Amanda Knox and ex-boyfriend guilty of Kercher murder.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Straw man. No one said it was a small backwards country. No one discussed the 'age' of Italian law. No one discussed Italy not being part of Europe. Irrelevant.

Yes they did. You said when you decided and stated that the Italian court rooms are nothing more than kangaroo courts. You are dismissive of a culture and legal system that spans back thousands of years.. and yes Italy being part of Europe is very relevant... use google its your friend.
See Italy being part of Europe means that Italy has adopted European Law

For your acquaintance I shall post below. Please peruse and explain to me what if anything you consider to be lacking.

Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is a provision of the European Convention which protects the right to a fair trial. In criminal law cases and cases to determine civil rights it protects the right to a public hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal within reasonable time, the presumption of innocence, and other minimum rights for those charged in a criminal case (adequate time and facilities to prepare their defence, access to legal representation, right to examine witnesses against them or have them examined, right to the free assistance of an interpreter).

1.In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.
2.Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
3.Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:
(a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;
(b) to have adequate time and the facilities for the preparation of his defence;
(c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;
(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;
(e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.

en.wikipedia.org...

purplemer
You said when you decided and stated that the Italian court rooms are nothing more than kangaroo courts. You are dismissive of a culture and legal system that spans back thousands of years..

Oh just stop it. Irrelevant. The length of time the legal system has been around, or what it's evolved from, has NOTHING to do with the fact that it's corrupt today. Not a darn thing. 'respect whatever it says because it comes from a system that goes back a thousand years' ??? Really? If you want to blindly trust it simply because of it's roots .. go ahead and knock yourself out. But the fact remains ... the prosecutor is corrupt and up on charges ... the evidence was suppressed ... and there isn't a lick of evidence worthy of a murder conviction for knox.

Again I challenge you (third time) ... post the evidence showing her to be guilty of murder.

purplemer

Please elaborate what does law look like to you. American law was influenced by Roman Law until the legal system sold itself out to money..

The prosecutors original theory of the crime was that it was a Satanic Sex cult murder.


Think about that for a minute; Then stop being either completely ignorant or purposely obtuse.

reply to post by FlyersFan

More straw man deflection.
The length of time Italian law has been around is irrelevant.

The Yes of course it is irrelevant. The fact that Roman law is the mother of law is irrelevant. The fact the whole of Europe has based its laws on Roman Law is irrelevant. The fact it is the oldest and most complex legal system in the world is irrelevant. The fact that the UK and USA have both been heavily influenced by Roman Law is irrelevant.

If you have any respect for law and the legal system then these things are important in the measuring of man and his deeds...

reply to post by purplemer

More deflection. IT IS CORRUPT NOW.

purplemer
Please peruse and explain to me what if anything you consider to be lacking.

What part of 'it's corrupted' don't you get? Guess you just don't want to get it ...

4th time - I challenge you - show exactly what 'evidence' proves Knox to be guilty of murder.

reply to post by FlyersFan



FlyersFan my friend that lives in the ATS severs I have no intention on providing you with the evidence that she is guilty. I am sure you are capable of ussing a search engine just as much as me. If i posted the evidence we would enter a discussion of the evidence it would be to no avail. I prefer to stick to the cold hard facts of the case and the cold hard facts of the case have proven her guilty of murder..


Really you can keep her I dont mind. She can walk a free murderer in the land of the free..

Nothing more just than justice..

purplemer
I have no intention on providing you with the evidence that she is guilty. ... I prefer to stick to the cold hard facts of the case and the cold hard facts of the case have proven her guilty of murder..

... and what EXACTLY are those cold hard facts that prove her guilty. Go ahead .... we can't wait for you to enlighten us as to how the 1,000 year old court system is infallible and incorrupt, and how they got it right with this .... give us the evidence.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Well I supplied you with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights the provision of the European Convention which protects the right to a fair trial. You have failed to show in anyway why she was not granted a fair trial. Heck you didnt even comment on it..

As I said lets try and stick to the facts. You stated it was a kangaroo court and I requested what law this kangaroo court has broken. I supplied you with a list of laws they could have broken to help you in your endeavour yet you continue to flap around like a fish out of water.

If the court is a farce as you stated... Put your money where your mouth is prove it... Heck I will even throw in a jury of straw men to make you feel more comfortable..

reply to post by FlyersFan

post the evidence showing her to be guilty of murder.

Beyond reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence required to validate a criminal conviction in most adversarial legal systems.
Here's your proof: LinkyPoo

This is fun!!

-Cheers

Never mind evidence - where was the motive?

purplemer
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

FlyersFan my friend that lives in the ATS severs I have no intention on providing you with the evidence that she is guilty. I am sure you are capable of ussing a search engine just as much as me. If i posted the evidence we would enter a discussion of the evidence it would be to no avail. I prefer to stick to the cold hard facts of the case and the cold hard facts of the case have proven her guilty of murder..


Really you can keep her I dont mind. She can walk a free murderer in the land of the free..

Nothing more just than justice..

Um, FF has provided links to pretty much everything needed to see how certain evidence has been selectively used, other evidence ignored, and also looking at the bizarre worldview of the prosecutor and his penchant for wanting Knox to be the wanton Jezebel daughter of Satan.

What cold hard facts are you talking about? All I'm seeing are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations and opinions. If you want to talk about 'cold hard facts', show some 'cold hard evidence', or stop trolling.

Have you looked at any of the links FF has provided?

purplemer
You have failed to show in anyway why she was not granted a fair trial. Heck you didnt even comment on it..

Already commented ... a fair trial means just that ... a 'fair trial'. Evidence was suppressed. Evidence showing that the crime scene was contaminated, that the knife was contaminated in the crime lab, that the knife didn't fit the wounds, that there were no 'knox bloody footprints' .... already stated that. And the prosecutor failed to give a motive. His 'she was an evil witch who killed because her roommate told her to flush the toilet' isn't a motive.

A fair trial means EVIDENCE to support the conviction. There is no evidence.
Just rag tabloid gossip slander and suppressed evidence that could clear Knox.
I gave the links. Obviously you didn't read them.


5th request - GIVE THE EVIDENCE that this woman commited the crime.

reply to post by Snarl

Again ... no evidence given.
From what was given in court - It is beyond a reasonable doubt that she did not do it.
The real murderer is already in jail and has confessed and apologized.

reply to post by FlyersFan

... and what EXACTLY are those cold hard facts that prove her guilty. Go ahead .... we can't wait for you to enlighten us as to how the 1,000 year old court system is infallible and incorrupt, and how they got it right with this .... give us the evidence.

Flyersans love. I think I need to educate you a little here.. The Roman Empire and Roman Law are far older than a thousand years. Lets get back on topic. The cold hard facts will be available if you choose to use google and find them. Reminds me of the old adage. You can take a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

Law is law and due course has been followed. I have given you ample opportunity to demonstrate that the Italian court was lacking in due process.... You have failed to rise to the challenge instead you prefer to focus on the events of the murder and in doing so have failed to substantiate why it was a kangaroo court.

purplemer
I have no intention on providing you with the evidence that she is guilty. ... I prefer to stick to the cold hard facts of the case and the cold hard facts of the case have proven her guilty of murder..

Still waiting for you to show us how we should automatically trust a court system simply because it has 1,000 year old roots. We can't wait for you to enlighten us as to how the court system is infallible and incorrupt, and how they got it right with this .... give us the evidence. Show us how the prosecution isn't corrupt. Show us how the evidence wasn't suppressed. ....

FlyersFan
5th request - GIVE THE EVIDENCE that this woman commited the crime.

Wait a sec. Did you want evidence of her guilt ... or 'proof' that she committed a crime? Let's be specific.

I showed you evidence of her guilt already. For her to have been proven guilty only requires the removal of reasonable doubt. You can cite all the botched investigative procedure until the cows come home ... if the jury was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt ... she's found guilty. In this case ... she was. We'll have to see what happens at this point.

As Wrabbit has been consistently saying: It's pretty much a matter between nations at this point.

Where's the beef?

purplemer
Flyersans love. I think I need to educate you a little here..

OMG ... funny ... thanks for the early morning chuckle.

The Roman Empire and Roman Law are far older than a thousand years.

SO WHAT???? That's got NOTHING to do with the fact that this case has been corrupted ... if the Italian court system is broken ... if the prosecutor is up on corruption charges himself ... if evidence was suppressed .... I gave links showing all these statements of mine to be true. All you keep saying is 'it's a 1,000 year old system'. SO WHAT? It's broken.

Lets get back on topic. The cold hard facts will be available if you choose to use google and find them.

I already did .. and I posted links to the 'cold hard facts'. Address the facts ...
This is a discussion forum ... so discuss it. Give the evidence that Knox committed the murder.
How many times have I asked you to back up your statement ... seven now?

Snarl
Did you want evidence of her guilt ... or 'proof' that she committed a crime? Let's be specific.

I asked for evidence showing she committed the crime. A corrupt prosecutor and a broken system that suppressed evidence of her innocence isn't 'evidence of guilt'. It's just a farce.

It's pretty clear purple is trolling at this point; needs a ban and to have that smiley taken away permanently.

CJCrawley
Never mind evidence - where was the motive?

Yeah ... according to the prosecutor, who himself is up on multiple corruption charges .... Knox is an evil witch who was into sex murders and who murdered her roommate because she told her to flush the toilet. This fictional motive is brought to you by the same Italian 'justice' system that prosecuted scientists for not predicting an earthquake ahead of time. Morons.