You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

James_Miller comments on [LINK] Amanda Knox exonerated - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: fortyeridania 28 March 2015 06:15AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (58)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Izeinwinter 29 March 2015 06:07:53AM 3 points [-]

.. The thing that puzzles me here is why Knox was ever prosecuted at all. The prosecution had Guede. Who left his fingerprints all over the scene, fled the country, had a history of burglary and knives and changed his story repeatedly. That's a pretty simple and very solid case. Why the heck the prosecution insisted on trying to pin the crime on two more people who could have no plausible reason at all for conspiring with him is just inexplicable to me. I mean, traces of dna from people who lived in the apartment? Wtf? All that proves is that they indeed, lived there.

Comment author: James_Miller 29 March 2015 06:54:47PM *  2 points [-]

Selection bias in us hearing about it since a foreign government unjustly prosecuting an extremely attractive American girl is going to generate more publicity than if the girl were seen to be probably guilty.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 30 March 2015 06:23:26AM 0 points [-]

Nah, pretty girls arrested far from home get covered regardless of guilt or innocence. I've heard about the range of Australians arrested for smuggling drugs into Singapore only in the context of heavy coverage of pretty girls.