I typed up this bit as a response to someone on twitter but I turned it into a blog because I think it shows why Americans are irritated over this entire ordeal...
.@pataz1 Thank you for all the info on the case and clarification on Italy’s legal system. Here is my response, and I hope you take the time to read it all. Correct me if I am misunderstanding the system correctly but if your opinions do not match my opinions, I respectfully disagree. At least you will understand what Americans are thinking.
I will start by saying that I have not followed the case in great detail, but have given it some attention. I am not going to pretend I know much more than what the media has said as far as the facts go. My issue is with the system in general, at least compared to the American system. I am not saying the American system is perfect, far from it. I have many issues with the American system, but that is another conversation. Here is my American perspective…
I believe someone is should have the right to receive compensation for losses (even though a life is not replaceable, I believe the person that committed the crime should be held accountable.) But I also believe innocent until proven guilty. I also believe in the accused getting a fair and timely trial.
In America, one has a criminal trial and is either convicted or not convicted based on the evidence. They have a right to appeal the court’s ruling if they do not find it satisfactory. If sufficient cause or evidence is found, there is a case in the Court of Appeals. The issues or evidence in question is then reexamined. The conviction is either then upheld or there is an acquittal. In my opinion, justice has been served. The prosecution had two chances to prove their case and did not (all while the accused was incarcerated.) The accused (assumed innocent) was found not guilty after two trials. I believe in the rights of the accused and to drag them through more and more hearings is incredibly UNFAIR. I do not care how anyone feels. They had two chances to make their claim. As much as I sometimes hate the result, this is the fair result. In American eyes, Knox faced those that accused her, justly or unjustly, and won. She is free.
My original comment was that Italy’s SYSTEM is a joke. That is based on what happens next. As the source that you sent me stated, “As Italy does not recognize the judgment as final until it is affirmed by the Supreme Court, defendants are not placed in double jeopardy as a result of overturned acquittals.”
This is where my opinion comes in. The case is closed (in America) but apparently Italy’s Supreme Court has the time to review all trials. Why does their supreme court have this kind of time, nothing else to deal with? Why not have the supreme court do the case start to finish? It seems like a lot of extra work. Maybe the Supreme Court could decide better than a trial with a jury? But then why have trials with a jury in the first place, just for the Supreme Court to make sure they “got it right?” This part I find to be a waste of time and money. Redo the system. Have the Supreme Court decide all the cases…
It is the next part that I find outrageous. In the article you provided (http://aklwei.wordpress.com/2013/09/24/knox-lawyer-continuation-of-same-case-on-appeal/), it states this…
In Italy, prosecutors and lawyers for interested parties, such as Kercher’s family, can file an appeal. Unlike American courts of appeal, which only consider legal errors in the courts below, Italian courts of appeal, which are comprised of both judges and jurors, can reconsider the facts of a case.
Depending on the Italian high court’s reason for overturning Knox’s acquittal, it is possible that the court of appeals could consider new evidence that’s introduced, said Dalla Vedova. As a result, a defendant can effectively be retried in the course of one case in Italy.
“Interested" parties can file an appeal!? How insanely unfair is that to the accused, especially after already going through a trial?” I do not know if you have kids, but I do. If one of my children were murdered, I would want the person hung in my back yard (unlike most liberals, I am very pro death penalty.) Here is the catch. As long as the family BELIEVES the person did it, it will bring them closure. It does not matter if the person in innocent or guilty, just that the family BELIEVES justice was served. If we are going to base the legal system on beliefs, why have courts at all? Why not just pray to Jesus for the answer? Time and time and time again, I have had to crush people’s beliefs on something, hell, I have had my own beliefs proven incorrect. But apparently in Italy, belief is enough of a reason to keep dragging someone through the mud. There is no factual or logical reason for this to be able to happen.
BUT they did say a trial could continue if new evidence was brought to the table. I agree with that, so what is the new evidence? Do they have something new or are they going over the same crap they had before. And why did they not have enough evidence in the first two trials? Did the prosecution bring the case to trial too quickly? Typically new evidence is something very damning, like finding a note where you admit the crime or the buried body or something.
This case started in 2007. It is now 2014 and by the looks of it, may not be close to being over. How is that fair? What is wrong with the system? And what about Raffaele Sollecito?
From what I have read, this guy was incredibly wishy-washy on his statements, and probably did it. Yet there is this fixation on Amanda Knox. Why? Because her family BELIEVES she did it.
My view as an outsider is the entire system is a joke and clearly the detective work and forensics is shoddy at best. I mean they could not even handle and store the evidence properly? Can you see why we might see it as a witch hunt?
I am not saying Knox is innocent but many people in America have gotten off or been convicted based on based bad forensics or crappy lawyers. Many people have gotten off on much more air-tight cases than this one. You messed up (best case) or are simply wrecking someone’s life because of a belief (worse case,) get over it, learn from the mistakes and improve the system.
This has nothing to do with America vs. Italy, I am not a football (soccer for the Americans) fan. If she is guilty, prove it, in a reasonable and fair way, and hang her for all I care. I just feel she has done more than enough to be acquitted of this crime. If she is found guilty, I will just never be happy with the verdict based on the ineptitude of the entire event…nothing personal…