Tue 8 Dec 2009
Amanda Knox Trial Verdict: Why Allegations of Anti-Americanism are Hypocritical and Unfounded
Posted by Miss Represented under Meredith Kercher Case
[7] Comments
Amanda Knox: Courtesy of the Telegraphy
Justice for Meredith Kercher and her long suffering family continues to be hindered by the incessant wailing of various journalists and bloggers who are now making all sorts of wild comparisons and claims. Indeed, it’s a shame that so many of them only felt the need to comment on the case once a verdict had been reached. Sadly the great majority really need to get their facts straight.
One US Senator has urged US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to investigate claims that the trial and subsequent conviction of Amanda Knox for her part in the murder of British exchange student Meredith Kercher, be investigated amid accusations of Anti-Americanism. I believe these claims are completely unsubstantiated and extremely hypocritical. Here’s why:
Friends of Amanda: Accusations of Ethnocentrism and Anti-Italianism
The ‘Friends of Amanda’ (FOA) PR campaign has been accused of anti-Italianism and ethnocentrism itself. On many occasions representatives of or writers sympathetic to the FOA cause, including Seattle defence attorney Anne Bremner, Timothy Egan and Douglas Preston have made defamatory remarks about the mental state of the chief prosecutor Giuliano Mignini and about the Italian Justice system. Mignini has responded by taking legal action against the West Seattle Herald for comments which labelled him ‘mentally unstable’ and accused him of trying to further his own career by prosecuting Amanda for the murder.
I don’t need to tell you that these comments are ridiculous and extremely offensive. Indeed the Italian judiciary have been remarkably silent about the treatment handed to them by the American and British press. At no point have any of the Italian lawyers involved in the case made defamatory remarks about the American legal system, the mental state of those acting for the FOA on Amanda’s behalf or individuals involved in analysing the case who are supportive to Amanda. On the contrary American representatives for Amanda and the FOA have done all of this and more to the Italian Judiciary, the Italian people and those who believed the evidence against Amanda and Raffaele was strong.
Some of the comments made in articles and interviews on (predominantly) US TV networks have been profoundly embarrassing and upsetting for the Italian people and have (understandably) caused a backlash in support for Amanda in Italy. Comments and snide remarks aside, this smear campaign ‘technique’ is merely smoke and mirrors designed to draw attention away from the DNA evidence used to convict them and the fact that neither Amanda Knox nor Raffaele Sollecito had a consistent alibi for their whereabouts on the night of the murder.
Relentlessly pursuing an ethnocentric and anti-Italian criticism of the trial by constant unfair comment and comparison between two very different legal systems and then claiming ‘anti-Americanism’ when the outcome is not as expected is extremely hypocritical. Different does not mean inadequate. The Italian legal system is steeped in history and far more complex and structured than the FOA will have you believe. Amanda and Raffaele were afforded many advantages and excellent legal representation. Amanda’s defence lawyer himself is of the opinion that the trial was conducted fairly.
Differences in legal systems aside. Meredith Kercher was murdered in Italy. It is therefore not in the jurisdiction of any US investigator or lawyer to investigate or attempt to influence. Can you imagine what would happen if the Italian government attempted to influence the progress of an American trial then claimed anti-Italianism when the verdict didn’t go their way?
The idea of the US Secretary of State intervening in this case is ridiculous. Hillary Clinton has far more important things to do than bail out every American who gets into trouble abroad (even if they are considered political prisoners the US cannot always successfully intervene). This case is not a matter of national security and it doesn’t represent general foreign policy interests. Ms Clinton and the Senator demanding the investigation should be very careful. Remember what happened last time an American official tried to intervene on Amanda’s behalf? Judge Michael Heavey wrote a letter to Italy’s justice minister on his official headed paper which was so full of inaccuracies he later had to apologise.
It also appears that the suggestion of interference by the US Secretary of State has unnerved not only Amanda’s legal team and those in charge of successfully prosecuting her, but also Meredith’s mother Arline Kercher who, in comments made to the Sun newspaper quite rightly expresses her distaste, saying: “We were not exactly given special treatment. I can’t see there was this anti-American thing.” And poor Arline is spot on, in fact there have been several instances where (predominantly) US commenters on the case have been distinctly anti-victim and made comments which are extremely offensive to Meredith and her family. Meredith’s corpse has even been shown on Italian television. The only person who has suffered any discrimination is the only person that no longer has a voice of her own: Meredith.
More Spin
Fortunately for Meredith’s long suffering family it seems the US media is once again misleading its audience. Headlines screaming ‘Hillary Clinton Meeting with US Senator to Discuss Knox Case” are exaggerated to say the least. Just because Clinton says she will meet with the Senator doesn’t mean she can or will intervene in Amanda’s case. This has been very carefully contrived to keep the story of Amanda’s plight in the news and at the centre of a very well manipulated public audience.
Remember: Amanda Knox Was Not the Only Defendant Convicted of Murder
The Italian legal system also successfully prosecuted Rudy Guede in a fast track trial, he was convicted and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Let’s also not forget Amanda’s co-defendant, Italian national Raffaele Sollecito who got 25 years.
The accusations of anti-Americanism might not be so laughable had Amanda been the only person convicted for the murder. Raffaele Sollecito is from a very wealthy and influential Italian family. His father is a doctor and his sister was a Carabinieri officer. Needless to say, the family are very well connected. If the PM were as ‘corrupt’ and incompetent as the FOA would have us believe why then did he ‘allow’ Raffaele to be charged and prosecuted with the same culpability as Amanda Knox?
The idea that a convicted murderer should be released on the back of anti-American trial claims is ridiculous. Amanda and Raffaele had the same trial. Was the trial anti-Italian too? How about we release everyone convicted of murder based on the fact that their trial ‘might’ have been anti-[insert get out clause here]?
Claims that the Trial was Unfair
The fact that neither Amanda nor Raffaele were convicted of stealing Meredith’s rent money, phones and credit cards lends credibility to the fact that the jury didn’t believe beyond reasonable doubt that they were guilty of this particular offence. Neither the money not the cards were ever found.
This seems to lend credibility to the idea that the jury took their responsibility seriously and only returned guilty verdicts on those charges to which they felt the defendants were guilty beyond reasonable doubt and to those charges which the prosecution were able to present clear evidence of their guilt. Amanda’s lawyers believe she had a fair trial as do Meredith’s family and their legal representative Francesco Maresca.
The idea that Amanda was railroaded is so far from the truth as to be ridiculous. I sincerely hope that advisers to Ms Clinton and Senator Cantwell make sure they are aware of the full facts of this case before condoning or conducting any kind of intervention on Amanda Knox’s behalf.
So good to have you back- you say all the things I think but with a lot more clarity than I could ever achieve! My one wish now is that there is no appeal and that AK and RS confess and do their time- I personally feel tired and drained at the thought of the whole trial having to be repeated so goodness knows how the Kerchers feel, will everyone please just let Meredith rest in peace now?
In your professional opinion Miss R- how likely is it someone will now confess?!
Hey Ginny,
Thanks, I took a break from posting after I came back from Perugia as I felt I’d said all I needed to say at the time.
I’m not sure if this is right (hopefully someone will correct me if I’m wrong) but I think Amanda and Raffaele are automatically granted an appeal under Italian law.
I feel the only person ever likely to confess in any real capacity will be Rudy Guede as I feel he may be feeling ‘hard-done-by’ and may choose to play the ‘truth card’ at some point. But only if it benefits him in some way.
It’s likely that both AK and RS have spent so much time ‘believing’ they are innocent that they will be unable to connect with the truth and implication of what they’ve done. It will also be very hard for them to turn around and admit to their families that they were guilty all along. Things have just progressed too far now.
I still feel, despite it being a little pessimistic, that we’ll never really know the truth about what happened that night.
Despite this the Kercher family have shown a remarkable amount of dignity and have made it plain that they will be celebrating Meredith’s life and hopefully in time they can find some sort of peace.
Best,
Miss R
Miss Represented,
Thanks for your efforts. I’m a New York Times-reading American living in France who was shocked to see an “innocent American student” convicted in Perugia and sentenced to 26 years in jail. Then I was even more shocked after studying sites like “True Justice for Meredith Kerchner”. The evidence against Knox and Sollecito is overwhelming. I do not comprehend why the NYT – and the US media in general – have failed to take an impartial, objective stance.
After spending hours studying the case, there remain some points that confuse me.
—
First, in the US there’s a significant difference between 1st Degree Murder (premeditated murder) and other “lesser” forms of murder like manslaughter. A “diminished capacity” defense is sometimes used to argue that the killing was not intentional and to obtained a reduced sentence.
Do you think the Italian Court would have been reacted differently had Knox & Sollecito had owned up to their deed? If they had admitted that they’d done something very evil, fallen prey to fantasy, drugs, and alcohol, but never intended to take Meredith’s life? Then shown true remorse, begged the court for punishment – but also a chance at rehabilitation?
What if this position were taken on appeal in 2010?
I do realize that Knox and Sollecito are probably incapable of this kind of self-consciousness and compassion, however their parents and attorneys might see it as the most effective strategy going forwards. Who knows? Though bizarre, maybe Knox has been trying to confront the truth via her recent story-writing?
Their attorneys much have known that the Knox and Sollecito were lying and that a guilty verdict was coming. Why not change course and be honest? Or, was the truth so damning that it would have had the same consequences?
Do you have any thoughts on these complex and painful questions?
—
Second, I’m wondering to what extent you have gained clarity about the killers’ psychology?
I’m tempted to see Knox and Sollecito as two chemicals, each mostly harmless until mixed. Once mixed they become toxic. Knox and Sollecito had known each other for a matter of days. (This is not like the Charles Manson case, where Manson had had much time to manipulate his followers.) The sexy Knox was evidently Sollecito’s first lover – after long years of pornography and game playing. The wealthy, good-looking Sollecito gave Knox the attention she craved. That’s powerful stuff. Each had a fantasy life (writings, comics, weapons play, play acting, etc.) that included the violent domination of other human beings. Suddenly these two are thrown together, they feed off of each other, and they translate fantasy into reality.
Did each unlock repressed urges in the other in such a way that anything became possible – and all inhibitions were dropped?
We can’t know exactly what they said and planned regarding Meredith, but we do know their behavior in the days following the crime: an image of being impervious and untouchable? No fear of the police, public histrionics, etc.
Was this subsequent behavior a continuation of their sudden “liberation” – or was it a conscious effort to do the opposite of what a guilty person might do? To act like guilty people would not act?
It’s very bizarre, pathetic, and confusing. My questions are very difficult, but if you had any comment, I’d be grateful.
Norbert
Hi all,
Norbert asks some excellent questions. May I add one more for Miss R to consider answering:
How would an interrogation technic have to focuss to make Knox and Sollecito finally tell the truth? Considering that they refused to confess until the verdict was out?
thanks
Roxane
Hi Roxane12,
I’m not sure any interrogation technique exists that could ‘make’ Amanda and Raffaele confess, short of torturing them which I definitely don’t think is a very ethical solution. There are various ‘tricks’ an expert interviewer can use to try and ‘trap’ an interviewee into incriminating themselves. One technique the police use is the PEACE interview training which equips the investigator with inter-personal skills necessary to maintain control of the interview and the direction of the questions.
Miss R
Norbert,
Sorry it’s taken a while for me to get back to you.
With regard to your first question. I think, had AK and RS admitted their involvement from the start and expressed remorse in any capacity they would possibly have seen a reduction in sentence. With regard to diminished responsibility they may have had a shot with regard to drugs but, having not had any history of mental health problems etc it may have been perceived as malingering.
With regard to rehabilitation, I think the Italian authorities will have to do something with them even though they have not confessed their involvement. I assume having been convicted of a sexual offence as well as a murder, RS in particular may be required to undergo some sort of sex offender treatment program as part of his rehabilitation. The problem may arise for RS (assuming his appeal is denied and has to complete the rest of his sentence) if he does not admit involvement he will not be able to progress through the SOTP, this may affect the likelihood of obtaining parole.
I’m not sure that position would be taken on appeal as AK and RS’s defence team still believe they have a good shot at clearing their names. After Reading Commissario Montalbano’s excellent post on TJMK about the appeals process it seems likely that AK and RS are likely to see a reduction in sentence after appeal. This may well bring the sentence down to less than if they admitted the crime and repented.
RE: Knox’s storytelling. I have become of the opinion (over time) that Knox’s storytelling is actually a way of manipulation. So much focus has been placed on her writing that I think she plays up to it to a certain extent. I don’t happen to think she’s a very good writer at all and a lot of what she writes is mindless gobbledegook, I think people should be wary of trying to analyse any of her ‘deep and meaningful’ stuff. She enjoys the attention, she really does and I think we will find over time that what she writes will be given more attention than it necessarily deserves.
RE: what I’ve gained about AK and RS’s psychology. It’s difficult to say, a lot of what I write is based on many years of reading and researching messy heads. A lot of people have an idea of the sort of person that commits a crime, it’s not really a good idea to start there, look at the evidence and look at the behaviour and then form your own conclusions.
I think part of the problem with the US particularly when making comparisons between the Italian and US legal system is the lack of appreciation for behavioural evidence alongside physical evidence. I would in no way condone ever convicting AK, RS or anyone else for that matter on behaviour alone but when used alongside physical evidence it can actually present a very powerful and all rounded picture.
The problem has come from the smear campaign orchestrated by the FOA giving everyone the idea that there is no physical evidence and that the Italian system is the equivalent of a kangaroo court where a bunch of incompetent lazy armchair psychologists capture innocent American students and grill them about their sex lives. The reality of course is very different. Italian courts also appreciate the value of behavioural evidence and as the Italian people are very open and people oriented they want to understand this behaviour too. It just gets reported on a lot more I guess.
For this reason there has been a lot of information in the public domain about particularly AK’s character which I’ve used to get a fairly good idea of the sort of person she was when she committed this crime. The psychology of the case is very interesting and very important.
I think AK and RS probably brought something out in each other that they hadn’t quite expected or thought they could control. Raffaele I believe is quite disturbed and probably not the best lover or confidante for someone as free-spirited as Amanda.
With regard to why they behaved the way they did after the body was found. I’m not sure though I do know that people do and say all sorts of odd things especially when under an inordinate amount of stress (as I can imagine one would be after committing murder).
While the trial was fair from a technical standpoint, we also have the issue of a non-sequestered jury in what truly was a media circus and frenzy. Tell me the jury members were not affected by all they were exposed to in the media? Tell me without failing the red face test.
I do not agree with many who believe the verdict was fueled by an anti-American sentiment. Energies spent on that view are wasted. However, I have a difficult time seeing how the jurors weren’t affected by the intense media attention/coverage and how this then translates into a fair trial.
What is this physical evidence that implicates AK and RS beyond any reasonable doubt?