The Media Circus in the Amanda Knox Case
On Monday I talked about the alleged anti-Americanism in the Amanda Knox case from my perspective as an American living in Italy. The comments got a bit (a lot) out of control with a debate about whodunit, what the police did right/wrong, and all kinds of stuff that weren’t mentioned in my post.
That’s cool — I don’t want to stifle discussion, even though I’m sure many of the posters have been all over the Internet saying the same things. I’d rather comments stick more to what the post is about though, and I will be moderating more tightly on this post and on Friday’s (and the comments are also going to moderation first, so please be patient); I may also close the comments on Monday’s post, so if you have your last words, get them in now!
On the other hand, I very much appreciated reading thoughtful comments from those of you who addressed whether you felt anti-Americanism had anything to do with the Amanda Knox case — especially from those of you who have lived or currently live in Italy. I’d especially like to direct your attention to a comment posted by my friend Tina who is from Seattle but was living in Perugia at the time of the Kercher murder; I think this is a perspective hardly ever mentioned in any press.
Today I’m talking about another of my pet peeves in this case: the so-called media circus surrounding the trial. In the grand scheme of this awful case about the brutal murder of a young woman, this is absolutely a minor point in the discussion; I don’t deny that. Nonetheless, it’s something that bothers me every single time I see it mentioned in the American press, so I want to talk about it here in my personal space.
The So-Called Media Circus
The American media loves to put out the idea that Italy has made the image of Amanda Knox equivalent to that of a cold, heartless, sex-crazed killer and that Italians are salivating over every detail of this case as it happens, talking about it over their morning espresso, wondering how Knox will wear her hair tomorrow. Please.
Just. Not. True.
Regarding the alleged attacks on Knox’s character: sorry, but Italy is being confused with English/British tabloids on this one. And, by the way, regarding the tabloids, I’m in complete agreement with those who are disgusted with some of their coverage on this case. For me, the Foxy Knoxy crap — along with the “Rudy Guede, drug-dealing drifter” stuff — was vile, and continues to be.
Now to be fair, Italian and American news organizations also published sensationalistic headlines, albeit more about Guede than about Knox in the case of American ones. But I’m not talking about *what* was published. I’m talking about how much people cared in Italy, or the so-called media circus regarding the case.
Or put another way, “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”
The simple truth is that this case wasn’t and isn’t a big media deal in Italy outside of Perugia; several of my friends throughout Italy have confirmed that this has been their experience in their far-off corners of the Bel Paese as well. There are, were, and will be national news stories when important trial events come up, but by no means is this a story that has gripped a nation.
I’m not saying the lack of interest is a good or bad thing. I’m only discussing it here to give those outside of Italy an accurate sense of what the climate has been like here regarding this case: there hasn’t been much of one.
To put it in perspective, as someone who comes from the country of O.J. Simpson’s Trial of the Century, I can honestly say this case never came close to that level of interest outside of Perugia. There simply has been no media circus unless you go looking for it on the Internet, in which case, well, you can find anything on the Internet, can’t you?
Part of the reason this misconception bothers me so much is the discussion of the sex angle, which my fellow American expat bloggers in Italy Michelle and NYC/Caribbean ragazza mentioned in their comments to Monday’s post; American “journalists” want to make it seem like Italians were so aghast by any mentions of sex in this case that they were ready to convict Sollecito, Guede, and especially Knox because of it.
The real Italy we live in, though, just isn’t as puritanical as the United States on such things. On Monday Michelle wrote, and I wholeheartedly agree:
Another angle that is much discussed in the U.S. media which isn’t such a big deal here is the whole “wild sex” aspect. The U.S. media makes it seem like the Italians (who are all ostensibly devout Catholics and reserved about their sexuality) have persecuted Amanda because she was a “free-spirited American woman involved in some kind of kinky sex game.” I don’t think Italians really care about the sex aspect. Anyone over in the U.S. who thinks that is the case need only come over here and turn on the TV. What they will see is that Italians flaunt sexuality in yogurt ads and that topless women in g-strings dance on evening programs meant for the whole family. Italy may be home to the Vatican, but Italians have fewer sexual hang-ups (IMO) than Americans do.
So, please, American “journalists,” stop calling this Italy’s trial of the century and painting a picture of this country that just isn’t true. Exaggerations may help to build a better story, but this is yet another reason why you lose credibility with those of us who live here — and why those who don’t live here should be careful about believing everything you “report.”
Come back Friday when I’ll talk about the evidence outlined in the motivazioni della sentenza, the court’s opinion in the case; Americans who have been led to believe Knox was convicted based on her strange behavior may be surprised by what the judges and jury actually heard regarding physical evidence and eyewitness testimony.
Fellow Americans and foreigners in Italy as well as Italian natives, I’m especially interested in hearing your opinions and experiences, so please add your two beans! The same goes for everyone else too, of course. Please let’s try to remain civil and respectful. Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
[PHOTO CREDITS: All on Flickr via Creative Commons license: Circus by Thomas Totz; English tabloids by saschapohfleep on Flickr; Perugia: Università degli Stranieri by Francesco Gasparetti]
75 Beans of Wisdom to “The Media Circus in the Amanda Knox Case”
« Older Comments
Michelle Fabio is an American attorney-turned-freelance writer living in her family's ancestral village in Calabria, Italy and savoring simplicity one sip at a time.
Affiliates, Sponsors & Supporters
Nutella E-book for Sale
Logo by:
Recipes
O.Fallaci,
You wrote:
“Rudy Guede was caught, brought into the police station and booked for the 6 crimes. He was not convicted of them, due to “lack of evidence”.
In other words, there was no evidence that Rudy Guede had committed these six crimes. Thanks for clarifying this important point.
Seriously we’re done with Guede unless O. has more to say on this; now I’m wishing I had just deleted the original comment from you, Harry. Uffa.
thanks for a little more light on the subject!
Thanks for reading Mimi!
mimi´s last post . . . Negative Painting – flowers
Michelle,
Ok, point taken.
I’m looking forward to reading your take on the judges’ sentencing report. I don’t expect there are many Americans who can understand Italian and have read the report.
I think both you and Saint_Michael are going to be disappointed with the post tomorrow; I don’t have a take, per se — I’m really just translating what I think are what the judges most likely based their decisions on. You two, I’m sure, will have fun in the comments regardless
I don’t care who Harry Rag is Michelle- I just wanted to know what his problem was with Amanda Knox- but since you answered for him- well I guess I will take that to the bank. In any case, I am saving my ammo for the blog on the Motivation Report.
See my most recent response to Harry
Kevin,
The knife does not match *all* the wounds on the victim. There was more than one wound on Meredith Kercher.
Amanda Knox was not interrogated overnight. She accused an innocent man in less than 2 hours time. This fragile “girl” sure came across as a strong, somewhat arrogant woman during her testimony. I doubt that escaped any court attendee’s attention.
Maya posted:
Kevin,
The knife does not match *all* the wounds on the victim. There was more than one wound on Meredith Kercher.
Amanda Knox was not interrogated overnight. She accused an innocent man in less than 2 hours time.
—————————–
1) The knife did not match the real murder weapon’s bloody silhouette on the sheet; the knife was tested improperly for LCN DNA with a plethora of ‘too low’ readouts; this evidence would be thrown out of any other court in the world without hesitation; the knife was supposedly carried around for protection in Amanda’s purse–never heard of a kitchen knife carried for protection before.
There is not a person reading this post who wouldn’t be frothing at the mouth if this piece of manufactured evidence were being used to convict him/her or a loved one of murder. No one!
2) Amanda was coerced and bullied into accusing an innocent man after 40+ hours of interrogation over a 4 day period; Amanda was interrogated by 12 people on the night of Nov. 5 into Nov. 6 (one more time, 12 people ganging up on a 20 year old American female); these 12 people plus the interrupter are the ones accusing Amanda Knox of slander for her telling the truth about the interrogation; Amanda was yelled at, lied to, and struck during the interrogation; Amanda was denied an attorney when she was obviously a ‘suspect’, not a ‘witness’ as declared by the police.
Perugian police chief Arturo De Felice declared “she buckled and made an admission of facts we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them all in”. Sure . . .
Both Amanda and Raffaele were detained in solitary confinement after their arrests with no access to attorneys until their hearings—again, they had no access to legal counsel until their hearings. The implications of this are horrific. A 20 year old female in a foreign country is interrogated without access to legal counsel; a 20 year old female in a foreign country is actually interrogated by her interpreter/translator; the 20 year old female is arrested and put into solitary-confinement; the 20 year old female is taken directly from solitary-confinement to a hearing–still no legal counsel, no access to an attorney; the hearing condemns her to spend up to 1 year behind bars while the investigation continues–no charges have been filed. Prosecutor Mignini and Judge Matteini attach the satanic sex orgy motive without any substantiating evidence. Wonder why the media went bonkers with their trashing of Amanda Knox?
Steve Moore, retired FBI agent, wrote “What the inquisitors did not achieve however, speaks volumes of Amanda’s character and innocence. No matter how hard they tried, and how manipulative and coercive they were, Amanda repeatedly denied ANY involvement in the murder, and the police could develop no feelings of guilt in her. This is not sociopathic, this is innocence.”
OK and we’re done on this too…I think there’s been plenty of Knox is guilt/Knox is innocent, no? We get that those of you who have sides have sides. Basta.
This is a really tough case since it is the perfect storm. The police bumbled the investigation from the start and the prime suspect is from another country. I do not feel it is really anti-americanism, but in any country when someone not from there is suspected of a crime it seems to be instinctual to turn on them. It is easy to blame and get angry out the outsider and pretend that someone from your own country would hurt another.
Hopefully justice will prevail and the real murderer will be the one to end up in jail.
I think that’s a very fair assessment, Tracy; thanks for coming by
O. Fallaci:
I am very interested in your information about Rudy being booked for 6 crimes in 33 days. Could you provide us with more information on this either here or possibly by email to the administrator of the injusticeinperugia dot org site.
Does your information differ from the six crimes I came up with?
Thank you
Letting this in just in case O. wants to respond to this, but otherwise Guede’s criminal or non-criminal history is still a topic that’s over as far as I’m concerned.
“Americans who have been led to believe Knox was convicted based on her strange behavior may be surprised by what the judges and jury actually heard regarding physical evidence and eyewitness testimony.”
Michelle, this is VERY similar to the words Barbie Nadeau used in an interview where she said that Americans were not aware of all the evidence against Knox. Both of you are American expats living in Italy which I find a very interesting connection. Do you know her? Is there something about being an expat that makes one want to show that they are not biased in favor of America?
Don’t know Nadeau, and I don’t personally have any reason to show I’m not biased for America or Italy…to me, there is truly evidence that points in different directions.
Barbie went on to embarrass herself by saying “There were 5 spots of blood mixed… Amanda Knox’s blood and Meredith Kercher the victim’s blood found throughout the house in 5 different areas”. This is truly evidence that Americans or anyone else is unaware of since it isn’t true.
Have you read the motivazioni? That’s not exactly what’s in there as what they found as evidence, but it sure is close.
I think most people in either country will only be aware of bits and pieces of information from the news. Not everyone has looked into the case beyond that, which is understandable. After speaking with many Italians about the case those who think Amanda Knox is guilty usually bring up the knife information. They do not realize how week that evidence is in every way. They are hearing the news bit ‘Knox DNA on handle, Kercher DNA on blade’. I won’t go into how and why here but will say the knife evidence will probably be thrown out during the appeal.
That very well may be true, but you can’t deny that the judges in the original trial found it credible and based their decision partly on it; if you want to argue the strength/weakness of the evidence, that’s a different issue — but you can’t say it didn’t exist. It does. And tomorrow I’ll be providing the page numbers of the motivazioni to let you know where you can find the evidence the judges found against Knox.
Sept79,
I remember you and the lovely comments you’ve made in the past about the victim’s family at the Italian Woman’s Table.
I give you that the *defense* has tried to dispute that said knife matches the stain on the sheet. What you fail to disclose is that the knife does *indeed* match at least one of the wounds on the victim. I think we all know, regardless of fence-side, exactly which wound that is, don’t we? While it may not match *all* wounds, it does match (at least) *one* very important wound on the body of the victim, Meredith Kercher.
Please recall that while the media circus would have you believe Ms. Knox suffered countless hours of interrogation (while never mentioning the hours spent by Filomena, Laura, Sophie, et al), the final one came about because Ms. Knox chose to show up at the station even though she had not been summoned. In less than 2 hours, (not 40 or 50 or overnight or whatever the PR circus is reporting now) she accused an innocent man.
Sorry Michelle, this is your place and I don’t blame you if you don’t post this. My original post was to Kevin in an effort to balance his skewered facts.
Best,
Maya
I’ll post this mostly because I just got a message from a previous commenter who has taken his toys and is going home b/c I wouldn’t publish yet another comment about Guede after I explicitly said that topic was done on this blog (and this comment referenced voodoo!); I appreciate, Maya, in this moment, that you at least recognize I am entitled to some steering of the comments if I feel they’re getting too off-course. And notice, btw, how strict I am with the 100+ comments on the anti-Americanism post…sheesh.
Hang in there, baby! You’re a breath of fresh air. Even if you have made me want goats now. Thanks a lot. : )
My goats have seen a lot of me this week as I go to them to restore my sanity…goatie cuddles cure a lot. Who knew?!
In an April 2010 appearance on MSNBC Barbie Latza Nadeau states:
“There was a lot of information that was just never reported here in the United States.”
Let’s see. Barbie wrote at least 20 articles about the case between Newsweek and the Daily Beast. Why didn’t she report all this information?
As an example of this information that was never given to the American public she states:
“There were 5 spots of blood mixed… Amanda Knox’s blood and Meredith Kercher the victim’s blood found throughout the house in 5 different areas that were recovered after the use of luminal which is used to recover blood that’s been cleaned up.”
Her statement is completely and categorically false. In fact there were no samples of mixed blood. What authorities found was Meredith’s blood mixed with the DNA of Amanda Knox. Amanda lived there; here DNA was already there when Meredith’s blood came along.
What you’re doing is arguing one side; if you have read the court opinion, you know that the court accepts an explanation as to why DNA and blood doesn’t get mixed as easily as you just described — and why they admitted into evidence certain samples (to be discussed tomorrow in my post).
Let me emphasize again the lack of transparency in the Italian system. The trial record would include information on what tests were performed on which samples, what the results were and how the results could be interpreted by both sides. This information is not available to the public as it is in other western democracies. The reason that Italian law does not want this information in the public domain is to shield a corrupt and dysfunctional judicial system from public scrutiny.
Now it’s clear you haven’t read the motivazioni.
Compare this to the judicial action against Judge Michael Heavey, the judge in Seattle who is accused of misconduct for speaking up for Amanda Knox and criticizing the quality of justice in Perugia. Documents from Judge Heavey’s case are available as we speak from the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct web site in pdf format.
Way, way off-topic.
“but you can’t say it didn’t exist.”
When people say Amanda Knox was convicted with no evidence it doesn’t mean that they think there was no evidence presented by the prosecution. It means that the evidence presented against her and Sollecito have been too week to seriously considered as evidence.
That may be true for you, Tori, but I have heard with my own two ears people saying Knox was convicted based on nothing, based on how she acted — on American television to be exact.
I do not understand in any way how the forensic team could be allowed to pick up the bra clasp off of the floor in a pile of dust 47 days later and then use it as evidence. The chain of custody was broken. Why wasn’t it processed correctly during the original evidence collection? The knife evidence is another example. It doesn’t even meet standard of worthy of being presented at trial. The shoe prints being attributed to RS until a family member proved the truth would have been presented otherwise. The prosecutor attending his own trial for abuse of office at the same time, more and more. Why were independent forensic experts denied to the defense?
Getting back to the media. The easy sound bites were easy to sell – DNA on knife and bra clasp. These stick in people’s minds. It is a lot less juicy to say the bra clasp had four other peoples DNA on it also and was found in a compromised crime scene.
Again, you are making arguments, which you’re certainly entitled to do — but the judges didn’t *believe* that side. That’s how court decisions work.
I have read the Motivation. Remember though that the motivation is an explanation of how they came to the guilty verdict.
As I wrote to someone before you, please don’t insult my intelligence. I used to help write appellate court decisions, so I’m well aware of what court opinions are.
In the motivation the murder wasn’t planned. To explain the use of the kitchen knife from RS’s apartment it comes up with the theory that Amanda carried this large kitchen knife in her purse for protection. It is ridiculous. I have also read the Appeals of both AK and RS. They are extremely strong. I have pretty much lost trust in the Perugia judicial system and have no idea if they will be seriously looked at. I can only hope so. Have you read the appeals yet?
No and to be honest, I’m not planning on it; this week has really been all of this case I ever wanted and more.
Hi Michelle,
As someone with both a legal background and a speaker of Italian, one thing that has been gnawing away at me for a while … from what i understand of the Judges Report, if Knox and Sollecito successfully appeal their conviction and are declared Non Copevole, wouldn’t Rudy Guede also have to be released?
I seem to recall that the three convictions are all tied together, and that the release of any one would result in the subsequent release of all three, and would transfer the crime back to unsolved cases file.
My understanding is that this is because the judge believed that Rudy could only have gained access from someone inside the house (i.e. Knox) and that Knox couldn’t have committed the crime on her own.
Mille grazie!
~Uncle
I’m afraid I don’t have a background in Italian law, though, and that’s what matters in questions like that
I had read somewhere along the line that the judge specifically left Guede out of most of the opinion so his case wouldn’t be “tied” to K & S’s, but I honestly can’t remember where I read that or who wrote it, so I have no idea whether it’s accurate. Perhaps someone else knows?
“As I wrote to someone before you, please don’t insult my intelligence. I used to help write appellate court decisions, so I’m well aware of what court opinions are.”
Sorry, didn’t mean it like that. I just meant that of course it will point to guilt because it is explaining how they arrived at a guilty verdict.
I know. I’m just a bit cranky and tired — and I got somewhat attacked on a message board for saying that a court opinion is anything BUT balanced. I suppose you can guess which “side” the message board is on
“No and to be honest, I’m not planning on it; this week has really been all of this case I ever wanted and more.”
We’ll see how I feel about the appeals when it’s closer to the time they’re coming up; maybe I’ll be ready by then
I’m afraid I don’t have a background in Italian law, though, and that’s what matters in questions like that
Agreed, but many thanks anyways, Michelle … you seem to be the lone voice of reason in this storm, it is a bit tedious trudging through the cut & paste arguments from both sides of the guilty / not guilty fence!
Here in the northeast US, I’ve been impaneled twice, and was foreman once, so I tend to look from the that angle. I often wonder what it would have been like to have served on this jury, and how I would parse the different arguments and conflicting testimonies.
~Uncle
Me too, Uncle; in fact, as I’ll write tomorrow, it’s really hard to get a good grip on a case (including understanding a decision) without seeing it live. Thank you, btw, for your kind words.
“The simple truth is that this case wasn’t and isn’t a big media deal in Italy”
I’m reflecting on what would make a big story, especially if it is based on things I have personally discussed with family and friends. The oil spill in the gulf is very big news to me, even emotional to see the effect on nature it has had. I haven’t had a great deal of conversations about it though. I’ve talked with a few people for a short time if it comes up but mostly comments like ‘this is so tragic’ and not much more.
It is the same with the Amanda Knox case. I have very strong opinions about it but have only really discussed it with one friend. There is no regular talk about Amanda Knox in my city. I’ve heard the same from a British friend. That this is a dead story. News stories don’t last because there is always something new coming up. There was an earthquake in Haiti, world cup football, elections. Plus, I think most people talk about their personal lives, friends, family and work more often than news topics. If I want to discuss the case I end up going online. I think this is largely true of most new stories and isn’t enough to judge what is a big story. I think a better way to judge the interest in a story might be by the number of articles, blogs, video segments, FB and other sites that are discussing the subject.
I appreciate your insight, but I disagree; first of all, I think it depends on your family and friends as to what you talk about. I have certain family and friends with whom I discuss a lot of current events, and others very little — so I don’t think you can really judge one way or the other based on what you, as an individual, talk about (although I do think I, as an American, can glean something from the fact that NO Italian here has ever asked me about the Knox case when they couldn’t shut up about Obama in 2008).
There are stories, though, that truly capture the public’s attention and even people who aren’t interested in it can’t get away from it — those are what I would describe as media circuses. And believe me (as someone else mentioned here in the comments), Italy knows how to do circus and shove a story down your throat; you literally can’t turn on the major channels without finding a story on about it on a nightly basis, there are documentaries thrown together immediately and shown in prime time, the newspapers have several articles about it every single day, etc. They often involve children or young people in Italy, in fact.
I don’t think keeping track of what’s on the Internet is a very good indication at all as any boob with a signal can post as much as they want…and again, if people aren’t paying attention, does it even matter?
To put it in more concrete terms, in my lifetime, I consider the following to have been media circuses (off the top of my head): OJ Simpson trial, Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky scandal, Scott/Lacey Peterson — these all in America. In Italy, even the 2008 US Presidential election was a media circus. You just could *not* get away from the coverage even here, especially about Obama (who I like, btw, but it was still ridiculous). I think the same could be said of the election in the US as well — I could not get on FB without being flooded with people sharing info about the election (I was guilty as well). THAT is interest, and that is a circus, IMHO. But again, thanks for your comment
Hi Michelle:
If you’ve helped write appellate court decisions it was presumably as a law clerk during or after law school. It takes pretty good credentials to clerk at the appellate level.
As one of the most heavily criticized trials in modern European history, the case is both historically important and of great interest to legal scholars. Some talking points:
1) What is your view on the lack of access to the trial record? There are exactly two documents available to the general public: The Motivation document and the so-called Judge Micheli report. The fact is that not a single other document is available on the internet in its full unaltered form. Parts of the trial record have been selectively provided to favored journalists by a corrupt prosecution team. The public wants to see if Massei and company knew what they were doing. It’s not enough to take his word for it. Surely you understand the importance of public access to the trial record.
What do you think of the “judge” who reduced Rudy Guede’s sentence by 14 years because he thought that Rudy had apologized to the victim’s family? English language media outlets all reported that this WAS the Judge’s reasoning. How could anybody think that Rudy’s apology for not doing enough to save the victim should be taken seriously?
2) Isn’t it troubling that jurors were apparently never told that the standard for guilt was proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I would like to see the judge’s instructions to the jury. Wouldn’t you?
3) What is your take on “Judge” Massei’s claims that there is no need to test the apparent semen stain underneath the victim? This would seem to be surreal.
4) Aren’t you troubled by the fake HIV test? Just imagine if something like that had happened in the US.
5) Don’t you think that’s Mignini’s allegations that Doug Preston and Mario Spezi were aiding a serial killer called into question his mental fitness to perform his duties?
6) Why do you think the police carefully chose not to record any conversations in which they participated?
7) Aren’t you troubled that jury members were not instructed to only consider what was presented in court? Barbie Nadeau criticizes Tim Egan for writing an editorial critical of the court. She talks about how insulted the jurors were by this. They’re sleeping in court and their angry about a newspaper article. These are very real questions for legal scholars.
These are the only points I can think of right now. There maybe more.
Interesting questions, and I’m sorry I really don’t have the time or inclination to answer, but perhaps someone else does, in which case even though this is slightly off the main topic, I’ll allow it
Prosecutor Mignini, who was convicted for abuse of power in January 2010 and whos’s charges against 20 innocent people were dropped in April 2010, due to lack of evidence (falsly accused), said, “It grieved me to have to ask for a life sentence for a woman of only 22 and a man of 25, but yes, I have suffered over this. It is not easy to ask for life sentences for two young people in their twenties. I too am a human being. I, too, have a heart, but my job is to defend justice. I believe they did it.”
In my opinion most people are sexual and most people don’t care about much except their-self and sometimes immediate family.
I’ll let this is as tangential…and at least you didn’t mention Guede!
I haven’t lived in Calabria that long yet and I’m sure I still miss a lot because I’m still learning the language, but frankly, I have not heard one single word about
this case from anyone here. There also doesn’t seem to be any Anti-Americanism of any importance here. What little I’ve encountered has mostly come from vacationing or expat Brits– I’m sure I’m oversensitive about it because I’m not particularly proud of much that my country has accomplished in these past few decades.
I guess I’m getting old, but I’m SO tired of this type of polarized discussion where nobody convinces anyone of anything..the internet seems completely saturated with this stuff already.
I think I’m getting old too, Di……
Di´s last post . . . With Love from Calabria
Di:
Your write, “I guess I’m getting old, but I’m SO tired of this type of polarized discussion where nobody convinces anyone of anything..the internet seems completely saturated with this stuff already.”
The public debate about this case is legitimate and important. This is how citizens make the world a better place and it will not go away until Italy comes to its senses and frees the two hostages.
Not putting words in Di’s mouth, but what is happening here and has surely happened elsewhere isn’t a debate — it’s two sides shouting at each other. There’s a big difference. No one has said that fighting for Knox (and Sollecito and Guede’s?) freedom isn’t a valuable thing, or that fighting to keep them in prison isn’t either. But there’s no discussion here; only I’m right and you’re wrong, and that simply doesn’t get anything accomplished. Look at Washington D.C.
Now for Harry Rag’s comments about Mignini:
This is a man who thought that the authors Doug Preston and Mario Spezi were aiding a serial killer. The idea that Preston and Spezi were aiding a serial killer is a joke. Mignini’s other bizarre theories in the Monster of Florence case received widespread and well deserved ridicule. He did the same thing in Amanda’s case where he became obsessed with theory that would have no parallel in the history of crime.
It is not just Americans who are saying this; a Florentine prosecutor, Luca Turco, describes Mignini as “in thrall to a sort of delirium.”
The man is not mentally fit to hold office and all of Italy should be ashamed of their failure to have already removed him from office.
Personally I’m not ashamed. He doesn’t represent me in any way so I don’t have any reason to be — have you had a look at each an every US prosecutor to make sure they’re respectable? Please. Mignini discussion is now over too, especially after what I posted today about how the motivazioni discounted a lot of his theories anyway.
I see a great deal of patience and tolerance on Michelle’s part (I don’t know how she puts up with some of this….).
Speaking as someone who has a fraction of Michelle’s legal training, but who nonetheless has worked in the legal field for years, I think many of the posters are ignoring the very aspect of Michelle’s posting that makes her thinking and reasoning process very different and unique: she has EXTENSIVE legal training and experience.
I believe that what Michelle is pointing out is: from a trained legal professional’s perspective, there WAS evidence in this case upon which a court of law based its opinion. Michelle stipulated that she did not weigh the evidence, she hadn’t reviewed everything from the trial, she wasn’t there, but she was so generously providing us, the readers, with some parts of the motivazioni (statement of decision-ish) that she thought might provide some new information to those who think there was NO evidence.
Not to get technical, but NO evidence is different than BAD evidence, GOOD evidence, CONVINCING evidence. Evidence is admitted or not admitted based on the evidence and procedural laws of the country, and the jury or trier of fact gets to weigh the evidence. The jury is free to completely not believe evidence, not find a witness credible, etc…I am generalizing here, but that is the gist.
My point? This case has been highly emotional because of the media coverage, the “anti-American” accusations, the fact a lovely young woman lost her life in a horrible way. But, a big BUT, not every posting has to be about EVERY aspect of this case. There was a legal decision and a sentence rendered in this case and it is being appealed.
For gosh sakes, don’t bully people into making such obvious statements just to protect their integrity (such as having to reassure everyone that innocent people should not be in prison?)- don’t we all “know” Michelle by now, that she is a lover and not a fighter? And isn’t it GREAT that so many Americans in Italy (not speaking for myself) haven’t felt an anti-American sentiment?
I have to admit that I’ve gone back and forth on this one – several times, and still don’t hold a strong opinion of guilt or innocence concerning Knox. However, having lived in Umbria when the murder was commited, during the period before the trial, during the trial and including sentencing, I think it’s safe to say that the Corriere del’Umbria mentioned something about the case/trial 3-4 times a weeks. If nothing was happening the coverage dropped off, but in general, the coverage was pretty non-stop. Most of what we read painted Knox in a negative way and the details were sensationalized as much as possible.
As Americans we never felt any anti-American sentiment towards us personally, nor do I think there was an anti-American sentiment towards Knox.
Thanks for your perspective, Barbara!
Barbara´s last post . . . HONOR FLIGHTS HONOR WWII VETS
“What they will see is that Italians flaunt sexuality in yogurt ads and that topless women in g-strings dance on evening programs meant for the whole family. Italy may be home to the Vatican, but Italians have fewer sexual hang-ups (IMO) than Americans do.”
As someone who has lived in Italy for more than 10 years, I can second this opinion. And I do not feel that there is any anti-American sentiment in this case here in Italy. I’ve heard no comments to this effect from Italians – who are in general very pro-American.
You are doing a great job here Michelle!
Best,
Alex
Alex´s last post . . . BBC’s John Simpson Awarded 2010 Ischia Prize
I’m sorry to those of you who still have valuable insights to be made, but I’m no longer interested in refereeing the comments here, so I’m closing them. If you’d like to email me, feel free, but if you’d like to continue arguing your side of the case — whichever that may be — I suggest you go find one of the many forums dedicated to this case online.
Thank you all for reading, but I’m starting this week fresh and clean of stress, and that includes not having to wade through countless comments that have nothing to do with what I posted.