It's my opinion. I suggest you read the timeline of events on CNN.com. I think it's pretty clear that she isn't being completely forthright in her explanation of the events that occurred.
I will state again because you seem REALLY dense about this: Assume she is a big fat slobbering constant liar. Being a liar does not prove you are a murderer. What is your proof she murdered Kercher? Here is another thought: Say you suppose the prosecution's theory about what happened is true: Three folks (one already a drifter criminal, two young college students with a bright future all but assured) somehow end up together, Guede has sex with Kercher (a fact not in dispute), and they kill Kercher. Two of them stay in town because they are incredibly stupid thinking they will easily get away with this heinous crime. One of them flees the country because (oh fuck it, I am tried of trying to defend the completely insane thought process of that moronic prosecutor). Knox and Solecito are brought in for interrogation. If they were part of a trio who killed Kercher, why didn't either of them try to pin the murder on Guede? They had no reason to protect him? Why would Knox bring up the bartender if she knew Guede was involved? Makes no sense. None at all. Unless, she wasn't part of the murder and didn't know Guede was there having sex/raping Kercher. Anywho, the suspect who flees and gets caught, who barely knew Knox and her boyfriend, who has no reason to "protect" those two, has the perfect opportunity to turn on the two of them and pin the crime on them during his confession. He does not! Make no sense. None at all. Unless.... you get the point.
With so much guesswork, there must be many, many innocent people in prison for very long sentences. In both Italy and the U.S.
The question to me is if US is going to turnover Knox for a retrial. If Italy had someone who the US wanted arrested to stand for trial in the US,I would be pissed if Italy got in the way citing their rules of law as controlling. Will be interesting to see what the US does.
Italy convicted 26 CIA members for torture during the Bush Wars. The U.S. has successfully "persuaded" ($$$$) the Italian prime minister to not pursue extradition. If the U.S. extradites Knox, it will lose what tiny precedent it holds in resisting allowing the CIA extraditions. It won't have a leg to stand on (much like Bush's torture victims).
Dude, I don't have to prove anything. I already stated it's my opinion that she's guilty. She lied about her former boss and she lied about where she was on that night. These are irrefutable facts. I can add two and two together and come up with four. Can you?
I respect your opinion and I don't know one way or another whether she is guilty but if she lied that doesn't make her a killer. It does make her possibly guilty of perjury depending on when she lied.
I haven't followed the case. The point about lying though, I assume, if she didn't do anything wrong, why lie to police? Lying alone doesn't make her a killer, but it is suspicious behavior.
Cause she was scared and was interrogated for hours in a 2nd language w/o an attorney. Not hard to imagine someone breaking and just tell the police what they want to hear.
Especially if that person is a woman (no disrespect to women but we do know that they can get emotional in high pressure situations).
First, you are wrong that those are "irrefutable facts". Her lies were from her immediately recanted confession that would have been 100% illegal in the U.S. and even the Italians had problems with the interrogation process. No attorney. No translator. Excessive time. Sleep deprived. And thank you for stating that your opinion is based on NOTHING but your perceptions of headlines and pictures.
You don't know anything about police interrogation do you? Learn about it and you will find that there are big problems with "confessions" extracted during poorly executed police interrogations. And yes, lying is suspicious. But, by itself should never be enough to convict someone of murder and sentence to more years in prison than the dude you know for certain was at the scene of the crime.
Masbee, you're applying the American system to this, but I doubt you know Italian rules of evidence. Also, you're trying to eliminate guesswork, assumptions, opinions, and generalizations, but even the American system doesn't do that. As I posted above, many innocent people must be in prison in both countries.
I know a thing about police interrogations. As I said, lying by itself does not mean she is involved in the murder. But it is a big piece of evidence the jury should consider, IMO.
