• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Serendipity. Just when we are talking about Amanda's family and entourage going against the advice of their lawyers, this comes up:


Amanda Knox's family in talks for her to give tell-all interview - after spending $1m on legal fees
By Nick Pisa In Rome
Last updated at 3:22 PM on 16th May 2010


The Daily Mail

Would any television network pay $300,000 to interview a convicted murderer? Does Italy have some sort of "Son of Sam" law? I doubt they would allow the interview to take place.
 
Would any television network pay $300,000 to interview a convicted murderer? Does Italy have some sort of "Son of Sam" law? I doubt they would allow the interview to take place.

I don't know. We'd have to ask an Italian lawyer. I know it breaks broadcasting rules in the UK under the auspices of the Press Complaints Commission. I suspect that the loophole they're trying to exploit is that the money is going to Amanda's family, rather then Amanda herself.

The Son of Sam law could certainly block it in the US, as it appears from the article one of the media companies is ABC.
 
I don't know. We'd have to ask an Italian lawyer. I know it breaks broadcasting rules in the UK under the auspices of the Press Complaints Commission. I suspect that the loophole they're trying to exploit is that the money is going to Amanda's family, rather then Amanda herself.

The Son of Sam law could certainly block it in the US, as it appears from the article one of the media companies is ABC.

Would the money from this interview first have to go towards the outstanding judgments against her?
 
Serendipity. Just when we are talking about Amanda's family and entourage going against the advice of their lawyers, this comes up:


Amanda Knox's family in talks for her to give tell-all interview - after spending $1m on legal fees
By Nick Pisa In Rome
Last updated at 3:22 PM on 16th May 2010


The Daily Mail

The money may go to the parents, but *she* will be earning it. If she's earning anything, it should go to the massive debts she has outstanding to her victims.
 
Last edited:
*snap*, Rose. :)


Quote:
Amanda Knox's Italian lawyer Luciano Ghirga said: 'There are talks going on with three TV companies, one from America, Italy and Britain - but I'm not sure which ones.
'It's all being handled by the parents and the PR man that they have hired in America - to be honest I am not in favour at all and I would not advise it but they seem to be pretty insistent.'


The Knox family have hired PR consultant David Marriott in their home town of Seattle in Washington, who has been at the centre of the negotiations with ABC and Mediaset, the Italian TV company owned by billionaire controversial Italian Prime Minister Silvio [/HILITE]Berlusconi.

* * * *
Well, don't that beat all.
 
Bloggers disapproved? What a shock.

It wasn't a PR disaster or a triumph. I know it's hard for the guilters to believe, but there actually is a large number of people in the world whose first reaction to everything is not a value judgment. If I had seen those pictures on my own without the help of the various editorial comments, I wouldn't have thought twice about them.

As for Americans making Amanda's situation worse, well, as I said before, it is very hard to overcome one's cultural upbringing. Basically, you are suggesting that Amanda's supporters toe the line and behave deferentially toward people we perceive as extremely immature and unethical. To do so would involve playing a complex game, the rules of which we would constantly have to be tutored in and reminded of.

We would have to keep in mind that we are never allowed to criticize the prosecutors, police or investigators. As you wrote, "Let's take the matter of Amanda supposedly being hit during questioning. Her lawyers went to great pains to state to the press that they never said she was hit." I have a feeling the prison doctors, psychologists, chaplains, guards and so on who have crossed paths with Amanda and Raffaele in prison have gone to similar great pains not to betray their feelings about the two defendants, lest they face slander suits themselves.

Even if such an elaborate game -- a strategy, if you will -- were possible, and everybody on Amanda's team was willing to pull it off, we know there is still no guarantee that Mignini and his pals would respond predictably. It very easily could get to a point where he stops feeling threatened and starts feeling respected, but then he goes ahead and acts arbitrarily and capriciously anyway.

Michael Heavey approached the Italian Court very respectfully -- where did it get him?

The fact that Italy is only a generation or two removed from a Fascist regime should not require that we have to goose-step in order to communicate with them.


Slinging mud at Italians is not going to help.
 
Would the money from this interview first have to go towards the outstanding judgments against her?

Good question.

Only if it's 'hers', not if it's the family's money. They have no liability for her debts, since she was convicted and sentenced as an adult. And of course, Amanda doesn't have to pay a cent anyway unless and until her sentence is upheld by the third degree.
 
I can understand their desire to recoup the money they've spent thus far and pad the coffers for the appeal costs. Their only sale-able commodity is Amanda herself. However it does not seem at all sensible to go against the advice of Ghirga who is very aware how this may come across while they apparently have no clue.
I wonder why they ever thought it wise to hire an American PR Firm instead of one from Italy. In the long run it matters not a hoot what her fellow Americans think. She is being tried in Italy.
 
I could be that the legal battle over who would get the money may cost more than the money they could earn. Maybe that is another reason Amanda's lawyer is advising against it? It doesn't sound like a good idea to me for a variety of reasons, not to mention that every time Amanda makes a statement it seems to come back and bite her somewhere.
 
Good question.

Only if it's 'hers', not if it's the family's money. They have no liability for her debts, since she was convicted and sentenced as an adult. And of course, Amanda doesn't have to pay a cent anyway unless and until her sentence is upheld by the third degree.

She is still earning the money herself by doing the interview, no? I have seen cases where funds like this are placed on hold until all legal claims are resolved.
 
Do you think one could be forgiven for thinking it looks like the interview/money is of more concern than the security of her defense?

Do they know she's guilty and will not go free so why waste the opportunity to make some dough?

What does Ted Simon think of this?
 
Thanks, Charlie.
I believe I was remembering this exchange regarding the sweatshirt and the washing machine:

The part that doesn't make sense to me still does not make sense to me. Either Amanda did not immediately tell them where this sweatshirt was despite the "importance" of this piece of evidence or she told them and the police did not bother to check for it (lost in plain sight). If Amanda didn't tell them was it because she forgot, or was there another reason for not wanting them to find it? If she did tell them, it makes the police look pretty poor (and if it was just sitting there on the bed regardless, that is just bizarre, in my opinion).

I guess the third option is she was confused or had another memory lapse, which would seem to support other similar claims of memory loss. In any case, I just look at this (not missing) piece of the puzzle and still see it as very strange. I assume the police tested it and found nada?


RoseMontague,

When you said "Either Amanda did not immediately tell them where the sweatshirt was despite the "importance"...etc..etc....

You make me wonder how good this communication was at all between the police and Amanda at the early stages. (early meaning before legal support/translation help)

On Nov 2 there were many "average" Italians and Amanda communicating, and from what I read even Filomena and Laura were not experts in understanding, speaking English. Amanda wasn't an expert in Italian either.

So how much did Amanda and the police really understand each other early on before she had a lawyer? (Nov 2 to Nov 7)

Even in the "non-recorded interrogation", Nov 5 & 6, they decided to bring in a translator with all those police already there. This is telling that they weren't communicating well. So this proves there was communication help needed or they wouldn't have brought in a translator.

So its highly likely that anything going on before Amanda had a lawyer, and "translator help" , there was probably a lot of confusion on both sides.

The Nov 2,3,4,5,6 would have been much confusion.
 
RoseMontague,

When you said "Either Amanda did not immediately tell them where the sweatshirt was despite the "importance"...etc..etc....

You make me wonder how good this communication was at all between the police and Amanda at the early stages. (early meaning before legal support/translation help)

On Nov 2 there were many "average" Italians and Amanda communicating, and from what I read even Filomena and Laura were not experts in understanding, speaking English. Amanda wasn't an expert in Italian either.

So how much did Amanda and the police really understand each other early on before she had a lawyer? (Nov 2 to Nov 7)

Even in the "non-recorded interrogation", Nov 5 & 6, they decided to bring in a translator with all those police already there. This is telling that they weren't communicating well. So this proves there was communication help needed or they wouldn't have brought in a translator.

So its highly likely that anything going on before Amanda had a lawyer, and "translator help" , there was probably a lot of confusion on both sides.

The Nov 2,3,4,5,6 would have been much confusion.

Exactly. That is certainly one possible reason. It seems to me that the question of the sweatshirt was dropped when the sweatshirt was "found". Yet the process of that finding seems to me to be still important.
 
JREF2010,
What do you make of AK's family disregarding her lawyers' advice? Especially with the first appeal looming?
 
RoseMontague,

When you said "Either Amanda did not immediately tell them where the sweatshirt was despite the "importance"...etc..etc....

You make me wonder how good this communication was at all between the police and Amanda at the early stages. (early meaning before legal support/translation help)

On Nov 2 there were many "average" Italians and Amanda communicating, and from what I read even Filomena and Laura were not experts in understanding, speaking English. Amanda wasn't an expert in Italian either.

So how much did Amanda and the police really understand each other early on before she had a lawyer? (Nov 2 to Nov 7)

Even in the "non-recorded interrogation", Nov 5 & 6, they decided to bring in a translator with all those police already there. This is telling that they weren't communicating well. So this proves there was communication help needed or they wouldn't have brought in a translator.

So its highly likely that anything going on before Amanda had a lawyer, and "translator help" , there was probably a lot of confusion on both sides.

The Nov 2,3,4,5,6 would have been much confusion.

Is there information that there was not a translator to help during the interview process before the interrogation of Amanda on November 5-6 or other English-speaking witnesses?

There were several English-speaking witnesses to interview from November 2-6. It would definitely be of benefit to both sides to make sure there was a translator available who could help with the questioning.
 
Is there information that there was not a translator to help during the interview process before the interrogation of Amanda on November 5-6 or other English-speaking witnesses?

There were several English-speaking witnesses to interview from November 2-6. It would definitely be of benefit to both sides to make sure there was a translator available who could help with the questioning.


There was a translator present from the first day. It was she who noticed the mark on Amanda's neck (as well as Laura).
 
There was a translator present from the first day. It was she who noticed the mark on Amanda's neck (as well as Laura).

Thank you. I would have found it astonishing (and sloppy police policy) if a translator hadn't been available from the first day of questioning.
 
If the Italian justice system is in anyway influenced by what English speakers write on the Internet than it's comments like this that will help Amanda remain in prison a very long time.

You are saying the Italian justice system will keep Amanda in prison on the basis of outrage and revenge, as opposed to the evidence presented at trial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom