Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that the people on here who were condeming Amanda Knox should apologise?

259 replies

margerykemp · 03/10/2011 20:57

Some of the language used by some people on here was really appauling.

Hang your heads in shame!

OP posts:
Bubbaluv · 04/10/2011 03:09

I'm surprised how many people think AK's family were dreadful to pay for an expensive PR campaign to help their child. If it were my child I would do anything. ANYTHING it took to get my child out of prison for a crime I truly believed they did not commit (maybe even if I thought they did it? Hmm )

Are you all honestly saying you would sit back and watch events unfold? Would you listen to the appaulling things the prosection was saying about the child you know and love and not spen every penny you had to make sure that people knew the other side of the story?

It sounds like people hate them for being good fund raisers!

Bubbaluv · 04/10/2011 03:12

Sweet, innocent wrongly accused people don't go around trying to frame other people in my book.

If she were terrified and confused and the police presented her with an escape hatch ("Just point your finger at him and this will all be over for you - we know he did it") she would not be the first person to cave in the name of self-preservation.

justadreamaway · 04/10/2011 07:26

Amanda Knox was not freed on a technicality. The only technicality was that there was no evidence against her or Raffaele, the only evidence that had existed having been shown to be fabricated by the police and prosecution.

I think there are a lot of cases like this. The police 'know' who committed a crime, so they frame that person. In general, they frame a guilty person, and so not much more is heard about it. One example is OJ Simpson - although he was guilty, he was acquitted because some of the physical evidence against him was planted by the LAPD. If he hadn't had such good lawyers, he would have gone to prison for the crime which he did commit.

In this case, for whatever reason the police decided that Amanda and Raffaele were guilty, so they tried to force confessions out of them, and then planted DNA evidence. By the time they found who really committed the crime, they had too much invested in the case against Amanda and Raffaele. They couldn't let them go after initially finding so much 'evidence' against them. So they went to the other extreme and talked up their participation in a Satanic sex party gone wrong.

As Bubbaluv said, the Patrick Lumumba allegations were suggested to her by the police during an interogation designed to break her psychologically. The defamation charges are just revenge on her for having shown up the Italian justice system for the sham it is.

All very sad. The fact that she is young, American and photogenic isn't why she was acquitted. But it does indicate that the might be dozens of old, nonAmerican, or nonphotogenic people in prison who are just as innocent.

widdles · 04/10/2011 07:33

in a court of law she and rafealle have now been freed but please don't let them make a penny from what has happened to meredith. No one will know for sure how why or who was involved in this terrible crime and a family have lost a daughter/sister. No financial gain should ever come from that

lassylass · 04/10/2011 08:00

Theres an awful lot of 'evil italian police' vs 'angelic amanda knox' in your post justadreamaway.

You've swallowed the Knox PR campaign hook line and sinker.

She got off on a technicality.

slavetofilofax · 04/10/2011 08:08

Didn't she get off because the technicality she was convicted on was proven to be unreliable?

differentnameforthis · 04/10/2011 08:13

What happened to the barman?

She tried to frame him for the murder & he spent about 2 weeks in jail & almost lost his family. She lead police to believe that he was some kind of violent sexual predator. All because he fired her.

justadreamaway · 04/10/2011 08:14

Nice rhetoric lassylass. What evidence do you think there was that she was guilty?

Pissfarterleech · 04/10/2011 08:18

justadreamaway yes, absolutely bang on.

There is no technicality - there was no evidence!

Guede is serving time foe the murder so the Kerchers do have closure.

She implicated the barman under intense interogation and pressure

Portofino · 04/10/2011 08:34

She DID NOT LEAD the police to believe he was some king of sexual predator. Lord - there have been numerous threads in recent days where this was all discussed in detail and people are STILL coming out with Daily Fail type comments.

noblegiraffe · 04/10/2011 08:36

Don't you think that when the prosecution start trying to fit you into a murder by saying it was a satanic sex game that they might just be a bit desperate?

Portofino · 04/10/2011 08:37

The appeal judge ruled that they being freed as they DID NOT commit the crime. The only (flimsy) evidence that put them anywhere near the crime scene was discredited.

Please feel free to discuss the evidence that makes them still guilty.

porcamiseria · 04/10/2011 08:43

why do you even give a shit OP, are you her friend?????

StealthPolarBear · 04/10/2011 08:50

This may be a silly question but do people not get compensation for wrongful imprisonment? Or does that not count when you're freed after appeal?

4madboys · 04/10/2011 09:01

in the UK you would get compensation stealth i am not sure of the system in Italy but i am guessing that yes she will be able to apply for/get compensation.

tbh i think as she has been acquited then she is innocent in the eyes of the law, so she is innocent, BUT i do think that had she not have been white, middle class etc then the american public would NOT have supported her in the way that they have!

begonyabampot · 04/10/2011 09:04

if people believed the initial verdict of 'guilty' from the Italian courts, why don't they now believe the 'non guilty' verdict? I hope justice was done yesterday and that they are innocent, I prefer to believe that than that 2 murderers walked free.

ColdSancerre · 04/10/2011 09:04

BBC say it will be difficult to get compensation as she will have to prove she has been victim of a malicious prosecution. It's in their main story on the AK/RS appeal result.

SoylentClean · 04/10/2011 09:07

Sky News last night said that she would be looking at compensation of half a million euros, but it sounded a bit like a throw away comment so I doubt it was based on much.

4madboys · 04/10/2011 09:10

have just realised that she was sentenced to 3 yrs for wronly implicating the barman? so only ONE year of her sentence has been unjustly served so she would only be able to claim for that one year? i dont know how it works?

heggertyhaggerty · 04/10/2011 09:11

I don't understand why a lot of supposition and theory about AK has seemingly been allowed while a mere whiff of McCann doubting and we all get highly castigated

It doesn't make sense.

lassylass · 04/10/2011 09:17

"What evidence do you think there was that she was guilty?"

Exactly the same evidence that the original jury convicted her on. Physical evidence and her behaviour at the time.

Throw enough sh1t and some of it sticks - which is how the PR campaign worked. Create an argument for forensic doubt, discredit the italian police and judicial system with your 'independent' experts, and repeat constantly until people cant see the wood for the trees. Thus Kercher being forgotten.

Knox will never set foot in Italy again even if she is called back to a final appeal. The USA have been bought and paid for and this was all about getting an apple-pie american girl back home from a filthy foreign jail. I'd be surprised if many of the cheerleaders even care if she did it or not.

Coming to a cinema near you soon.

noddyholder · 04/10/2011 09:22

Sad lassylass but i can't help but agree

LapsedPacifist · 04/10/2011 09:24

A man who admits his presence in the house at the time of the murder has been convicted. His DNA was all over the body and the crime scene. There was no motive or evidence for the involvement of the other 2 people, apart from their own confusion and erratic behaviour after the crime. The Satanic sex-game theory was just utterly ridiculous - not once scrap of evidence to back it up.

Portofino · 04/10/2011 09:26

Um the experts were appointed by the court. There was forensic doubt. This is nothing to do with PR. People seem to be confusing sensationalist news reporting with what actually happened. They - there were 2 of them, remember, were entitiled to appeal. They did. You only have to look at the Daily Mail fiasco last night to realise that you cannot believe what is written in the newspapers.

MilicentBystander · 04/10/2011 09:26

What rot!

There was no evidence at all that Knox was involved. Guede's DNA was on the pillow.

I suspect Knox was behaving so oddly after the murdered precisely because she was innocent and didn't think for a second she'd be framed for it.

If you had killed someone, you'd do your utmost to behave as if you hadn't.