No, it's what happened the second time. She was convicted, then aquitted, then convicted again. Wrap your head around that.
I have no idea whether she likely did it or not. A lot of people seem convinced that she didn't, but I've never seen any kind of dispassionate examination of all the evidence, so I refuse to hold an opinion either way.
No, it's what happened the second time. She was convicted, then aquitted, then convicted again. Wrap your head around that.
I have no idea whether she likely did it or not. A lot of people seem convinced that she didn't, but I've never seen any kind of dispassionate examination of all the evidence, so I refuse to hold an opinion either way.
Wasn't this new conviction held in a trial because the previous was declared a mistrial after the fact? I thought that is what caused this trial, which is why I am confused on the actual double jeopardy status of it.
It seems like regardless of the outcome, there is an appeal if the "losing" side isn't happy with the outcome in the Italian justice system. Now, that is screwed up.
Under US legal standards she would never have been convicted.
Wasn't this new conviction held in a trial because the previous was declared a mistrial after the fact? I thought that is what caused this trial, which is why I am confused on the actual double jeopardy status of it.
It seems like regardless of the outcome, there is an appeal if the "losing" side isn't happy with the outcome in the Italian justice system. Now, that is screwed up.
Wasn't this new conviction held in a trial because the previous was declared a mistrial after the fact? I thought that is what caused this trial, which is why I am confused on the actual double jeopardy status of it.
It seems like regardless of the outcome, there is an appeal if the "losing" side isn't happy with the outcome in the Italian justice system. Now, that is screwed up.
Please be more specific WRT which officials and who was extradited.
Ok, fine. I'm also of the opinion that she falls into the Natalee Holloway this-is-only-news-because-it's-an-attractive-young-woman catagory. I fail to see why this case is significant. I hope justice is served either way, but I don't see any point in really following it closely.
I really have no idea, a legal expert might be useful here.
Ok, fine. I'm also of the opinion that she falls into the Natalee Holloway this-is-only-news-because-it's-an-attractive-young-woman catagory. I fail to see why this case is significant. I hope justice is served either way, but I don't see any point in really following it closely.
We're talking Amanda Knox. Try to focus, her extradition hasn't happened... yet. I'm betting we hear arguments for it.
Betting we have officials in the Admin who believe extradition treaties overrule US law.
Wasn't this new conviction held in a trial because the previous was declared a mistrial after the fact? I thought that is what caused this trial, which is why I am confused on the actual double jeopardy status of it.
This is more or less news because of the fact she's a U.S. citizen being tried in a foreign country.
There are three phases to the process.
In phase one, she was found guilty.
In phase two, she was found not guilty, but a higher court ruled that the judge acted with misconduct. Thus, they had to re-do phase two. Today was the verdict from the re-do of phase two.
In phase three, she'll get a final appeal, and whenever that ends, it will finally be over one way or the other.
Are you saying that because you're Italian or just don't understand that the evidence is horse shit?
There are three phases to the process.
In phase one, she was found guilty.
In phase two, she was found not guilty, but a higher court ruled that the judge acted with misconduct. Thus, they had to re-do phase two. Today was the verdict from the re-do of phase two.
In phase three, she'll get a final appeal, and whenever that ends, it will finally be over one way or the other.
During this the prosecutor was found to have acted with misconduct during this and other cases. this was something separate and had NOTHING to do with the case (sadly)
The problem is that in the second phase, she was acquitted and the prosecution was allowed to appeal that decision to a higher court, which declared it a mistrial. This is not allowed under the US Double Jeopardy clause to my belief. If the prosecution, for whatever reason, does something improper (with exception of something like corruption or intentional misconduct), the acquittal stands and is protected. As the trial was completed, they cannot try someone for the same crime. Giving the prosecution an appeal is incredibly strange.
The problem is that in the second phase, she was acquitted and the prosecution was allowed to appeal that decision to a higher court, which declared it a mistrial. This is not allowed under the US Double Jeopardy clause to my belief. If the prosecution, for whatever reason, does something improper (with exception of something like corruption or intentional misconduct), the acquittal stands and is protected. As the trial was completed, they cannot try someone for the same crime. Giving the prosecution an appeal is incredibly strange.
This is a summary of what I have been reading online. Basically Italy can request it but because of Double Jeopardy she will never be extradited. However that will probably mean she will need to be very careful with where she travels the rest of her life.
I don't think she wants to go back to Italy. Just a guess though! >_<
I read lots of the Massei report (the summary of everything from phase one of the trial, as written by the presiding judge) and came to my own conclusion.
Have you done anything more than read the occasional news story? You should read the Massei report and come to your own conclusions.
At one time, I think I posted a bunch of recaps of the biggest arguments. If you want, I can try to find those posts and copy/paste them here.
I don't think she wants to go back to Italy. Just a guess though! >_<
I read lots of the Massei report (the summary of everything from phase one of the trial, as written by the presiding judge) and came to my own conclusion.
Have you done anything more than read the occasional news story? You should read the Massei report and come to your own conclusions.
At one time, I think I posted a bunch of recaps of the biggest arguments. If you want, I can try to find those posts and copy/paste them here.