Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sen. Maria Cantwell's reaction to Knox verdict is simply ridicolous.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
demoleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 04:19 PM
Original message
Sen. Maria Cantwell's reaction to Knox verdict is simply ridicolous.
Edited on Sun Dec-06-09 04:24 PM by demoleft
every american can make an opinion about the italian judiciary system.

but to state something like:
"I have serious questions about the Italian justice system and whether anti-Americanism tainted this trial"

is simply ridicolous. and not respectful of the judges and system of another country - allied, as to that.
but mostly - it's simply something to laugh at.

mrs clinton has not taken any initiative so far but is ready to listen to all people who doubt.

and i would advise sen. Cantwell either to learn some italian, so she can read something else than US papers articles on the case - or to just read back some basic essays on international relationships.

US are very jealous of their own independence as to their state structure. i assume italy should begin to do the same.

Sen. Cantwell quote above and whole statement here:
http://www.king5.com/news/local/Sen-Maria-Cantwell-reac...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. At Least Italy Won't Execute Knox
I think the other developed nations of the world have plenty to complain about when it comes to our "justice" system - and most Americans don't like it when foreigners start criticizing us.

It is certainly possible anti-American sentiment tainted the opinions in this case. If so, they aren't much different than us in that regard. Racial or ethnic prejudices may play a role in verdicts and sentencing. It doesn't even have to be racial/ethnic - it is hard to find an impartial jury - putting the accused at a disadvantage.

If there was prosecutorial misconduct in the Knox case, it would be better for American leaders to refrain from making public statements and to work this out "behind the scenes" through diplomatic channels.

Of course, that's just my stupid opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asjr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Your opinion is not stupid. Working behind
the scenes would be a better way to find out what actually happened. What puzzled me was (as I understand it) that there were 2 judges on the panel and the other jurors took their advice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. European criminal procedure is different from American
In European countries other than England, the judges have generally had the power to examine witnesses and collect evidence. The trial is genrally not limited to the facts presented by lawyers for the prosecution and the defense. Instead, the judges have the responsibility to follow the evidence so as to ascertain the truth as best it can be determined from the whole body of evidence, not just what the lawyers for the parties present.

Criminal procedure as it exists is not the norm for most of the world. With respect to Italy:

From -- Criminal Procedure: Comparative Aspects - Adjudication
The contrast between adversarial and inquisitorial styles of conducting the criminal process becomes most evident at the trial stage. In inquisitorial systems, the trial is typically dominated by the presiding judge, who selects and calls up the evidence to be presented at trial, makes procedural rulings as necessary, and interrogates defendants, witnesses, and experts. In adversarial systems, the judge's role is limited to presiding over the parties' presentation of the evidence. Advantages and disadvantages of either system have long been the subject of scholarly debate. To some extent, the difference between the modes of trial is technical rather than substantive: as long as the court as well as the parties have the right to question witnesses, the sequence of interrogation is of little relevance. Yet there is one basic difference between adversarial and inquisitorial systems that relates back to differing definitions of the purpose of the process: the inquisitorial judge has the responsibility of making certain that a complete account of the relevant facts is given in court so that the verdict can be based on "the truth"; in the adversary system, by contrast, the finder of fact decides on the factual basis as it is presented by the parties, and neither the court nor the jury have the right to probe into the factual background or (in most systems) to introduce evidence on their own initiative.
<SNIP>
A similar structure exists in Italy where, since 1989, the trial is supposed to be party-dominated and strictly separated from the pretrial process. It is the parties who present lists of evidence to be taken, and it is they who examine and cross-examine witnesses (Italian CCP, arts. 468, 498). But the presiding judge can strike manifestly superfluous witnesses from the list (Italian CCP, art. 468 sec. 2), reject irrelevant lines of questioning (Italian CCP, art. 499 sec. 6), ask additional questions of witnesses and experts (Italian CCP, art. 506 sec. 2), and can even, "if absolutely necessary," order additional evidence to be taken (Italian CCP, art. 507). The supposed strict separation between pretrial and trial proceedings has not survived the very first years after the reform of the Italian criminal process: the law and the jurisprudence of the courts have since permitted the introduction of pretrial statements under more and more liberal rules (see Italian CCP, arts. 510-513; Grande).


Read more: Criminal Procedure: Comparative Aspects - Adjudication http://law.jrank.org/pages/901/Criminal-Procedure-Compa...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 03:35 AM
Response to Reply #4
59. European countries other than BRITAIN
Britain is not England. (Although in terms of the legal system, common law applies in general to England and Wales and not Scotland; Scottish law is somewhat different.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's called politics. She's fighting for a constituent.
The trial did sound pretty ridiculous though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. You sound like someone who is relying on the biased
MSM coverage of the trial. It was anything but ridiculous. And she should be careful about the constituents she chooses to fight for. A better way to do that would be to request that this woman be allowed to spend her sentence in a US jail as Italy and the US have an agreement that would allow that. But to question the judicial system, especially since there is so much evidence against this woman, was a big mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. "so much evidence"?
There isn't a single solid piece of physical evidence to implicate her. She had no motive. The trial was done in the Italian media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
31. It's obvious from your statement that you are relying only on the
US MSM. There is a stack of evidence against her and if she were on trial here, she would not have had as many chances as she had there to extricate herself from the trouble she put herself in after lying to the police in the beginning.

She changed her story so many times for one thing. Initially stating she was in the house when the girl was murdered and heard her scream. She changed that later and claimed to have been at her boyfriend's house 'all night'. Not only did SHE contradict herself several times, but she and her boyfriend contradicted each other.

Phone and computer records show her to have lied. And as for forensic evidence, there was evidence of her being in the house that night. At least four different pieces of DNA evidence with the blood of the victim mixed with her DNA.

The prosecution had a solid case against her mainly because of physical evidence, phone and computer records (eg she and her boyfriend claimed to have watched movies on his computer, but expert computer witnesses stated that the computer had not been used that night). Also, both she and her boyfriend turned off their cell phones at the exact same time on the night of the murder and turned them back on at the exact same time the following morning.

That is only a small sample of the evidence. There is a ton of evidence mixed with the constantly changing stories both of them told, to give the police reason to arrest them both. Blood in the bathroom, footprints matching hers etc. Unless you've taken the trouble to look at the actual evidence rather than that selectively reported by the MSM, you cannot say with any credibility that there was 'no evidence against her'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timefortherevolution Donating Member (321 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #31
53. Biased much Boticelli?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #53
57. Welcome to DU. Speaking of biased
explain if you can, all the lies she told. And explain why none of the other roommates of the murdered girl, Meredith, or any of her other friends felt the need to lie to the police? Only she seemed to have a problem getting her story straight as to where she was on the night of the murder.

Your snide remark doesn't contribute anything to the defense btw. If you have some facts that contradict the evidence, present them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #53
75. Where's evidence of bias?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #31
61. you know when couples turn off their cell phones at the same time?
Edited on Mon Dec-07-09 03:01 PM by maxsolomon
WHEN THEY GO TO SLEEP. this could also explain turning them on at the same time, WHEN THEY WOKE UP. AGAIN, WHAT IS THE MOTIVE?

stop accusing everyone else of only knowing what we're told by the MSM or the biased American press - i've read everything you have, as this girl could be my daughter - she's as normal a UW student/Seattle girl as they come. i have seen the "ton of evidence" - how much can be explained by
1. living with the victim
2. touching the corpse when you discover it

how many of the "lies" can be explained by the interrogation she was subjected to? people get confused, they say and do many things when coerced by the police, especially in a language they don't know well. Amanda grasped at the liferafts the Polizei threw her, blaming Lumumba, recounting hearing "screams" when she was at her BFs.

Cantwell is my Senator, and she should represent a constituent victimized by a hysterical judical process. Europeans need to stop watching Law & Order and CSI. that shit is fiction and it rots your brain - even us stupid Americans know that.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TorchTheWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #61
65. they turned them off for 3 hours
The 3 hours during the time Meredith was murdered.

Motive has never been necessary to prove murder. It doesn't matter what the motive was.

The police found the body after breaking into Meredith's room while Knox and Sollecito were claiming they had no idea she was dead or in the room at all. Knox was actually on the phone with her mother at the time the body was discovered. There would have been no opportunity for either Knox or Sollecito to have touched the body when it was discovered. No DNA evidence of either Knox or Sollecito was found in Meredith's room aside from the DNA of Sollecito on the clasp of Meredith's bra.

Both Knox and Sollecito lied and lied frequently about where they were, who they were with and what they were doing that night. Why? Why the lies on top of more lies to explain previous lies until Knox gets to the point where she claimed she didn't know where she was, who she was with or what she did that night... and no wonder because at that point there was nothing else she could say (except the truth).

Knox and Sollecito spouted more lies on top of lies than Nixon and Reagan put together yet there are so many people here that believe they're innocent little lambs.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #65
76. Stupid me, I had almost been suckered by MSM that she is utterly innocent
Edited on Mon Dec-07-09 07:49 PM by snagglepuss
but there is alot of evidence that US media doesn't mention thanks to PR firm hired by the family and the FOA group they created.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #61
66. i'd love to see your comment
but you're on ignore.

undoubtedly for a good reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TokenQueer Donating Member (762 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #7
18. There was no real evidence against Amanda Knox.
This was trial by tabloid. Mignini (the District Attorney equivalent that orchestrated this farce) was brought up on corruption charges in 2008 for his unethical handling of the 'Monster of Florence' case. Yet this case marched on with his dirty paw prints all over the initial investigation. Shameful...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #18
32. I see you are using the MSM here and the PR firm
her family hired. That is clear by your use of their talking points, now very recognizable, to try to distract from the mountain of evidence that actually does exist. Mignini, eg, is only one of many people there, several judges and lawyers who review the evidence. Even with him out of the picture, excluding anything he contributed to the case, she was a prime suspect having nothing to do with him, but with her own actions.

She lied and lied, over and over again, about almost everything and each time she was caught, moved on to another lie. If she is innocent, her phone records, the lies she and her boyfriend told about where they were that night, her initial confession, then retraction, the phone calls she made (or said she made) none of this required Mignini's involvement at all.


Rely on the MSM if you want, but if you want facts, then do some research. I did and it changed my mind completely as some things just cannot be explained away. It's interesting how the MSM focus only on Mignini and disregard everything else. Why do you think they are doing that? One thing is certain, once the facts are reported here as they have been in every other country, Mignini becomes a very minor issue and she looks very guilty as does her boyfriend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timefortherevolution Donating Member (321 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #18
43. She was convicted based on the contrived reputation as a floozy.
Listen to Magnini closing remarks.

Parallels the Salem Witch Trials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. Stop repeating the lies of the MSM.
She was not convicted on Mignini's closing statement. She was convicted on some pretty solid evidence. She was charged in the first place because of her own ever-changing stories about where she was that night, going from claiming she heard the crime from her bathroom, to claiming she wasn't there at all. She lied to her mother about calling the police, she lied about watching movies on her boyfriend's computers, she forgot that all these things can be checked, cell phones, computers etc.

And that was only the beginning of the evidence against her. Mignini could have died and it would not have changed the evidence against her. She put that evidence in play, herself.

'Salem Witch Trials', really, get a grip. Two men were also convicted, one a black man from the Ivory Coast, was that some kind of 'witch-doctor' trial? You are being very sexist yourself actually, no concern at all for the two guys who were also pretty trashed as murder suspects often are, in the media. But your concern is only for the woman.

Let me ask you, do you think the other two were 'rail-roaded' also, or just her? After all, conjuring up 'satanic cult-like sex/murder scenarios isn't exactly something generally associated with women. I ignored that nonsense when I tried to find out why she was arrested. That is all extraneous tabloid, nonsense and in the end, had nothing to do with what got her arrested and convicted, no matter what Mignini said in his closing arguments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timefortherevolution Donating Member (321 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #46
52. The sexism to which you allude is about Knox.
What does her sex life have to do with whether or not she committed murder.

For every bit of evidence that could point to her guilt, any research on the subject points to media hype.

Let's start with the term Foxy Knoxy. BBC articles reference it as coming from her sex life while in college when in fact it started in
high school, as a result of her soccer skills. On and on.

Give me a break!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. Her sexism had nothing to do with the
the evidence that the conviction was based on. Nothing. She was convicted by the lies she told and the forensic evidence that showed she was in the house the night the murder was committed. If you want to focus on tabloid stories or a prosecutor's theory, do that, but that was not what convinced me and everyone else that she is probably guilty. I haven't even read any of that as I have not followed this trial.


I looked for what the evidence against her was, and it wasn't hard to find. If I was on the jury, her own actions and words would have convinced me she was probably guilty. Maybe you are a person who is unable to separate facts from media hype, but juries do it all the time.

You have made no attempt to explain the lies she told to the police, and even to her mother on the night of the murder. Because there is no exonerating explanation for those lies. None of the other friends and roommates of Meridith, the victim, had any problem supplying the police with proof of their whereabouts that night, only Amanda and her boyfriend.

Trying to distract from the actual facts of the case by focusing on tabloid stories doesn't work because the facts still remain and are not that difficult to sort out from everything else.

She was charged and convicted of murder, not of anything else. Adults are capable of understanding that even if she was a sexual deviant that wouldn't make her a killer so it was all irrelevant. Blood evidence which was produced at the trial, her footprint made from the victim's blood, the attempts clean up the scene of the crime, witness testimony that contradicted her, her constantly changing stories, her attempts to set up an innocent man and then her boyfriend, all of these things, and there's so much more, convinced me that she was guilty, at least of being present when the crime was committed.

Regarding 'media hype', from what I found the Italian media was not focused on this case before the trial started except when her family was in Italy and drew their attention to it, tastelessly posing at the scene of the crime amongst other things. So if the tabloids were writing about it, they have only themselves to blame.

By contrast, the family of Meredith, the girl who was so brutally murdered, were silent not wanting to influence the pursuit of justice for their daughter. If I have sympathy for anyone, it is for them. They conducted themselves with extreme dignity, in total contrast to the way Amanda Knoxe's family behaved.

Btw, the US media has been criticized rightfully for hardly ever mentioning that a brutal murder was committed. That the family and friends of that girl will never see her again. And that she most likely died a slow, painful death as she was left to bleed to death after being stabbed several times and had 47 total wounds on her body. The moving of the body and the way she was killed, along with forensic evidence, led the judges and other experts to conclude that she was killed by more than one person.

Sorry if I can't find much sympathy for Amanda Knox who didn't, as Meridith's other friends did, show much emotion if any, as a result of the death of her friend and roommate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #54
78. The power of American MSM to distort truth is mind-numbing as are DUers
Edited on Mon Dec-07-09 07:53 PM by snagglepuss
who are lapping up what MSM whores dish out. MSM is NOT CREDIBLE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiller4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #7
37. There was no DNA from Amanda Knox in the room where the murder took place
None. Three forensic experts including one from the prosecution argued that the knife intruduced by the prosecutions was not the murder weapon. There was rumor and bias but no evidence. Knox will win her appeal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #37
56. The murder did not take place in the room in which she was
found. She was moved there afterwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalhistorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
26. No, actually, it really wasn't. The evidence
against Knox was VERY strong, practically insurmountable, and it appeared to have been presented fairly. In many ways, the European justice systems are far better, and far less tainted by prejudice and prosecutorial misconduct, than our own system is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liquorice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. There's no physical evidence at all. Rudy Guede acted alone. They even secretly
recorded Guede saying that he acted alone before the Italian police got hold of him... This was a modern-day witch trial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. How exactly are they better? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
5. Very foolish of her to get involved in this case.
Edited on Sun Dec-06-09 05:36 PM by sabrina 1
Until I read some of the evidence against this woman, and was relying only the US coverage of the case, I thought she might be innocent. But after doing just a little research, it doesn't look that way. I would suggest Cantwell do some of her own research.

Looks like the case was handled very fairly. There was more evidence against this woman, than there was against Scott Peterson and he is on death row here.

Her best bet, since I'm convinced after reading about the evidence, that she will not win an appeal, is to tell the truth. In the Italian system, they show a lot of leniency to criminals who show remorse and tell the truth. She could have her sentence reduced, give some real closure to the murdered girl's family, and sooner rather than later, ask to be allowed to spend the rest of sentence in a US jail. The US and Italy have an agreement that would allow that.

But I am really disappointed in Cantwell's incredibly ignorant statement about the Italians showing any signs of anti-Americanism. If anything, if she knew anything about Italy, Italians are far more partial to Americans than they are to the British. And the murdered girl, Meridith, was British.

Cantwell is going to end up regretting getting involved in this case, once she is set straight about the facts.

As for the US criticizing any other country's judicial system, the world just laughs and points to Gitmo and Abu Ghraib, to the US kidnapping citizens of foreign countries and holding them without charges or access to any judicial system. The world knows that the US now believes that the accused are not entitled to habeas corpus.

We have no standing in the world when it comes to corrupt judicial systems, especially since Th we have done nothing to hold the corrupt responsible.

The evidence convinced me that this woman was involved in this crime. And that is leaving out the evidence the US press has complained about. There is a lot more than that, which is why probably, they don't talk about it. Surely Cantwell knows how biased the US media is, and is not basing her foolish statements on their reporting without doing her own research.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. yup, i think she is guilty also
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #13
40. Guilty of what? There's no evidence whatsoever.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
6. I don't know about anti-American sentiment of the Jury
but the evidence was investigated in 2007.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pscot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
21. There was plenty of anti-American sentiment
Edited on Sun Dec-06-09 06:43 PM by pscot
expressed in the Italian media at the time of her arrest. I assumed it reflected the attitudes of the public. On the other hand, given the remarkebly nasty tone of the comments in our local media since the verdict maybe people generally are just assholes. By the way, I have no idea whether she did it, though I thought there were some large holes in the prosecution's case. Had she been tried here, I doubt she would have been convicted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Truth2Tell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
8. A few years back I spoke personally with Cantwell
about trying to get her to get involved on behalf of another one of her constituents who had been denied justice overseas: Rachel Corrie. At that time she gave me a bunch of weak-tea rationalizations about not getting involved in a foreign policy/foreign justice matter separate from the State Department. Her excuses for not doing more to help the Corrie family sound pretty hollow in light of her now standing up for this likely murderer with a wealthy connected family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalhistorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
27. I think you've gotten to the crux of her reaction, with your final
words, "a wealthy connected family." That is very likely why she gives a damn about this, and not other far more obvious cases of injustice (I strongly believe in Knox's guilt and have no problem with the verdict at all).

It's called pandering. She's simply puffing herself up by taking advantage of this situation and pandering, pandering, pandering. Someone needs to give her one of Paul Tsongas's old "pander bears" that he used to carry around at his rallies in reference to Clinton during the '92 Dem primaries. Both parties are equally guilty of such shameful behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #27
62. "wealthy connected family"?
they're a million dollars in debt fighting for the daughter. they're middle class. cantwell is a pol, but this is a travesty.

WHAT IS THE MOTIVE? what smart young couple bent on a satanic sex-game rape follows this timeline?

1. go to boy's house
2. get high
3. watch Amelie (have you SEEN Amelie? you want to hug everyone on the planet after seeing it, not RAPE & MURDER THEM)
4. turn off cell phones
5. go back to girl's house
6. murder roommate with acquaintance from the Ivory Coast
7. dispose of bloody clothing in front of Albanian cab driver
8. go back to boy's house
9. go to sleep
10. turn on cell phones
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #62
81. You've clearly relied on US media whores. You are sadly uninformed. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
80. That's certainly interesting. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
9. Knox' ex-boyfriend was also convicted. He is italian.
So what does anti-american sentiment has to do with it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. She got a longer sentence (?)
In America the woman usually gets off or gets a smaller sentence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Big freaking deal. He got one year less than she did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. In America the woman usually gets off or gets a smaller sentence."
This claim is often made and is opposite of the truth.

The other giant lie - women serve less of their sentence. Not true. They serve a much larger percentage of their sentences than men do.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lavender Brown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
73. I believe that was because she falsely accused an innocent man
before changing her story. Her boyfriend did not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
951-Riverside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
51. They sentenced the black guy to 30 years ...OMG! Racism!


:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
14. the innocent man she blamed was arrested and put in jail
if they had already decided on her guilt why did they arrest the guy she lied about
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liquorice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. That's not true. The police found a text message from
the innocent man Lumumba, on Amanda's phone that said, "see you later." They questioned Amanda about it for 40+ hours, and insisted that she and Lumumba committed the crime. The police said that the "see you later" text was a reference to them meeting up to murder Meredith. After being hit, sleep deprived and threatened, Amanda finally had a mental breakdown and said that she and Lumumba did it. It's called a false confession, and it happens in America too, especially with young people who are afraid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. When I say "see you later" it means
I'll see you the next time I see you. I can't believe they took a vague phrase like that and used it against her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liquorice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. I know! The whole case against Amanda Knox is ridiculous. The lead
prosecutor in the case is a nut who is always accusing people of devil worshiping and being in sex cults. Amanda is clearly innocent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TokenQueer Donating Member (762 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Kudos to this whole sub-thread!
Don't forget that she had only been in the country for a couple of weeks and knew very little Italian. No translator was provided. Later, when her attorney tried to speak out in the press about the outright lies advanced by the prosecution, Mignini threatened to charge the attorney as an accessory!

This was a cluster fuck - top to bottom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #22
39. Yep, her and Lumummba, I think his name is.
Some posters are twisting the facts because they swallow the British tabloid garbage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #22
55. They didn't. Maybe you should do some research on what
actually happened, and why she became a suspect in the first place. She was definitely a prime suspect for no reason other than her own actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #55
60. Looks to me like you're the one in this sub-thread
who hasn't done any research. There is absolutely no physical evidence connecting her to this crime. Actions can be interpreted in whatever way serves someone else's needs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #60
67. When you lie to the police about your whereabouts on the night
of the murder of a friend and then you lie about the phone calls you made that might, you will become a suspect in any country in the world.

The girl who was murdered, Meredith, and left to die a slow, painful death lasting, according to the evidence, possibly two hours, was not killed in the bedroom where she was found. The fact that you are regurgitating the paid for PR of the family of Amanda Knox, demonstrates how little you know about the actual evidence in the case. There WAS physical evidence, at least four undeniable samples of blood from the victim attached to the DNA (and one footprint) of Amanda Knox.

You are free to believe what you want to believe, but until someone can explain away the evidence that was presented in the trial, I will stick with my opinion.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #60
82. Provide just one source other than US media whores that contend there is
no physical evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #55
63. oh, is it the MSM lies that we all believe again
Sabrina 1, WHAT IS THE MOTIVE?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #63
83. Motives explained at length in following link, as well as a full accounting
of the evidence of all who were involved.


Trial details not heard on CNN, etc.:
http://missrepresented.net/blog
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #20
33. There is no evidence that she was hit and in fact she is being
sued for making that claim. Since she has been caught in so many other lies, she doesn't have much credibility at all. As for how Lumumba was blamed, she accused him and the police went to question him, based on her accusation. He was a well respected businessman in the community until then. He too is suing her. She later pointed a finger at her boyfriend.

Other roommates at the house didn't seem to have her problems with the police when questioned. None of them lied for one thing, so the police were able to check their stories out and found them to be true. Her ever-changing stories however, did not check out which is why she became a suspect.

Two of those convicted are not American. One is from the Ivory Coast, the other is Italian. Only in her case are charges of Anti-because-she-is-whatever' being made. And that is because it is easier to do that than to try to refute the evidence against her. And, oddly enough, only in the US media do you see the shoddy reporting on this trial and very little focus on the beautiful woman who so brutally murdered.

Sort of like the way the US never talks about the victims of our bombs. And then you see the talking points of the media (Anti-Americanism, the prosecutor is corrupt and one or two other talking points) repeated by people who haven't taken a few minutes to check things out for themselves. I have no sympathy for murderers no matter what nationality they are. But if that murder had taken place here, and the victim had been American, rather than of mixed racial background, Amanda Knox would be convicted on far less evidence than it took to convict her in Italy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liquorice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are completely innocent in
that horrific rape and murder. Their DNA would have been all over that room had they participated in that brutal crime. They would have had all kinds of defensive wounds on them, but they had no wounds whatsoever.

If Sollecito was so sick that he participated in the murder, he would definitely have raped Meredith too. But there is absolutely NO DNA evidence of that. NONE. There's no DNA evidence at all, except from the rapist/murderer Rudy Guede. Guede's bodily fluids are all over the room, including his semen.

So you believe that Amanda and Sollecito participated in a vicious rape and murder, and yet Sollecito did not rape Meredith, and neither Amanda nor Sollecito left any definitive DNA evidence in the room. That's ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #35
42. Actually I did not say that I believed they 'participated in a vicious
rape and murder'. Please read what I did say. I have no opinion of what happened that is not based on actual evidence.

You are also wrong when you say 'Guede's bodily fluids are all over the room'. Actually they were not. Only in two or three places in the bedroom, where btw the evidence shows she was moved to AFTER being murdered, and in the bathroom.

And it was not even completely established that the sex was forced by him so as far as I know. And because there was no solid evidence of rape, he was not charged with rape. He was charged with murder and convicted of murder. I am not aware of Amanda or her boyfriend being charged with rape either. What the tabloids say does not equal the actual charges.

What was established was that the murder could not have been committed by only one person. And there definitely was DNA evidence of Amanda's presence in the house on the night of the murder. And lots of evidence of her lying.

But, people will have to make up their own minds. After reading, NOT the tabloids, but the US MSM's take, which I felt was not very good reporting, and looking at the reporting from around the world of the actual evidence not being reported in the US, I do believe she was there that night. How much of a role she may have played in the actual murder, I do not know.

One thing I will say, her supporters in this country are pretty vicious themselves and are not doing her much good. It's a murder case, but they seem to have turned it into WW111, slamming, smearing and in some cases, threatening anyone who has a different opinion of what might have happened to the point where the police have been called.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/406548_blogwars27.html

Amanda Knox case creates a police investigation at home

Her stepfather has been implicated in participating in some of these threats and attacks. He has denied that. People have had their personal information posted on the internet etc. simply because they chose to look a little further into the evidence in this case than this family and their PR team would like people to do.

It makes me wonder if anyone who really believed their loved one was wrongfully accused, would feel the need to become violent with people who have a different pov. Personally in their position, I would be focusing on ALL of the evidence, IF I thought it was wrong. But they have not done that, just attacked, Italy, everyone and rarely if ever mention the victim. They are not coming across as particularly nice people and are probably turning off people when what they need is to gain sympathy for their cause.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TokenQueer Donating Member (762 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #35
44. Not that pesky little things like physical evidence mattered in this witch hunt.
Amanda was arrested and accused of committing the murder before the crime scene had been processed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #33
41. Where are you getting your "facts"? From Murdoch?
It sure as hell isn't from any real news source.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. Well, that's about as substantive as anything I've
read from the MSM. Why don't you prove me wrong? To be honest, this is just another murder case and I only bothered looking it up after the verdict and the disgusting coverage on the MSM which attacked another country mostly, and gave practically no information on the case itself. So, as I always do when I see our failed media report on something, like the WMDs in Iraq, or how we 'don't torture people here', I looked up this case.

All I can say is that this girl, Amanda, didn't need anyone to make her look bad. She lied, retracted lies, and continued to lie from the beginning. None of the other friends of the victim did that, they simply told the police where they were at the time of the murder and what their relationship with the victim was. Why did she lie? Her family says 'she was nervous'. I'm sure she was, so were all the others. They were mostly nervous that there was a brutal killer loose in their neighborhood, and thoroughly distraught over the murder of someone they knew. Iow, their behavior was normal. Her's was not. And then her phone records and computer records proved she lied.

But, because she's American in a foreign country, she just can't be questioned, is that your view? How about explaining all the lies she told? We put foreigners in jail here all the time and I don't see this kind of hysteria from their countries of birth, especially if there is any question about their innocence and there are plenty of questions about hers, unless you are so xenophobic you actually believe that being American in a foreign country means you are immune from even being questioned no matter whether you lie to the police or not ~ if so, good luck with that. The rest of the world doesn't seem to much care what Americans think anymore, sadly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #45
70. "Why don't you prove me wrong?" In the US, the prosecution (in which role you are acting here)
has to prove its case--as I believe it should be. You haven't proved she did it beyond a reasonable doubt--and the burden is on YOU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #41
84. Where are you getting information from? What source other than MSM?
I suggest you look at http://missrepresented.net/blog




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
16. Cantwell is doing her job. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftishBrit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
17. The others who were convicted were not American...
One was Italian, and the other was African.

So I honestly don't think anti-American sentiment is relevant here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. maybe it has to do with the American bias, especially media bias
which relates to their obsession over missing white women but ignoring cases involving minority women.

2 victims in this case are the british girl who was killed and the innocent man Knox blamed for the murder.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #19
38. It was the POLICE who initially claimed Lumummba was the culprit.
Nice try to repeat Murdoch talking points.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TorchTheWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 03:34 AM
Response to Reply #38
58. No, it was Knox who pointed the finger at her boss
Four days after the body was found when she was arrested. That was when she was presented with evidence that showed she was indeed there that night and had been lying about that for all those days. That was when for the first time she admitted she was there but that she was there with her boss and her boss did it. At that time, the police had DNA evidence of an unknown man. It was Knox pointing the finger at her boss coupled with the evidence of the unknown man's evidence that prompted them to arrest her boss expecting that her boss's DNA would match that of the unknown man's DNA evidence... except to their surprise it did not and it matched that of Rudy.

Knox needed to point the finger at a black man because when interrogated after being arrested part of the evidence that put her at the scene was that she was seen by a witness at the basketball court near her house with her "boyfriend" and an unidentified black man. But instead of pointing the finger at Rudy she again lied and pointed the finger at another black man she knew - her boss.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
24. No problem
The rest of the world feels the same about the US justice system.
They want to know why Bush, Cheney and Rove are still walking free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juno jones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
30. If she's innocent she wouldn't be the first american
to be hounded.

I admit much of my knowledge of Italy comes from books. I have never been.

But there are some pretty interesting parallels from this case to another case, that of journalist Douglas Preston, recounted in his book, "Monster of Florence" http://www.amazon.com/Monster-Florence-Douglas-Preston/... . He came to Italy and showed intrest a long running lurid case that was still open. He became the suspect of an investigation that wanted to find a foriegn monster and presented the most absurd occultic claims to back it up. Very good book, a real life mystery.

She seems kinda odd, but the Italian govt has railroaded foreigners before. When I heard that they were pursuing 'occult motives' (at one point in the case) I started listening. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. I have been to Italy and I'm amazed at the
claims that the Italians are anti-American. They are anything but that. As I have said before, if anything, they are more likely to be considered anti-British.

As for the Preston case, I am familiar with it. What happened to him was terrible. It happens here on a regular basis. It's happening right now. Where is the outrage about the journalists from several countries that the US held without charge and in some cases tortured for years? Compared to what we have done to so many innocent citizens of other countries, Mr. Preston can consider himself lucky that he was in a country that still believes in, eg, habeas corpus and actual criminal charges before you can throw away the key on someone.

Spanish, Canadian, Egyptian, British and other European citizens were kidnapped by this government, held without charges, tortured and when their governments asked for their release since there were no charges against them and they had been denied access to any court in this country, the US refused.

Did any of those countries scream that the US was anti-British, anti-Canadian or whatever?

This country really has sunk so low sometimes I wonder if there is any hope for it. People cannot seem to just look at a case, look at the evidence, have respect for other countries' UNTIL there is a reason not to, without screaming 'THEY'RE ANTI-AMERICAN'. But then, as most people around the globe have said about this case and the US reaction to it, that's what you do when you cannot defend someone on the merits of the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #34
64. In Perugia, there is anti-foreign student bias
the citizens don't particularly like that the program has turned the town into the French Quarter.

There is also a tendency to blame ills on foreigners, a nativist bias.

Amanda Knox's case is not connected to extra-judicial kidnappings in the GWOT. FOCUS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demoleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #64
68. sure. perugia has anti-americanism in the blood. and the judges and the police too...
...who else?

anyway, the point here is the senator's words. which embarassed mrs clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #68
71. Did you even read my post?
I said "anti-foreign", and i cited a reason.

Cantwell can say what the fuck ever she wants. Clinton's job is to get Amanda Knox the fuck out of there. I don't give a fuck if she's "embarassed".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demoleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. anti-foreign in this context - what does it mean? and please, spare me your rude language.
i'm all but impressed.

i'm interested in the embarassement of mrs clinton. it's about international relations. to me, knox is just another sentenced woman, just like anyone else.

enjoy your time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #72
77. it means they don't like the foreign students
boozing it up in their quaint town. what i wrote.

sorry about the rude language, i hadn't realized you were such a delicate flower unacquainted with the hurly burly of an internet discussion board. i'll bring smelling salts for you next time.

"enjoy your time", too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demoleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #77
79. yes, smelling salts are a good idea. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #64
74. There may be an anti foreign student bias there.
There is an anti immigrant bias here, and in many other countries. That doesn't necessarily translate (in most countries) into falsely convicting people of murders there is no reason to believe they committed. Nor was that the case here. Three people were convicted, one of them an Italian.

I did not say that Amanda Knox's case was connected to the extra-judicial kidnappings in our fake GWOT. I said that because of our corrupt system which has held without charge, citizens of many countries, several of them journalists, tortured them, and refused them access to our judicial system, the US has no moral authority to criticize the judicial systems of any other country. They would be better advised to stick to the facts instead of trashing other countries.

I mentioned this wrt the case of the journalist, who railed against what happened to him in Italy, and rightly so. But pointed out how lucky he was that he was not one of those unfortunate journalists who ended up in OUR system of 'justice' because he would have spent several years, without access to any court, in Guantanamo without contact with his family, and with the added joy of being tortured. The US, until it holds responsible the criminals who gave us this reputation, are in no position to criticize anyone else.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
36. Didn't they let the Italian agents go free?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
47. I wish our legislators would not take "sides" in matters like this
What would Cantwell have done if the dead girl had been another Seattle girl? which parent's request would be honor? If we don't approve of another country's judicial system, so what? There are plenty of places that do not approve of ours .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Ah yes, a "who are we to judge?" response.
I am sure if the girl was in China and had been executed you would still be saying that we had no right to criticize their judicial practices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. ah.. but. she wasn't in China, she isn't being executed
and "you" have every right to criticize anything you choose to, but "you" cannot control the judicial system of another country.

Every American who travels abroad HAS to understand that if they get into "legal-trouble" in a foreign country, they "might" be in a "whole-lotta-trouble".

Our son went to college in Florence, Italy, and it did not take him very long to figure out that things were very different in Italy...but then none of his flatmates ended up butchered.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. Exactly. You have to follow the law of the country you are in.
That law might be different from the US law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demoleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
69. US State Department: "We are not going to comment too much on an ongoing legal process".
In Washington, State Department spokesman Ian C. Kelly said Clinton was interested in the case and intended to speak with Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Democrat from Washington state, who has questioned the fairness of the trial.

Asked whether the State Department believed Knox had been treated fairly, Kelly said, "I don't have any indications to the contrary. I do know that our embassy in Rome was very closely involved in this. They visited Amanda Knox. They have monitored the trial."

He added: "We are not going to comment too much on an ongoing legal process."


"Italy: No issues with US over Knox verdict", http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091207/ap_on_re_eu/eu_ital...


so much for the sen. cantwell.
and no more embarassement for mrs clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 24th 2017, 04:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC