User:Overagainst/Subpage

Amanda Marie Knox (born July 9, 1987) is an American woman whose trials in Italy, along with Raffaele Sollecito, on charges of murdering Meredith Kercher] attracted international attention. The prosecution accused Knox and Sollicetto of being accomplices of [[Rudy Guede, the only person who has been definitively of committing the murder. An initial guilty verdict was reversed at a second level trial which  acquitted Knox after almost four years in prison. She was released and returned to her Seattle home. The prosecution succeeded in having the acquittals overturned, and both she and Solecitto were found guilty by a retrial.  Both Knox and Solicetto remain free and are appealing; a presumption of innocence holds until an Italian Supreme Court ruling on the case.

Early Life
Knox was raised with two younger sisters in West Seattle.. Her mother, Edda Mellas, a mathematics teacher, and her father, Curt, a vice president of finance at the local Macy's, divorced when Knox was a few years old. Her stepfather, Chris, is an information-technology consultant. Knox first travelled to Italy at the age of 15, when she visited Rome, Pisa, the Almalfi coast and the ruins of Pompeii on a family holiday. Her interest in the country was increased by the book Under the Tuscan Sun, which her mother gave her. She graduated in 2005 from the Seattle Preparatory School and studied linguistics at the University of Washington; making the university's dean's list, and working at part time jobs to fund an academic year in Italy. Relatives described the 20-year-old Knox as outgoing, but not always able to pick up on social cues.

Via della Pergola 7
In late September 2007 Knox arrived in Perugia to study at the University for She lived at a cottage, Via della Pergola 7, where she rented the smallest of four bedrooms in a ground floor apartment. Two of the bedrooms were occupied by Italian women in their late twenties, Laura Mezzetti and Filomena Romanelli. The other bedroom was taken by 21 year old student Meredith Kercher. None of the women were fluent in a foreign language, Knox had only a beginner’s level of competence in Italian, although she used it constantly. In addition to having the key to the apartment entrance door, the women had a key to their bedroom. Kercher had two phones; one, which had an Italian SIM card, was often switched off. Kercher used her other, English number, phone for calls to her ill mother. Kercher kept the English unit with her at all times, and never switched off. . Both Knox and Kercher were friendly with Giacomo, one of four young Italian men who lived in the walk out basement apartment of Via della Pergola 7, and who knew Rudy Guede. Guede was described as personable, but a habitual liar who had made threatening advances to young women. He was identified as the likely perpetrator of burglaries with similarities to the circumstances surrounding the murder. Although he was questioned and released by Perugia police 6 days before the murder, Guede had no burglary-related criminal record. While returning from a night out, during mid-October a group consisting of Knox, Kercher, Giacomo and another Italian man from the lower apartment of Via della Pergola 7 encountered Guede in the street. He accompanied them back to the cottage and the Italians invited him into the basement, where they smoked cannabis and talked until 4.30am when Knox and Kercher left. Guede spent the rest of the night in the basement. On 20 October, Kercher became Giacomo’s girlfriend after a trip to a dance club with him, other Italians from the basement, and Knox. Guede was again admitted to the basement apartment that evening.

After 25 October, when she had begun a relationship with Raffaele Sollecito, Knox did not use her tiny bedroom in Via della Pergola 7 and visited the cottage only to talk and put on fresh clothes. Her free time and nights were spent at the apartment of Solecitto. Knox’s waitressing shift was cancelled by a text as she left Solecitto’s on the evening of November 1, after acknowledging the message she switched her phone off. There was no activity on her or Solecitto’s phones until late the next morning.

Prosecution hypothesis
The prosecutor, implicitly assuming that while alone in the house Kercher could not have unlocked and opened the door to Guede (who she knew to be an acquaintance of her boyfriend Giacomo), reasoned that Knox’s complicity could logically be deduced from established facts. Mezzetti and Romanelli being away and Guede’s proven presence at the murder were taken as pointing to Knox having let Guede in through the apartment entrance door that only she (and Kercher) had an available key to. The investigators discounted the possibility of anyone but Knox having faked a break in to mislead police into thinking Kercher had been killed by a burglar rather than someone known to her.

Alarm raised
Just after midday on November 2, Knox called Kercher’s English phone, which she kept in her jeans and could always be reached on, but the call was not answered. Knox then called Romanelli and in a mixture of Italian and English said she was worried something had happened to Kercher, as on going to Via della Pergola 7 apartment earlier she had noticed bloodstains and Kercher’s bedroom door closed. Knox and Sollecito then went to Via della Pergola 7 and on getting no answer from Kercher unsuccessfully tried to break in the bedroom door, leaving it noticeably damaged. . At 12.47 pm Knox called her mother and was told to contact the police as an emergency.

Solecitto called the Carabinieri getting though at 12.51 pm. He was recorded telling them there had been a break-in with nothing taken, and the emergency was that Kercher’s door was locked, she was not answering calls to her phone and there were bloodstains. Police telecommunications investigators arrived to inquire about an abandoned phone, which was in fact Kercher’s Italian unit. Romanelli arrived and took over explaining the situation to the police who where were informed about Kercher’s English phone, which had been handed in as a result of it ringing when Knox called it. On discovering Kercher’s English phone had been found dumped, Romanelli demanded that the policemen force Kercher’s bedroom door open, but they did not think the circumstances warranted damaging private property. The door was then kicked in by a strongly built friend of Romanelli’s, and Kercher's body was discovered on the floor. .

Perugia background
There had reportedly not been a killing in Perugia for twenty years, but its prosecutors had been responsible for bringing controversial cases. In 2002 Giulio Andreotti was found guilty in Perugia of ordering the assassination of a journalist. Andreotti’s co-accused, supposed to have set up and committed the crime, were found not guilty. The Supreme court definitively acquitted him the next year. In 2002 Perugia prosecutor [[Giuliano Mignini] arraigned 20 respectable people for concealing murder in an alleged plot connected to notorious serial killings. By the time the case was dismissed legal expenses had impoverished the accused’s families. Mignini was criticized for acting on an implausible theory about the case.

Investigation
The police were not told the extent of Kerchers relationship with Giacomo in initial interviews. Guede, who went to a nightclub hours after the murder, and again the following night, is believed to have left Perugia couple of days after the murder. On 4 December the lead investigator was quoted as saying that someone known to Kercher but was believed to be responsible for her murder

Arrest
The body was found at 1 pm, one hour after Knox raised the alarm; she was kept at the police station until 6 am, and repeatedly interviewed over the following days, she complained of exhaustion. Under Italian law a suspect cannot be interviewed without a lawyer, and if someone is being interviewed as a witness when they incriminate themselves as a suspect, they must have legal counsel appointed before any further questioning. . On the night of 5 November she went to the police station with Sollicito and at some point in a series of interviews implicated herself and the bar owner she worked for in the murder. She was officially placed under investigation at 5am.

The lead police investigator advocated placing her under close surveillance to gather collaborating evidence from her contacts with supposed accomplices, but the decision was taken to arrest and charge Knox Solicito and the bar owner who was released after Guede’s fingerprints at the murder scene identified him as a killer.

Trials
Guede, Knox and Solecitto were all charged with murdering Kercher while acting together. Guede was tried first in an Inquisitorial- style fast track procedure. He was not charged with having had a knife. He was convicted of murder and the official judges’ report on the conviction specified that he had not acted alone, or stolen any of Kercher’s possessions. >

Knox and Solecitto were tried by a Corte d'Assise, which has adversarial dynamics similar to US procedure. Major differences from the US include the prosecution being able to appeal an acquittal, and if found guilty the defendant being guaranteed a second level trial. The verdict is decided by a judicial panel of six citizens and the two professional judges who also preside in court. Italian courts are relatively unlikely to exclude evidence as prejudicial; the professional judges give guidance to other members of the panel about which testimony may be given weight during their deliberations on a verdict. Knox had been the subject of unprecedentedly intense pre-trial media coverage.

Prosecution case
Events before the body was discovered were said to demonstrate that Knox had prior guilty knowledge of what had happened to Kercher. According to the prosecution, Knox’s first call of 2 November, to Kercher’s English phone, was part of an attempt to delay the discovery of the body. Sollecito had tried to break in the bedroom door because after locking it behind them, they realized they had left something that might incriminate them. Knox’s call to her mother in Seattle, a quarter of an hour before the discovery of the body, was said by prosecutors to show Knox was acting as if something serious might have happened before the point in time when an innocent person would have such concern. Prosecutors had no direct DNA evidence against Knox, but said she had cleaned the crime scene of traces that incriminating her. Evidence against Sollicito implicated Knox because their alibis were co-dependent. Scientific Police reported Kercher’s DNA was on a knife taken from Solecitto’s kitchen and a fragment of his DNA was on Kercher's bra clasp. According to the prosecution's reconstruction, Knox had attacked Kercher in her bedroom, repeatedly banged her head against a wall, forcefully held her face and tried to strangle her. Guede, Knox and Sollecito had removed Kercher's jeans, and held her on her hands and knees while Guede had sexually abused her. Knox had cut Kercher with a knife before inflicting the fatal stab wound.

Defense
The defense said despite forensic examination finding over 100 prints in the apartment and identification of 17 as Kerchers, 15 as Mezzetti’s, 5 as Romanelli’s and 1 as Knox’s, no clothing fibers, hairs, fingerprints, skin cells or DNA of Knox were found on Kercher's body, clothes, handbag or anywhere in the bedroom. Knox’s lawyers suggested that Guede was a lone killer who may have broken in. They emphasized that a piece of the broken window was found beside one of Guede’s shoe prints in Kercher's bedroom, his bloody palm print was on a pillow under Kercher's hips, and his DNA was on the strap of her bra as well as a vaginal swab taken from her body. In addition, Guede’s DNA mixed with Kercher's was on the left sleeve of her bloody sweatshirt and in bloodstains on the inside of her shoulder bag, which credit cards had been stolen from. Guede refused to answer questions at the trial.

Giulia Bongiorno, leading Sollecito's defence, questioned how Sollecito's DNA fragment had only got on the small metal clasp of the bra : "How can you touch the hook without touching the cloth?". Multiple full DNA traces of Guede were on the back strap of the bra.

Prosecution Theory
According to the prosecution, Knox’s complicity could logically be deduced from the established facts of Mezzetti and Romanelli being away, a simulated rather than genuine break-in, and Guede’s proven presence at the murder, because Guede must have got in through the apartment entrance door that only Knox (and Kercher) had an available key to. The premise of this reasoning was that while alone in the house Kercher could not have unlocked and opened the door to Guede, who she knew to be an acquaintance of her boyfriend, and therefore Guede had no motive for faking a break-in. Later charges against Knox and Solecitto included simulating a crime, and theft of items stolen from Kercher, with the exception of her keys.

Alarm raised
Just after midday on November 2, Knox called Kercher’s English phone, which she kept in her jeans and could always be reached on, but the call was not answered. Knox then called Romanelli and in a mixture of Italian and English said she was worried something had happened to Kercher, as on going to Via della Pergola 7 apartment earlier she had noticed bloodstains in their shared bathroom, an open front door, excrement in the Italians women’s bathroom, and Kercher’s bedroom door closed. Knox and Sollecito then went to Via della Pergola 7 and on getting no answer from Kercher unsuccessfully tried to break in the bedroom door, leaving it noticeably damaged. . The prosecutor at the trial of Knox and Sollecito suggested their unsuccessful attempt to break down Kercher’s bedroom door was because after locking it behind them, they realized they had left something that might incriminate them..

At 12.47 pm Knox called her mother and was told to leave the cottage and call the police emergency number. Solecitto called the Carabinieri, getting though at 12.51 pm. He was recorded telling them there had been a break-in with nothing taken, and the emergency was that Kercher’s door was locked, she was not answering calls to her phone and there were bloodstains.

Police telecommunications investigators arrived to inquire about an abandoned phone, which was in fact Kercher’s Italian unit; while there they were informed about Kercher’s English phone, which had been found as a result of Knox calling it. Romanelli arrived and took over explaining the situation to the police from Knox. On discovering Kercher’s English phone had been found dumped, Romanelli requested that the policemen force Kercher’s bedroom door open, but they did not think the circumstances warranted damaging private property. The door was then kicked in by a strongly built friend of Romanelli’s, and Kercher's body was discovered on the floor. According to Knox, Romanelli began screaming hysterically.

Prosecution background
There had reportedly not been a killing in Perugia for twenty years, but its prosecutors had been responsible for bringing controversial cases. In 2002 a Perugia court found Giulio Andreotti guilty of ordering the assassination of a journalist, despite acquitting the co-accused who were supposed to have set up and committed the crime. The supreme court definitively acquitted him the next year. In 2002 Perugia prosecutor Giuliano Mignini arraigned 20 respectable people for concealing murder in a plot connected to notorious serial killings. The charges were dismissed by a judge. Mignini was criticized for accepting a senior policeman’s implausible theory about the case.

Investigation
In initial interviews Kercher's friends did not tell police the details of Kerchers relationship with Giacomo, investigators asked if she had known any black men.

On December 4 lead investigator Marco Chiacchiera, was quoted as saying that they were working on the theory that a man known to Kercher may have been be responsible for her murder. Guede, who had gone to a nightclub hours after the murder, and again the following night, is believed to have left Perugia on December 4.

Under Italian law Knox had an unwaivable right to have legal counsel once she was being interviewed as a suspect. She was interviewed every day after the murder, and later said she had thought this was because she was considered a witness. During the interviews of 5–6 November Knox incriminated herself, but not Soccicito, by saying she was in the house at the time of the murder. The prosecution said she had not become a suspect until late in the sessions. If that was not true, the treatment of Knox would be unlawful and evidence obtained through it would be inadmissible under the rules of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/nov/04/italy.ukcrime Marco Chiacchiera

Mind control, brainwashing' is coerced change in established belief and allegiance attributable to subliminal processes rather than rational choice. Although scientists are split on the validity of the concept of being 'brainwashed', which is also used in loosely in describing any successful persuasion, proponents assert that there is a coercive process that can alter humans so as to make them act in the interests of a controlling influence. Ideas of coercive persuasion originated in attempts to explain conversion of Western prisoners to the views of their east Asian communist captors, but have been invoked to explain emotional attachments to self defeating behaviour such as submitting to exploitation by cults. Brainwashing calls into question ideas of the person as a moral agent who can be held responsible for their behaviour, but courts have in general not accepted it as a defence for criminal acts.

The concept of mind control was originally developed to explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in indoctrinating prisoners of war into betraying their previous beliefs, and continuing to do so after their release. These theories were later expanded and modified by psychologists to explain conversions to cults, although the American Psychological Association does not endorse any theory of brainwashing or mind control. The earliest scientific hypothesis, by William Sargant, saw similarities with the conversion techniques of John Wesley, but were largely based on transmarginal inhibition theory. Later work by Robert Jay Lifton emphasised social milieu and self-criticism with personal experiences being subordinated to ethereal ideology not amenable to exact definition. Contemporary writers on thought control emphasize an innate human propensity to fit into a group rather than ideology or classical conditioning. http://law.ku.edu/sites/law.ku.edu/files/docs/comparative-criminal-procedure-essay-john-head.pdf The Commandeering of Free Will: Brainwashing as a Legitimate Defense Ida-Gaye Warburton* American Psychological Association Losing Your Head in the Washer – Why the Brainwashing Defense Can Be a Complete Defense

in Criminal Cases The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox By Nina Burleigh p22. Introduction to Forensic DNA Evidence for Criminal Justice Professionals By Jane Moira Taupin 28 misinterpreted the dna profiles

Status of brainwashing and duress
Brainwashing was not held to excuse criminal actions, or be evidence of diminished capacity to have intent. Whether or not a defendant had chosen to be exposed to persuasion, those without a mental disease or defect were still held fully responsible for any criminal action not done under a clear and present threat of death or serious injury. undisputed mental illness or from incapacity to maturely and meaningfully reflect upon the gravity of contemplated acts A defense based on brainwashing had no status under the law, and securing of an acquittal on that basis would be completely unprecedented. Duress was accepted as a legal defense, but to acquit on the grounds of duress required the defendant to have been acting under a well founded and immediate fear for their life.