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

[margerykemp]

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

Hang your heads in shame!

agree blinks

Having lived in Italy, including the time that Meredith Kercher was murdered, it was clear that Rudy Guede was going to be in prison for a long, long time if there was so much as a shred of evidence against him. I have no idea if Knox and Sollecito had anything to do with the murder but I also have very little faith in the Italian justice system, especially when it comes to a black man.

As far as Knox goes, as she was eventually found innocent of murder, I hope that she doesn't end up paying for the original guilty verdict for her whole life.

To the original OP... YABU. When someone is convicted of murder, people will talk about them as a murderer. Murderers generally aren't very nice people

"do the rules about not making money off murder apply to police overtime, forensic scientists, prosecution lawyers and barristers... Or just the accused?" That is entirely different.

book deals, tv chat shows, films... etc - you are turning the death of a young girl into entertainment.

If Amanda Knox had any feeling for Meredith at all then she will want to step away from this and resume a normal life, not turn Meredith's murder into a spectacle thae that turns her (Knox) into a celebrity.

and let's not also forget that the verdict for slander stands, and thus the three year sentence for slander. so in actual fact Amanda Knox has been imprisoned for just one year longer than she should have been.

think you need to look further into how PL's name was even mentioned, wannabe.

Well, I think it's fair to say that there has been a miscarriage of justice regarding the imprisonment and release of AK and RS.

We just don't know if that happened four years ago with their imprisonment or yesterday with their release, and we probably never will.

The courts found them guilty four years ago and now, according to the OP, we are expected to apologise for bad language while condemning AK, having blindly believed the courts to have made the right decision at the time. And yet now we are also expected to blindly believe they have got it right second time around.

But I think it's reasonable to find it distasteful that either one of them may go on to profit from this. And the reason I say so is the behaviour Knox indulged in before they were found guilty. Cartwheels in the police station and posing for photo's with machine guns do not bode well for a respectful consideration of Meredith and her family right now.

AK was able to get a job writing a rock video from her prison cell. She seems resourceful, so she shouldn't need to rely on interviews about Meredith and her time in prison to make money now she is free.

Innocent or guilty? I think the Scottish law system would have had a better way of putting it;

'Not Proven'.

Meredith's Kercher's family must be devastated and AK and RS have the rest of their lives with the finger of suspicion pointed at them.

If they are innocent I am happy they are free but I am not convinced of their innocence at all.

'not proven' isn't applicable in this case as they are saying she is innocent. According to the court there is no doubt about that - obviously the public make up their own mind on that. The Not Proven verdict has a lot of critics as well.

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

Meredith's family are destroyed. Let me assure you they do not have closure although they do know what happened to their daughter.
They know more than you are able to know.

It goes to show what a shit load of money and influence can do for you. The Kerchers did not have money, or influence, but they did have justice for a brief while and now even that has been ripped from them.

How AK's defence lawyers can sleep at night I don't know. It's nauseating.

blinks no, she is guilty of slander.

If we have to accept that she is innocent of murder then you have to accept she is guilty of slander.

You can't have it both ways.

The judge yesterday went much farther than simply saying 'not proven' or that they were free due to lack of evidence. He said quite clearly that they had not done the crime.

They are innocent, absolutely innocent. And AK's parents have actually been less vocal than Raffaele's family, though that gets no mention on here. Because he's not American, so not as much fun for the conspiracy theorists. Or the papers.

I fail to see how supporting the release of two people who were totally innocent of the murder is a slap in the face to Meredith's family. The Kerchers have been put through hell, but by the Italian police and justice system, and not by AK and RS.

As for AK naming Lumumba, she served 3 years in prison for that, and has been ordered to pay his legal fees and damages. She has paid for cracking under interrogation. And she stands no chance of being paid for the defamation meted out to her by the Italian prosecutors.

Yes wanneBe but slaner is far from murder; very far.

RIZZO are you saying you a personal friend of the Kerchers or that you ahve secret info? becuase if you do you really want to go to the police with that, not drop hints on a parenting forum.

I don't know whether Amanda Knox was involved in the murder or not. However, the whole trial leaves a nasty taste in my mouth. I feel so sorry for the victim's family.

DoNotPress - I have no wish to attention-seek or 'drop hints'. I haven't got involved on here about it before, but it's such a desperately sad day and I simply felt compelled to speak up when I hear that the Kerchers "have closure" when yes, I do know personally that they do not. Like it's ok for them because at least Guede is in prison.

Of course there's more to know, not just in evidence but in how the case has been handled, and the Kerchers have been so dignified. It's wrong that people with money can get a guilty verdict overturned. It makes me sick.

As far as I can see there was definitely reasonable doubt so she shouldn't have been charged in the first place.

I can't believe people think they have the right to pass judgment on how she behaved afterwards. Students who are travelling don't have a care in the world and they do often lead lives that appear 'wild' to other people. I don't think the fact she was kissing her boyfriend after it happened implies any guilt on her part - in fact it's not really an abnormal thing to do if something traumatic has happened.

Of course they don't have closure, it would be silly to suggest otherwise.

But why would people with money be removed from appeals system? any suggestion that would be OK is in fact sickening. The appeals system exists for a reason.

Yes there is more evidence, but we don't know who is incriminated by that or whether the Kervcher's are aware of the nature of this. If theyw ere then bizarre things are occurring but I will not reject the court verdict brcause someone on a website said they knew of evidence.

"The judge ... said quite clearly that they had not done the crime."

That surprises me, I have not heard him say that but I would need to see in Italian I suppose what exactly he did say, I have just heard it translated over the top of the original video. I am not doubting your word but I find it surprising if he said expressly that they are innocent tbh.

But Rizzo, if they are innocent does it matter if they had money to get the verdict overturned if the new verdict of innocent is the correct one?

I read somewhere on this thread or another that people said RG had confessed to the crime. I don't know about this. I had a good look around online and I cannot find anywhere that he confessed to it. He agreed to a fast track trial which I suppose could be seen as a tacit confession but he probably did it knowing that this way he would be out in 5-8 years time and otherwise who knows when he'd be out. He has admitted he was there - since they found his unflushed poo down the loo and so on but not to involvement in the crime so far as I can make out.

yes of course slander is different to murder.

But the point I am making is that people are repeatedly saying that AK served four years for murder - that she was kept unjustly in prison for four years... She wasn't. AK served three years for slander, a sentence which was upheld. So in fact, AK has served just one year beyond the term which she should have served.

But she was convicted and imprisoned for murder.

As I recall she had one year added to her sentence because of accusation against the police.

From what I have read of the forensic evidence, the person whose dna was all over the place, who should not have had any dna in that room, was RG.

He is in jail, guilty of the murder.