Amanda Knox Guilty Again

christopherj

Today an Italian court has declared that Amanda Knox is, once again, guilty. She did not attend that trial (is not required to in Italy), so her final verdict will be either by appeal to the Supreme Court of Italy or the US extradition court. Extradition requests might be impeded due to the fact US does not have double jeopardy.

Previously on LessWrong, in The Amanda Knox Test: How an Hour on the Internet Beats a Year in the Courtroom there was some complaint that it actually took more than an hour on the internet to thoroughly research the case. Of course, the courts have been at this since 2007...

Her co-defendant, Raffaele Sollecito, who did show up at the trial, got sentenced to 25 years, but I don't know for sure where he is now because apparently he's totally unimportant and who cares (the media's opinion, not mine). I'm fairly sure he's in Italy though. So far it seems the plan is to revoke his passport but not arrest him.

Anyone want to take their hand at making predictions?

Will the final appeal find Amanda Knox and/or Raffaele Sollecito innocent or guilty?
When will the trial end? edit: I mean the inevitable appeal
If convicted, will the US extradite Amanda Knox?

Anyone want to take their hand at making predictions?

Will the final appeal find Amanda Knox and/or Raffaele Sollecito innocent or guilty?
When will the trial end? edit: I mean the inevitable appeal
If convicted, will the US extradite Amanda Knox?

In a country which repeatedly elected a known criminal who escaped conviction through various shady means to the top post, it is hard to tell whether even the Supreme Court will bother with looking for truth. Additionally, according to Wikipedia,

The Court of Cassation cannot overrule the trial court's interpretation of the evidence but can correct a lower court's interpretation or application of the law.

so there is not nearly as much latitude in what the court can do, compared to SCOTUS. So, if the Supreme Court gets to hear the case, I'd give it 50/50 odds of the conviction being substantially upheld.

In a country which repeatedly elected a known criminal who escaped conviction through various shady means to the top post

blushes with embarrassment

6komponisto12y

...except that they already did completely overrule the trial court's interpretation of the evidence when they canceled the acquittal last March. So, they could certainly do it again, in the opposite direction, if they were so inclined. (I'm not predicting they will be so inclined.) In Italy, the "interpretation or application of the law" includes the reasoning about the evidence used by the lower court; this is the loophole they use to disagree with lower courts about the facts of the case when they feel like it.

0private_messaging12y

The important question here is, can the supreme court say that the evidence does not meet the standard of reasonable doubt? Is that a matter of interpretation of the evidence, or a matter of the application of the law?

11

Amanda Knox Guilty Again

11

11

11

Amanda Knox Guilty Again

11

11