Amanda Knox - Your Verdict

AK- the verdict

  • Innocent

    Votes: 22 18.2%

  • Guilty

    Votes: 59 48.8%

  • Hung Jury

    Votes: 2 1.7%

  • Don't know, Don't care

    Votes: 28 23.1%

  • planet X has no crime

    Votes: 10 8.3%
  • Total voters
    121
  • Poll closed .
Kevin_Lowe said:
Nonsense. I am not attributing any claim to you at all.

I am making the claim that since reality is not a democracy, and since Knox's guilt or innocence has nothing to do with how many forumites think she did it, this thread is pointless regardless of whether Knox is guilty or not (and like Rolfe I haven't followed the other thread in enough detail to feel entitled to an opinion on Knox's guilt).
Click to expand...

Are all polls here pointless or just this one?
 
uk_dave said:
I have followed it and learnt many new and interesting things, such as:

  • Ladies sometimes share bras, regardless of body shape
  • Police sometimes suspect cute girls of murder because they're horny
  • The press reporting of a court case is not to be trusted except when it is
  • Sometimes the police will plant evidence in order to convict innocent people and make sure the real killer doesn't walk free
  • Italians are funny people
  • Americans are funny people
  • Internet sleuths play an important part in modern day murder investigations
  • Google is your friend
Click to expand...
One that I learned from that thread is:

  • An interview in an Italian police station is comparable to serving a sentence at one of Stalin's labour camps.
Who knew?
 
stilicho said:
One that I learned from that thread is:

  • An interview in an Italian police station is comparable to serving a sentence at one of Stalin's labour camps.
Who knew?
Click to expand...

I learned that routine police procedures will make you confess that someone else did the crime.

Amanda is innocent no matter what she did.
 
Mission of Skepticism and Critical thinking has not been achieved with this poll.

1. "planet X has no crime". What is the purpose of including this as an option ? Is it suppose to be funny. Is it funny that someone may be in jail for something they didn't do ?

2 . "Don't know, Don't care". Don't care ? That would be quite cold hearted wouldn't it?

There should really just be 3 options. Innocent, Guilty and Not informed enough to vote.

I would also say the results of this poll are very uneven so far. How many of the voters have thought out critically why they are voting a certain way. Are they just falling for basic instinct based on what they have heard or have they taken time to do a skeptical and critical examination of some of the basic arguments before casting a vote.
 
Draca said:
Mission of Skepticism and Critical thinking has not been achieved with this poll.

1. "planet X has no crime". What is the purpose of including this as an option ?
Click to expand...
Tradition.

I'd love to know how it started too. Scrut, I'm lookin' at you old timer.
 
The 'Planet X' option on polls is mandatory. Or, at least, expected.
 
"Former FBI agent and internationally recognized investigator Steve Moore offers his evidence to prove the innocence of Amanda Knox."

mynorthwest.com/?nid=577&a=17573&p=10&n=Northwest Nights


An interview with a former FBI agent about the case. He is very clear and thought out. It points to clear signs of innocence. To believe in guilt in this case is to put aside critical thinking and instead put belief it in a murder theory that doesn't make sense, is in all ways unbelievable and that doesn't fit with the evidence presented.

It is not possible in a crime scene this brutal and bloody for two of the killer to have left the scene with no personal wounds or DNA left behind. All the evidence is consistent with a burglary turned into murder. Police misconduct also is something that happens all too often.
 
bump for any new "Amanda" posters who may have missed it.
 
Draca said:
All the evidence is consistent with a burglary turned into murder.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. How many burglars if they happen to find it necessary to kill someone during the course of a burglary take the time to clean up the place depsite not knowing when any of the other residents will come home, yet even when spending all that time cleaning up the place don't bother to actually steal anything, and then stage a phony break-in to make to try to fool the police into thinking that the murder happened during a burglary?
 
Last edited:
I joined with one other person to vote hung jury.

I'm too lazy to sort through the facts to form an opinion of my own, but I trust Skeptic Ginger and Kestrel and they think she was innocent or at least that there was inadequate evidence for conviction. Plus, I've heard somebody criticizing the impartiality of the Italian justice system on some radio station. So there are some facts that suggest that she was innocent.

But it was a highly publicized case and it seems like it might have been difficult to convict an innocent person under that situation and Italy presumably does have at least a moderately fair judiciary so there are some facts argue that she's guilty.

So in the end I am undecided. Just based on my current almost non-existent knowledge of the facts concerning the case, I lean slightly to the idea that she was innocent




 
davefoc said:
But it was a highly publicized case and it seems like it might have been difficult to convict an innocent person under that situation and Italy presumably does have at least a moderately fair judiciary so there are some facts argue that she's guilty.
Click to expand...

If Italy had a completely unfair system, they might have taken Knox at her word and simply beaten Patrick silly until he confessed. They didn't. They employed sophisticated scientific techniques to determine the real culprits and now the right people are in jail.

The authorities included work done by world-class experts including Dr Stefanoni, whose c.v. includes forensic work on victims of the 2004 Asian tsunami.
 
stilicho said:
Dr Stefanoni, whose c.v. includes forensic work on victims of the 2004 Asian tsunami.
Click to expand...

I fail to see the relevance of this. If you're trying to convince everyone that she's an expert who people turn to across the globe in matters of great import then you might want to find a better example than a disaster in which almost a quarter of a million people were killed - I would imagine that any and all available forensics experts, no matter how goof or bad they may have been, would have been welcomed with open arms in that case.

Not saying that Dr Stefanoni is bad, just that pointing to her work on the victims of the tsunami does nothing to clarify her level of expertise either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom