Amanda Knox could face slander case over police claims

[demoleft]

Source: bbc

US student Amanda Knox, who murdered her British flatmate Meredith Kercher in Italy, is now expected to face slander charges, officials say.

The move comes after an inquiry into claims by the 22-year-old that she was beaten by police during questioning.
...
Knox has said she was unable to identify the officers who hit her.

The prosecutor in the case said there was no proof of assault and Knox would now be charged with slander in order to protect the good name of the police department.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8472967.stm

[Rebubula]

1. Knox

Trial was a sham...they might as well pile shit on to cover their asses.

This is only my opinion...I have no proof of her guilt or innocence.

[sabrina 1]

4. No,, it wasn't a sham. She received a very fair trial

and if she had been tried here, probably would have received the death penalty. She lied over and over again, and still cannot settle on her story of where she was that night.

The propaganda machine here hired by her parents, didn't really persuade anyone who actually looked at the evidence against her.

But they did make false allegations against the Italian judicial system, hoping that the ignorance of the system here would get support for their allegations. But in the age of Google, people are capable of doing their own research and repeating their lies really won't sway too many people.

[Jefferson23]

5. Fair? Not according to many US attorneys looking at the case, not at all.

[demoleft]

8. fair according to US diplomacy in italy and to mrs clinton, so far.

til proved otherwise.

which is more than enough to call it fair.

[Jefferson23]

10. Clinton has not said anything either way,

[demoleft]

11. exactly. does it not suggest anything?

US State Department did, among others, speak (and reduced sen. maria cantwell's arrogant reactions to silence), avoiding diplomatic embarrassment to mrs clinton.

find it here. already discussed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7168219#7175657

[Jefferson23]

13. It suggests nothing for now. From your own source:

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

[demoleft]

14. "Italy: No issues with US over Knox verdict"

..."Clinton herself, speaking Sunday, said she had not looked into the case but would meet with anybody who had concerns. She said she had not expressed concerns to the Italian government."

the guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8845746


i suppose she spoke already to those "who had concerns."
we're still waiting for doubts cast on the fairness of the trial.

in the meantime, mrs clinton' silence speaks. and tells it was fair.
waiting for different official statements.

[Jefferson23]

15. I think that is your presumption that Clinton believes the trial was fair

Imo, time will tell.

[demoleft]

16. silence speaks, in diplomacy. anyway you're right, time will tell. ciao. n/t

[sabrina 1]

9. Which attorneys, and what about the case do they believe

was unfair, or not handled properly? I have read a great deal about the case and the evidence and I was very impressed with how she was treated there. In fact, I wish our own system were as fair sometimes.

The only U.S. attorney I recall criticizing the case seems to have withdrawn from publicly speaking about it. The other U.S. attorney is now working for her defense team in Italy so naturally he would take the position that were flaws in how the case was handled as she is appealing it.

[Jefferson23]

12. There are more than a few, and some of the concerns revolve around

the DNA, or lack there of, that would not support the prosecutors premise. Also, the alleged confession was possibly under duress, 14 hours straight etc.

snip* In a statement released following Knox's sentencing, Senator Maria Cantwell expressed serious concern that the jury's verdict is tainted, largely because of anti-American sentiment, and because of the peculiarities of the Italian judicial system that allowed jurors access to the European press' notoriously understated reportage.

But what, if anything can the federal government do to intervene on Knox's behalf? According to the U.S. Department of State, not much.

"We can't get directly involved in the appeals process," says Fred Lash, a spokesperson for the department. And if there is any existing precedent for the the federal government intervening in the legal proceedings of a foreign country on behalf of a citizen, Lash is currently unaware of one.

But let's say the proposed summit between Clinton and Cantwell does take place. The Secretary could come away persuaded that Knox got a raw deal. Hypothetically, she could then convince the Obama administration to put diplomatic pressure on the Italian government, much like her husband did on the government of Singapore in 1994 after American teenager Michael Fay confessed to vandalism and was sentenced to a lashing across the buttocks with a bamboo cane for his trouble.

The Clinton administration later begged for clemency on Fay's behalf, but Singapore proceeded anyway. And it's worth noting here that Fay's situation involved neither orgies or murder.

Still, Lash says that Secretary Clinton and Senator Cantwell are currently in talks for a meet. Knox, meanwhile, could remain in an Italian prison for up to two years before the appeals process is finally resolved, reports the Seattle Times.

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2009/12/speaking_on_yesterdays_edition.php


More here, snip* from Time Magazine:

Many legal observers in the U.S. were dismayed, though not surprised, by the verdict, since they felt all along that Knox had already been convicted in the Italian court of public opinion and had no real shot at a fair trial. Within hours of her arrest, reporters had scoured her MySpace postings. They found her nickname "Foxy Knoxy" and ferreted out drunken videos, publishing them all. A local shopkeeper presented the prosecution with a store video of Sollecito and Knox buying lingerie and making out a few days after the murder.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1945845-2,00.html

[sabrina 1]

17. Thank you for your response.

As far as the questioning being under duress, that has been addressed many times. For instance the first part of the questioning was merely as a witness. She was one of many people who knew Meredith, the victim in this case, who were asked to go talk to the police. There have been no complaints from any of the other witnesses, which is all she was at that time, about the police. Any one of them could have been a suspect and probably as in most cases like this, all of them were. Yet, all of them were able to satisfy the police as to where they were that night. None of them aroused suspicions by changing their stories.

I'm sure all of them were emotional and upset but only Amanda Knox had trouble remembering where she was. The police would not have been doing their job if they did not find her to be of interest in the case at that point.

As for the DNA evidence, of course the defense always challenges DNA evidence, and in fact, the prosecution team did not use the contested evidence in the case. But there was enough other DNA evidence that she was there, not to mention her own confession that she was, that was presented to the jury. Many DNA experts found the DNA evidence to be compelling.

The U.S. media was influenced by the PR team the family hired and did a very poor job of covering the case. But news media from around the world did a far better, less biased job of covering the case.

Regarding the State Dept. interfering, I doubt they will once they take a close look at the evidence in the case. This is not a situation where a U.S. is being abused, as in the other case you mentioned. She was given a very fair trial, which she herself admits in a country that is an ally of the U.S. and has no history of being considered 'Anti-American' with regards to prosecuting U.S. citizens.

She is very lucky actually to be in Italy where there is no death penalty and where like here, contrary to the U.S. media's claims, a person is considered innocent until they are convicted.

Italy's judicial system also focuses on rehabilitation, unlike ours which is all about punishment. She could have her sentence reduced considerably if she shows signs of remorse and a change in attitude about the crime she was convicted of.

She also probably will have it reduced after the appeals process, even if she loses, something that would never happen here.

All I can say is that from what I've read from many different sources, I do believe she was there that night, as all evidence points to it. It is possible that she WAS as she claims, high and may have a foggy memory of the events. But I am convinced she was there and that she tried to cover up the crime.

[Jefferson23]

20. I don't think the problems with the case have anything to do with

anti-Americanism either. I do believe there may be sufficient evidence that the prosecutor presumed guilt prematurely and did so via
the press, and as a result rammed this case through..perhaps more to do with ego than justice.

Time will tell how the appeal process goes, I am not convinced yet that she is guilty.

[sabrina 1]

21. It's possible that a prosecutor might presume guilt too quickly

and no one wants to see an innocent person convicted wrongfully. But as I understand there were several prosecutors and the trial was months long, not rushedd at all, and Amanda was allowed to speak for herself as often as she wanted to, to correct information she thought was wrong. She did that, and imo, having watched her testimony, didn't help herself at all.

She also pointed a finger of blame at an innocent man, who was arrested and jailed and lost his business over it. She showed no remorse about that either, saying, laughingly, that 'no', she had not apologized to him.

But as you say, the appeals process may reveal more about the case. As far as her guilt, it's possible she did not actually participate in the killing of Meredith physically, but I do believe she was there and at the very least, did nothing to stop it, and helped to cover it up afterwards.

[billyryan]

29. amanda knox defamation charges

mignini has just been convicted of abuse of power by a three
man panel of judges and sentenced to one year and four months
in jail.now the misterious dissapearance of the tapes of
amandas interogation the destroying of the hardrives of
computers the possible deliberate dna contamination.he looks a
right idiot with his defamanation charges tonight.the
prosecution of amanda knox and the word justice should never
again be used in the one sentence

[billyryan]

24. amanda knox defamation charges

not only has amanda knox been wrongly charged with murder but
has also been convicted without any evidence but as far as the
italian legal system is concerned how dare she even defend
herself.i have no doubt if this charge comes to court amanda
will be found guilty and will have two to six years added to
her sentence.there is no independant evidence that she lied,
which should be needed in a fair trial,but the prosecution did
not need evidence in the murder trial either,just their
oppinion of what happened.this case shows how desperate that
the prosecution are to save face,the idea is been floated here
probally on behalf of mignini and camodi that if amanda
confesses to what she did not do and allows them to save face
they will see she only serves about mabey ten years,and they
are threatening her with thirty or more if she does not.this
is a high risk strategy of course because if this case goes to
trial i am sure there is a lot of people around perugia who
got roughed up in this police station.the carrot of leniancy
is been offered to amanda to save face,or the prospect of
thirty years for a crime she had nothing to do with,also these
same charges will be brought against her parents at an
oppertune time,to add the prospect of they not been able to
visit her in jail.this will eventually be a decision only
amanda can make

[sabrina 1]

31. No evidence? You are not helping her case at all by

telling such blatant lies. Don't forget, people are capable of doing their own research now, they don't have to rely on a biased U.S. media.

Not only did she lie about her whereabouts on the night of the murder, she lied about an innocent man whose life was pretty much ruined by her.

He too is suing her as he should. If she told a lie that big and destructive to another human being, she is fully capable of lying about the police.

Your outright dismissal of evidence that people all over the world saw, leaves you with little credibility.

If you want to defend her, then explain where she was on the night of the murder, because she doesn't seem to be able to do so.

As for Mignini, you have simply demonstrated how fair the Italian judicial system is. Apparently if someone is guilty, no matter how it might not benefit them to return a conviction, they are more than willing to do so.

In fact, his conviction, if it is true, debunks thoroughly the Knox defenders erroneous claim that the Italian system of justice is unfair.

[hughee99]

2. She's already been sentenced to 26 years,

I don't think the slander charges are her major concern.

[demoleft]

3. indeed it won't. n/t

[JI7]

18. Italians are pretty lenient and they would likely have cut those years

[sabrina 1]

6. Hi, Demoleft ~

Nice to see you ~ :hi:

I am glad to hear that she is being called on her claims of police brutality. It's funny that none of the many others who were questioned by the police, as she was, in the intitial stages of the investigation had any problems with the police, nor did they have any problems answering questions honestly and providing their alibis. Only Amanda Knox had these problems.

[demoleft]

7. ciao you there...

...lovely to see you too. :hi:

yes, she will have to take responsibility for anything that happened and she told now.
but i do not think she worries much about this.

[JI7]

19. she is also the one who changed her story how many times ?

each time they confronted with evidence that contradicted her story she changed it to something else.

and of course she blamed an innocent man .

[Joe Chi Minh]

22. She must be innocent then, according to her American supporters here.

[sabrina 1]

23. Yes, at the very least she has demonstrated that lying

comes easily to her. And she had no remorse about destroying the life of the man she falsely accused.

But it's a very sad, tragic story most of all for the Meredith's, the victim's family. But for the families of those who have been convicted also. These kind of cases make me wonder what goes through the mind of someone who would do such a thing and wreck so many lives, including their own.

[msanthrope]

25. She destroyed the life of an innocent African immigrant, with her

false accusations....

something her supporters neatly gloss over.....

[billyryan]

28. amanda knox defamation charges

the police destroyed an innocent man by putting pressure on an
innocent girl until she buckled,to use there own words, and
signed a statment in a foreign language that they
dictated.amanda did not stop the people of perugia continuing
to be customers in patrick mumumba bar when he was
released.when the file of amandas statment about her
interogation during her trial was sent to the prosecuters
office it was handled by mignini and comodi,no investigation
took place just the file is closed and at there discretion
depending on the public reaction she may be charged,and
mignini can oversee another miscarriage of justice.mabey no
one else in that prosecuters office is willing to have their
name associated with this salem witch trial.a police officer
from rome gave evidence in an earlier hearing of being in the
next room to where amanda was being interrogated and hearing
her screaming.is it not ironic that with at least four
prosecution witnesess caught out lying none of them will face
any charges even though they were trying to put an innocent
person in jail for life,but telling the truth about your
interrogation could get amanda six extra years

[struggle4progress]

34. Yep. First, she had been at her boyfriend's all night. Then, she'd been hiding in the bathroom

while her former boss killed the girl. Then, it was back to all night at her boyfriend's, with a return home the next morning to find the front door open, blood in the bathroom, and no answer from her roommate behind a locked door -- which she somehow thought did not merit a call to police. The natural reaction is: something's really wrong there

[TonydelBalzo]

48. Knox was struck by the Police

If this is valid argument:

Addressing the question of what might have motivated Miss Knox and Mr Sollecito, who had no previous criminal records or history of violence, to have committed murder, Mrs Comodi said: "Why did they do it? I often ask myself that. We live in an age of violence with no motive. We don't know what sparks these things."

Then this is true====>

Addressing the question of what might have motivated the Police to beat Miss Knox, Mrs Comodi said: "Why did they do it? I often ask myself that. We live in an age of violence with no motive. We don't know what sparks these things."

[Nihil]

51. Don't you just love 'em?

Single-issue trolls that is

"Comment: Freedom and Justice to Amanda Knox"

:boring:

[brentspeak]

26. Witch trial justice, kangaroo court conviction of a wrongly-accused person

Being dim is no justification to convict someone of murder in the absence of credible evidence.

[beac]

27. Theres is PLENTY of "credible evidence"-- starting with the FACT that her

boyfriend does not alibi her for the night of the murder. The FINAL versions of their alibis (both made several changes to their own over the course of the investigation) do not match. HE says she went out from 9pm-1am. SHE says she was at his house.

I highly recommend http://perugiamurderfile.org for information on the case not covered in the American, pro-Knox press.

This link: http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/our_take_on_the_case_for_the_prosecution_4_amanda_knoxs_multiple_conflictin/ gives a detailed break-down of Knox's multiple, conflicting alibis.

This one: http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/our_take_on_the_case_for_the_prosecution_3_raffele_sollecitos_multiple_conf/ does the same for Sollecito's several alibis.

[brentspeak]

39. After reviewing all that, my opinion remains unchanged: the trial was a sham

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[brentspeak]

44. The Knox family wrote those links which you yourself provided?

Who knew?

[Xithras]

47. The problem is that lack of an alibi is not "evidence" in and of itself.

An alibi is useful for excluding potential suspects, but the lack of an alibi, or a bad alibi, is not evidence in and of itself.

The real problem that many people have with the case is that every single bit of evidence against her is both damning and refutable at the same time. The knife? Some experts say it's the murder weapon, some say it's not. The blood on the tip? Some say it's the victims, and some say it's not. The bloody footprints? Definitely hers, but they weren't recorded by the first police on the scene, and she walked through the house the next day, so there's an explanation.

All told, it's an incredibly circumstantial case. I personally do think that she was involved in the murder, but there are no real smoking guns to really prove it one way or the other.

[rocktivity]

30. Now this is coincidence--I was on jury duty for one day yesterday

and was nearly placed on a robbery case. One of the judge's questions concernced whether we would be more or less likely to believe a cop's testimony simply becuase he was a cop?"

Anyway, where's their proof that she's lying?

:rofl:
rocktivity

[sabrina 1]

32. No one, not even her supporters here in the U.S. dispute the fact

that she has lied. She is on video lying, she lied about an innocent man to the police. Then lied again, under no pressure from anyone, in writing, about that same man. He might be in jail for life, had he not had solid alibies to prove she was lying. Had it been up to her, he would still be in jail.

She has changed her story of where she was on the night of the murder so many times, it's hard to know which story is true and which ones are lies.

You may question whether or not she is guilty of murder, although most people do not, but there is no question that she has proven herself to be a liar. Of course being a liar doesn't make you guilty of murder, but you did ask if there was proof that she lied. Ask the man who spent two weeks in jail and lost his business whether or not she is a liar. She was asked if she apologized to him, her response was to laugh and ask 'who me? No'. Not a very sympathetic character.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[struggle4progress]

33. Italy: Knox prosecutor convicted in unrelated case

The Associated Press
Friday, January 22, 2010; 2:20 PM

ROME -- The Perugia magistrate who prosecuted U.S. student Amanda Knox for murder was convicted Friday of abusing his office in an unrelated case, officials said.

A Florence court convicted Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini and an Italian police investigator of abusing their positions in a 1985 probe into the death of a doctor thought to be involved in a Satanic group.

Mignini's lawyer, Marco Rocchi, said his client will appeal the conviction and 16-month suspended jail sentence, and will be able to continue as prosecutor.

Mignini told reporters he was bewildered by the verdict. He dismissed reporters' questions about whether the ruling might throw any shadows on his work in the trial of Knox for the 2007 murder in Perugia of her British roommate Meredith Kercher ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/22/AR2010012202458.html

[demoleft]

37. "unrelated", exactly. n/t

[toopers]

35. Read the book "Monster of Florence" . . .

You will know all you need to know about the Italian judicial system and the prosecutor in the Amanda Knox case. This was a sham trial by an arrogant, dishonest, and power hungry prosecutor. The prosecutor chose to ignore the simplest answer, and concocted evidence to fit a story he wanted.

[demoleft]

36. it has no relation with the trial of knox. as to the monster of florence...

...we have been living with this story since decades. the murders were hard to investigate into, there's always been the suspect that someone (or more) was/were behind the commission of the murders, though the killer never admitted to anything.

"an arrogant, dishonest, and power hungry prosecutor" - what do you know about the career of the man?

and why "power hungry"? who do you think it is amanda knox?
just a girl in trouble down here. and nothing to make a career on.

i can grant you. she's already forgotten.
just a case that will go to appeal.

but if you have any doubt, ask your US state department about the knox trial.

[toopers]

41. You obviously have not read the book . . .

That is why you make ridiculous statements. The two cases are related.

[demoleft]

42. i live in italy. i do not need to read a book, it is history here.

show some respect for others' opinion.
especially of those who live where things happen.

[toopers]

45. I respect everyone's educated opinion. I have shown more . . .

respect for yours than you have for mine. If you have any respect for my opinion you will read the book. Until then, don't tell me to respect your opinion.

[demoleft]

46. i never called your opinions "ridiculous statements". you did. over. i'm easy. n/t

[Jax]

50. You sat on Amanda Knox's jury?

I live where things happen too.

[davidpdx]

40. Christ they already convicted her of murder

The slander charges are just over kill. I'm not sure what the penalty would be, but I'm sure even IF she was convicted, the judge would run it concurrently. I don't see how they can make her pay money. She is a college students. Doing so would amount to holding her for ransom after her sentence was completed.

[TonydelBalzo]

49. Boycott Perugia - The Perugians need to take charge of their Police force

The claims for restitution and secondary crimes are totally out of control in this case.

Amanda Knox is appealing a guilty verdict, which sentenced her to 24 years for murder, one year for slander of Patrick and one year for the crimes of carrying a knife in town and breaking a window as a decoy. (Total 26)
She is also charged with slander, which could bring a fine or not less than 2 but not more than 6 years in jail. That's 28 to 30 years..the same as a Mafia Boss would get. Amanda also has to pay restitution to Patrick (Patrick wanted 80,000 Euro but was awarded 8,000 Euro on Appeal. Amanda also has to pay for damage to and lost rent from the apartment where the murder occurred.

Raffe is sentenced to 24 years in prison for murder (also appealing) and 1 year for the crimes of carrying a knife in town and breaking a window as a decoy.

Rudy took a different approach and was sentenced to 30 month (but not the 9 months of solitary confinement Mignini asked for). On appeal his sentence was dropped from 30 to 24 (to match Amanda's and then further reduced by 8 years (1/3 of the initial 24 years) because of his choice to take a fast track trial. His net total is 16 years. Ten years less then Amanda's despite admitting to leaving Meredith to die.

There is a fine for these three of 33,000,000 Euro for the death of Meredith. Each of the convicts must also pay the cost of their own trials. And to top it all off, each has to pay the state for the costs of their incarceration. Finally and hardly worth noting, none of the three can run for public office while in prison.

Amanda's parents are being investigated for slander for repeating the claim, on British TV, that Amanda was struck by a Perugian Policewoman. Again, this could be from 2 years to 6 years and/or a fine.

The prosecutor, G. Mignini was charged with abuse of office and unlawful wiretaps. He was found guilty of the abuse of office. His prosecutor requested 10 months in prison but the judge sentenced him to 16 months. He will not have to serve any of it and can continue to work during his appeal.

One of the Perugian police was charged with leaking information from the case.

Four members of Raffe's family and a journalist and his manager are also charged with Obstruction of Justice