of circumstantial evidence but nothing that directly ties Amanda to the murder scene. If you can't prove this then guilty or not you must be set free.

[RoLexus]

@scream6902 so you're a lawyer? you are ignoring the dna on the knife and bra, knox's dna mixed with bloo found on cleaned surface but discovered using luminol.

[scream6902]

You do know luminol does not only react to blood, right?

[RoLexus]

in this case, the spots that were cleaned and also contained knox' dna was that it was indeed of blood.

[Bigwave2003]

You say there is no "proof", but there is "tons of circumstantial evidence." In a court of law, circumstantial evidence is a form of proof.

Lawyers will tell you that circumstantial evidence can be more reliable than eyewitness testimony.

[scream6902]

You can't sentence someone on circumstance alone it has to be solid or else you could accuse anyone of anything. Please show me a case where someone sentence in jail based on their behavior I'd like to read up on it.

[RoLexus]

@scream6902 cynthia sommers. US court convicted her on strange evidence. whether she is guilty or not, Knox has been given a far fairer trial than her. So don't start saying how foreign courts are so flawed compared to the US.

[scream6902]

Um, from what I'm reading Cynthia Sommers charges were dropped after further investigation. She now has her name cleared.

[lauderette]

AND ???????????

[Bigwave2003]

Ever heard of Scott Peterson? He was convicted of the murder of his wife and unborn child based entirely on circumstantial evidence and his strange behavior. Right here in the good ol' US of A.

Also, beyond reasonable doubt does not mean to an absolute certainty.

And finally, no one is ever found innocent. The verdicts are guilty or not guilty. Not guilty meaning not proven guilty. Justice has a short menu.

[RoLexus]

@Bigwave2003 That's what I'm trying to tell him. Why do people get so worked up when a pretty white girl get convicted in foreign courts. They say there's not a shred of evidence when there clearly are. They US courts only convict murderers based on solid DNA evidence when clearly they convict people on circumstantial evidence left and right.

[scream6902]

I'm not claiming that we have a perfect justice system - look at OJ?

[scream6902]

While I do agree actions can damn you, Scott Petersons case is a little different. His actions started before Laci was even missing - Amanda's actions are simply she didn't look concerned enough and she kissed her boyfriend? I like hard proof - facts, not simply because she didn't cry or had sex.

[Bigwave2003]

Kissing and not crying aren't the actions that damned her. Aside from physical evidence, I'm talking about giving contradictory statements to police, saying you were at your boyfriends apartment all night, then saying you were at the murder scene, then trying to take back your statements and saying it was all coerced, trying to give the impression you were good friends with Meredith when clearly there many conflicts. Toss in a cartwheel or two at police headquarters ... you get the point.

[scream6902]

5 different spots in the bathroom. I don't know where exactly but I'll say the sink, floor, doorknob as 3. Duh, hello? You don't think her DNA was ALREADY there? Of course it was, if you look at the crime scene photos the blood isn't splatter movie blood everywhere. When Amanda saw it she didn't ignore it she started calling her roommates. You aren't going to assume immediately your roommate has been murdered - she stated she thought someone got hurt and was at the hospital.

[scream6902]

which she thought why the door was left open, suggesting someone left in a hurry.

[nickyzuke]

The knife wasn't found at the crime scene. It was found at her boyfriend's apartment where the victim had never been there. It was bleached by the bleaching chemical to remove blood residues but the faint DNA can be extracted. That explains why the amount is too small for the PCR process to amplify the DNA.

There was enough evidence to convict her. She's not the victim. Meredith Kercher and her family are the victims. It's time to show some respect and stop insulting them with this crap.

[scream6902]

You do not know what you are talking about. The DNA removed from the knife was not a DNA make up of blood - it was tested for DNA from blood and came back negative. It was possible that it was another form of Meredith that does not consist of blood. There was not enough evidence to convict her which is why the case went on for more than two years (also due to the way Italian courts are run). And lastly, what household utensil does not contain a form of bleach on it? Give me a break.

[xowee]

It's unbelivable how biased are the reports from the american press, believe i'm italian and i can tell you that the italian press is much more moderated. That's probably because there is no real motivation for us italians to back one or another theory considering that one italian was convicted too. And then what's wrong with all those amateur lawyers and their bizarre investigations?

[xowee]

Not to mention the ludicrous accuse to italians of convicting people just because of their moralism against sex and drugs.This is really the funniest one especially since it comes from the "well-known puritan" americans....

[RoLexus]

@scream6902 you mean you use bleach to clean your dishes, spoons, and forks? Strange I didn't know it is custom in the US to clean your dishes with bleach.

[scream6902]

regardless there is no report of any investigation about bleaching anywhere. Its not true, never happened and not worth arguing a point that was never mentioned in the case.

[RoLexus]

The family is really distorting the facts. first, there are evidence. knox's boyfriend dna on the victim's bra. her dna is mixed with the victim's blood in five different spots in the apartment. third, there is a murder weapon, there is a knife with both amanda's dna and the victim's dna on the tip of the blade in amanda's boyfriend's apartment even though the victim never been to their apartment. lastly, amanda confessed twice that she wast there and implicated an innocent man for the crime

[scream6902]

DNA on the Bra strap that was left at the crime scene for 6 weeks - it was not collected on the day of the murder. Watch the video tapes and you can see that the Bra is in another spot than originally filmed, but still on the floor then passed between all members of the CSI, so anything on their hands already could be passed onto the Bra strap - it should of been picked up the first day and put in a bag NOT handled by everyone on the scene that screams contamination.

[RoLexus]

so it is inferior italian forensic that is to blame? evidence found much later after the crime is still considered and admissible as evidence in US courts. So what is your point? The forensics team were touching up Raffaello Sollecito and then went to pick up the bra strap?

[scream6902]

There is millions of possibilities here - it could of been tampered with - it wasn't in the same spot as originally filmed. Both Rafaelle & Amanda were asked to come back to the house after the murder - it could of been contaminated then or simply tampered with - who knows. It shouldn't be admissible in court!! You can't go and pick something up 6 weeks later you are going to DNA test pass it around to everyone who has been handling the entire household.

[RoLexus]

So you're saying the bra strap was found 6 weeks later when Rafaelle was in jail, then the forensics took pieces of Rafaelle's DNA and rubbed it against the bra strap. Why isn't the defense advocating arresting the investigators for creating false evidence? I don't know why people are so critical of the Italian courts when courts in the US do the exact same thing, they do allow evidence found later after the murder to entered into court as evidence. What's with the double standard?

[scream6902]

The entire house was acrime scene, you dont think his DNA was maybe in Amandas room? Maybe they stepped in it then on the bra strap? Who knows, this type of evidence would never fly in US court if it was handled this way. 6 Weeks later on the floor then handled by VERY CSI, hello where did they get their jobs? You cant find a murder weapon then pass it around lol.

[RoLexus]

Stop being so ethnocentric. American courts consider late evidence all the time. American courts convict people without evidence all the time. You want to fight injustice, start doing it in your own backyard. No need to preach to other countries when ever an American is found guilty in another country.

[scream6902]

Your not getting the point here. Yes evidence can be brought into court at a later date but not when its handled so clumsy - its documented you can watch the CSI handle the strap, you can see that its been moved from its original spot. This would not be tolerated in a US courtroom.

[scream6902]

DNA is mixed with the victims blood - well of course it is Amanda lived there - her DNA is all over the house. The blood that you speak of was in the bathroom which she claimed to of showered in after the murder was committed. The knife DNA for Meredith is so inconclusive its not definite that it was even hers and the knife does not match up anywhere near the bloody imprint on the bed which is assumed to have been where the murder weapon was placed.

[RoLexus]

You're not putting things into perspective. Knox's DNA were found mingled with the victim's blood in FIVE different spots of the apartment. So she went around the apartment and start touching the blood just so that they can use her DNA against her?

[scream6902]

Spots in the apartment, not Meredith's room. The bathroom. You have it wrong here, the blood was mixed with AMANDA's DNA. The blood touched her DNA. If this was damning evidence it would of held much stronger weight in court but it didn't.

[RoLexus]

Obviously the jury did took the evidence into consideration and that is WHY Knox is found guilty.

[scream6902]

I am 100% sure the appeal court will set her free, we just have to wait and see though.

[RoLexus]

Haha it is evident there was blood stains in the bathroom and yet she wasn't suspicious that there might of been something going on in the house? I think you're dismissing the evidence too easily. What is the likelihood of Knox's DNA just so happen to be mixed with the victim's blood in 5 different locations?

[scream6902]

As far as the false confession - who knows. Its a different country, different rules - things aren't run the same there as they are here. She was interrogated for almost 40 hours? Thats a long time - I would think she was pressured one way or another and the police typed up her confession and she signed it. According to Amanda the cops were the ones that came up with the idea that her boss was the one who killed meredith

[RoLexus]

That isn't true. She wasn't interrogated for 40 hours. But she was interrogated for a maximum of 14 hours. Amanda confessed TWICE. first during the police interrogation. then after the interrogation she was free but asked for a pen and paper and later wrote down what she earlier confessed with the police at her own free will.

[scream6902]

I think it was 40 or so hours collectively. 1 14 hour session, I don't know about you but that's a long time to be hounded by the Cops, don't you think? She did not write her confession it was typed up not written. She was asked to imagine what may of happened.

[RoLexus]

During the first 14 hours was when Knox confessed. Later on during that day she retracted her confession and thus they questioned her some more. If you were a police and someone confessed to be at the scene and point fingers at the another person twice and than only to later retract their confession wouldn't you want to question them some more?

[clubfloozy]

Honey, I would just give up. You present an excellent case but scream6902 is so fuckin deluded that he doesn't know night from day. This is what happens when you believe everything you see and hear on FOX news.