Amanda Knox To Be Retried In Italy

Italy's high court has ordered Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito to be retried for the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Sources have said that they are not sure if Amanda will return to Italy for the trial or not. I think if I were here, I certainly wouldn't, I'd keep myself settle in the Great Northwest.

http://news.yahoo.com/italy-court-orders-amanda-knox-retrial-meredith-kercher-091519064.html

That would guarantee a conviction, but I don't think I would go either.

From what I read about the first trial, it was a bit of a kangaroo court.

they are going to have a third trial?

Joanimaroni wrote:

they are going to have a third trial?

I don't think there was a second trial, but I could be wrong. I thought the acquittal action came from some form of appeal.

Well.....I think we need to have another Casey Anthony trial.

At the unimpeachable website, ahem, Wikipedia:

All members of the Council of Europe (which includes nearly all European countries, and every member of the European Union) have signed the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects against double jeopardy. The optional Seventh Protocol to the Convention, Article Four, says:

Quote :

No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again in criminal proceedings under the jurisdiction of the same State for an offence for which he or she has already been finally acquitted or convicted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of that State.

If this is correct, how can they have a second trial???

EDIT: The Wiki article goes on...

Member states may, however, implement legislation which allows reopening of a case in the event that new evidence is found or if there was a fundamental defect in the previous proceedings.

Quote :

The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not prevent the reopening of the case in accordance with the law and penal procedure of the State concerned, if there is evidence of new or newly discovered facts, or if there has been a fundamental defect in the previous proceedings, which could affect the outcome of the case.

Our own Fifth Amendment to our US Constitution states:

Quote :

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Now, if the prosecutors had held back a juicy charge or two on Casey Anthony, they could now go ahead on those. I doubt that they did though... just speculating...

I don't think they held back....I think the problem was listed in Bob's additional Murphy's law......she was judged by 12 people that were not smart enough to get out of jury duty.

Joanimaroni wrote:

I don't think they held back....I think the problem was listed in Bob's additional Murphy's law......she was judged by 12 people that were not smart enough to get out of jury duty.