Saw this today. Remembered to NEVER get in any trouble when visiting Italy.
Better yet, don't visit Italy at all until they get their legal system out of the dark ages.
Remember this is the country that jailed a group of geoscientists for failing to predict an earthquake, which lest we forget, are scientifically impossible to predict.
Knox can just stay in the US and don't give a shit about the retrial right? I would assume there is no extradition to a country without a working legal system.
The US and Italy do have a bi-lateral extradition treaty. However an argument could be made that with her aquital the US could see that double jeapordy applies and thus could choose not to honour any extradition request. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
+2
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
From what I hear Italy doesn't have any form of "Double Jeopardy" in their laws so they can constantly retry the same case.
So the question that needs answered is what legal standard would any US Judge presiding over an extradition hearing apply: The US or Italy's?
0
Options
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
That is maybe a bit of an oversimplification.
iirc there was one scientist who some time in advance said an earthquake was probably gonna happen - you folks better move. A group of government appointed scientists said "no no chill there is no earthquake" in order to not have panic but without having looked at any research before making the statement. That is the version I was told repeatedly at the time. Trufax ratio unknown.
If that is the case, at worst they are guilty of incompetence. Earthquake prediction is still an imprecise science. This isn't like Dante's Peak where they found a sulphurous hot spring which proved eruption was imminent and sat on it. I still don't see how they would be held criminally liable for it.
+1
Options
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Yeah exactly. There are other cool examples too of their legal system being terrible. That 9 out of 10 involve their ex-pm is especially funny.
Yeah exactly. There are other cool examples too of their legal system being terrible. That 9 out of 10 involve their soon-to-be-ex-ex-pm is especially funny.
Fixed. The fact I feel this way is depressing in itself.
But yeah, I can't see how Amanda Knox could ever see a fair trial in Italy with how her case was argued last time. If I were an extradition judge I'd be tempted to block it on those grounds alone.
iirc there was one scientist who some time in advance said an earthquake was probably gonna happen - you folks better move. A group of government appointed scientists said "no no chill there is no earthquake" in order to not have panic but without having looked at any research before making the statement. That is the version I was told repeatedly at the time. Trufax ratio unknown.
Not totally different but somewhat different.
Well, that is literally all you can say about earthquake prediction, "it might happen today but probably not" because it is always more likely to not happen until right up to the moment when it does happen, which we cannot predict even slightly with current technology. Anyone saying "there is probably going to be an earthquake today" is just as wrong as someone saying "there will not be an earthquake today" if it happens later that day, the fact the first guy happened to be right by sheer chance does not make the second group criminally responsible for contradicting him.
We can predict where earthquakes are likely to happen, but as for when they might happen, the best geoscientist in the world is no more equipped to give guarantees than Mystic Meg and her crystal ball. It is the same as holding the police criminally responsible for failing to predict in advance where the next murder is going to happen.
To bring this back to the topic at hand, it’s just one example of how micky mouse the legal system is there, it’s the whims of the ruling elites at the time with an added dash of court of public opinion. People wanted someone to blame for an earthquake so the judiciary gave them someone to blame. It’s a farce.
Nate Silver looked into this for his book and it does not paint the convicted scientists in a negative light. IIRC the first guy was basically a quack making dramatic predictions while the second group were doing actual science. Quack got lucky so real scientists got fucked.
Yeah, just checked. First guy predicted a big earthquake for March 29th because radon gas and perihelon with Venus....aka quackery. An earthquake later hit a different town, nearby.
iirc there was one scientist who some time in advance said an earthquake was probably gonna happen - you folks better move. A group of government appointed scientists said "no no chill there is no earthquake" in order to not have panic but without having looked at any research before making the statement. That is the version I was told repeatedly at the time. Trufax ratio unknown.
Not totally different but somewhat different.
I love lolItaly stories as much as the next person, this isn't quite what happen with the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake.
The guy who predicted the earthquake did it based on very dubious science and essentially got lucky, he got on tv beforehand and spread a lot of shit. The other scientists were all quite correctly saying 'we can't predict earthquakes this guy is talking out of his ass'. Because of this media argument the National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risks continued to not give clear information even after the preliminary tremors started despite these often indicating an earthquakes going to happen very soon, one of them even going so far as to say there was 'no danger' because they were still annoyed at the prediction guy.
Thus after the quake they were prosecuted for being 'falsely reassuring' during the tremors period, NOT for failing to predict the earthquake. The prosecution even cited a bunch of literature about the early tremors being important. Since it was the deadliest Italian earthquake in 30 years and a massive media show they lost their jobs and got 6 years, the latter of which I do think is ridiculous.
iirc there was one scientist who some time in advance said an earthquake was probably gonna happen - you folks better move. A group of government appointed scientists said "no no chill there is no earthquake" in order to not have panic but without having looked at any research before making the statement. That is the version I was told repeatedly at the time. Trufax ratio unknown.
Not totally different but somewhat different.
I love lolItaly stories as much as the next person, this isn't quite what happen with the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake.
The guy who predicted the earthquake did it based on very dubious science and essentially got lucky, he got on tv beforehand and spread a lot of shit. The other scientists were all quite correctly saying 'we can't predict earthquakes this guy is talking out of his ass'. Because of this media argument the National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risks continued to not give clear information even after the preliminary tremors started despite these often indicating an earthquakes going to happen very soon, one of them even going so far as to say there was 'no danger' because they were still annoyed at the prediction guy.
Thus after the quake they were prosecuted for being 'falsely reassuring' during the tremors period, NOT for failing to predict the earthquake. The prosecution even cited a bunch of literature about the early tremors being important. Since it was the deadliest Italian earthquake in 30 years and a massive media show they lost their jobs and got 6 years, the latter of which I do think is ridiculous.
Ah, so it's the media making a big fuss about quackery that is at least a contributing factor. My Newswipe sense is tingling.
If the scientists can be held liable, I'd hold the media for spreading unreliable information equally responsible. However since I don't believe the scientists can be held criminably liable, the media get off the hook too.
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
edited March 2013
In Italy, they believe it is better that a thousand innocent people should be jailed then that one guilty person should walk free.
In Italy, they believe it is better that a thousand innocent people should be jailed then that one guilty person should walk free.
I'm not sure it's even that. It's more like "decide on what happened and then do everything to make it stick". I've seen better judgement and reasoning from the Ministry of Magic.
iirc there was one scientist who some time in advance said an earthquake was probably gonna happen - you folks better move. A group of government appointed scientists said "no no chill there is no earthquake" in order to not have panic but without having looked at any research before making the statement. That is the version I was told repeatedly at the time. Trufax ratio unknown.
Not totally different but somewhat different.
I love lolItaly stories as much as the next person, this isn't quite what happen with the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake.
The guy who predicted the earthquake did it based on very dubious science and essentially got lucky, he got on tv beforehand and spread a lot of shit. The other scientists were all quite correctly saying 'we can't predict earthquakes this guy is talking out of his ass'. Because of this media argument the National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risks continued to not give clear information even after the preliminary tremors started despite these often indicating an earthquakes going to happen very soon, one of them even going so far as to say there was 'no danger' because they were still annoyed at the prediction guy.
Thus after the quake they were prosecuted for being 'falsely reassuring' during the tremors period, NOT for failing to predict the earthquake. The prosecution even cited a bunch of literature about the early tremors being important. Since it was the deadliest Italian earthquake in 30 years and a massive media show they lost their jobs and got 6 years, the latter of which I do think is ridiculous.
Yea, the problem these scientists face is that an extremely small number (the chance of a major quake) even if multiplied by 100 to 500 times is still an extremely small number.
If you report the increase of 100 to 500 times you are going to have a fucking mad house way out of proportion to the increased danger. If you don't, because the public is horrible with numbers, you get six years in jail......I guess it's time for some more hysterical panics. I'm sure we can throw somebody in jail for them too.
In Italy, they believe it is better that a thousand innocent people should be jailed then that one guilty person should walk free.
I'm not sure it's even that. It's more like "decide on what happened and then do everything to make it stick". I've seen better judgement and reasoning from the Ministry of Magic.
Exactly, i wouldn't dream of calling Italy that consistant.
Several European countries we have extradition treaties with will not extradite anyone to the US who may end up getting the death penalty on the grounds that it is inhumane to execute someone. So I can totally see the US going, "double jeopardy, so no extradition."
So we get stiff once in a while. So we have a little fun. What’s wrong with that? This is a free country, isn’t it? I can take my panda any place I want to. And if I wanna buy it a drink, that’s my business.
Its also clown shoes, their supreme court didn't even review the evidence they took the word of the incredibly stupid prosecutor who sees demonic sex orgies everywhere.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Several European countries we have extradition treaties with will not extradite anyone to the US who may end up getting the death penalty on the grounds that it is inhumane to execute someone. So I can totally see the US going, "double jeopardy, so no extradition."
Extradition seems to be one of those things that, if another country is sufficiently confident in not honoring (I can't think of a better word, except maybe "not enforcing", but that's technically incorrect), there doesn't appear to be a lot to do besides gnash your teeth a great deal.
Requesting Knoxx for extradition would be an international incident for both sides. I doubt Italy would want that kind of coverage either way. Especially not with a US base in their country providing extra income.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
So, how was the US abusing its power there? I know that McKinnon was a geek cause celebre for a while, but I feel that was self-serving.
Well there was controversy over how the extradition agreement was enacted. It was one of those post-9/11 increased security deals and was meant to be bilateral. The UK passed legislation to make it law, and then the US was "whoops can't get it through congress" or something, so it's effectively an unbalanced situation in the US' favour.
That and it does feel to an extent they're making an example of him.
So, how was the US abusing its power there? I know that McKinnon was a geek cause celebre for a while, but I feel that was self-serving.
Well there was controversy over how the extradition agreement was enacted. It was one of those post-9/11 increased security deals and was meant to be bilateral. The UK passed legislation to make it law, and then the US was "whoops can't get it through congress" or something, so it's effectively an unbalanced situation in the US' favour.
That and it does feel to an extent they're making an example of him.
Well, yes, that's sort of the case when you're dealing with applying laws in new areas. But, from what I understand, there never was any contention that he didn't do what he was accused of, just a lot of victim blaming and pushes to prevent extradition on humane grounds. Further, I always felt that the geeks defended him more because they wanted to prevent the precedent his extradition and trial would have caused.
Yeah, our options on any extradition request seem to range from the legitimate (I believe our treaties tend to have clauses dealing with double jeopardy and other issues) to the less legitimate but still practical (just tell Italy to fuck off, we're the US and we can pull shit like that).
Given that, requesting extradition is a no-win situation for them.
However, I'd think this would limit Knox's movements in the future, since they could always pull what we pulled with Polanski and have another more sympathetic country (withbwhom they also have a treaty) snatch her up if she goes abroad. So it may not just be Italy this keeps her out of.
Honestly if I was Knoxx I'd stay the fuck out of Europe anyway. Her "conviction" was clown shoes, and this further development is worse. To compare her to Polanski is way way apples to horse anus's.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Honestly if I was Knoxx I'd stay the fuck out of Europe anyway. Her "conviction" was clown shoes, and this further development is worse. To compare her to Polanski is way way apples to horse anus's.
Whoa, lets be clear here, I was NOT comparing her to Polanski.
I was just using Polanski as an example of somebody being picked up in a third nation when their home nation refuses extradition. And it wouldn't just be Europe. It would be ANY country Italy had extradition treaties with that they could convince to pick her up.
Obviously "pissing off the US" would be a factor, but so would following the law and whatever international public perception if her case might be (which may not match perception here).
Leaving the US would, I'd think, carry some risk to her. Pretty much forever.
Yeah, our options on any extradition request seem to range from the legitimate (I believe our treaties tend to have clauses dealing with double jeopardy and other issues) to the less legitimate but still practical (just tell Italy to fuck off, we're the US and we can pull shit like that).
Given that, requesting extradition is a no-win situation for them.
However, I'd think this would limit Knox's movements in the future, since they could always pull what we pulled with Polanski and have another more sympathetic country (withbwhom they also have a treaty) snatch her up if she goes abroad. So it may not just be Italy this keeps her out of.
If I were Knox, I'd never leave the US again regardless of the outcome.
Not that every country is as bad as Italy, but fool me once...
That said, I'd be surprised to see another country snatch up another country's citizens and extradite them to a 3rd. ESPECIALLY if that's an American citizen. I guess if it was someone trying to make a 'fuck you America' point like Venezuela or something, but that's pretty ballsy.
That doesn't feel like a thing that should be decided by legal precedent rather than scientific analysis. Italy has problems.
Scientific analysis reports the following
The radiation produced by cell phone photons are <0.001 kJ/mole
The average molecule's energy at room temperature is about 2.5 kJ/mole
And the amount of energy transfer required to break apart covalent bonds is much higher than 2.5 kJ/mole, or else the chemical bonds required for life to exist would not be able to stay formed.
See, and I admittedly have no idea how the law works at that point. If I'm wanted on a murder conviction in Italy, and they have a treaty with, say, Canada, can't they request that I be picked up if I'm in their jurisdiction?
At that point it's obviously going to be an international incident, but I'd think it'd at least be concievable that Italy could convince a third country to extradite over US objections.
And if Italy did that they'd be pissing off a country that provides them more than they provide it. I mean I wouldn't put it pass Italy, but over one white girl I doubt they'd risk the political ramifications of such an action.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
See, and I admittedly have no idea how the law works at that point. If I'm wanted on a murder conviction in Italy, and they have a treaty with, say, Canada, can't they request that I be picked up if I'm in their jurisdiction?
At that point it's obviously going to be an international incident, but I'd think it'd at least be concievable that Italy could convince a third country to extradite over US objections.
It's conceivable, but unlikely.
We've got a lot more weight than Italy does, our justice system is much more highly valued, and we couldn't even get Polanski extradited. Unlike Knox, he wasn't acquitted.
Still, if I was Knox...I'd stay my ass in the good old USA.
If I were her I'd probably stay in the US, but I don't know if anyone gives enough of a shit about Italy to piss off America over it
See, and again this'll depend on local public opinion. For instance, it sounds like the common perception in the UK is that she's guilty. So if the British public wanted to see her extradited...
Unlikely, but with decades in an Italian prison on the line I wouldn't throw those dice.
Several European countries we have extradition treaties with will not extradite anyone to the US who may end up getting the death penalty on the grounds that it is inhumane to execute someone. So I can totally see the US going, "double jeopardy, so no extradition."
Not just something as extreme as the death penalty. Countries have refused to extradite probation violators to the U.S, because we don't give them credit for the time they spent on probation. Not extraditing on double jeopardy grounds is pretty much a given.
...Okay, I guess I'm the only person who read the case material and thought, "Yeah, I think you killed your flatmate."
The prosecution has a pretty dubious case, probably because the prosecution already has such an advantage in Italy, but the story offered by the defendants is nonsense. "Oh I can't remember whether or not my girlfriend & I were having sex at my apartment that night. Whatever she says is right."
It's a pretty good indicator that you're bullshitting when you can't independently keep a story straight. That and Ms. Knox changing the story from, "I was there and hid while she was murdered," to "Oh I was over at my amnesiac boyfriend's place having sex. And we smoked pot, which is somehow why our story isn't straight,"
Motive is up in the air. but meh. People kill other people with incredibly thin motives all of the time.
Posts
Remember this is the country that jailed a group of geoscientists for failing to predict an earthquake, which lest we forget, are scientifically impossible to predict.
The US and Italy do have a bi-lateral extradition treaty. However an argument could be made that with her aquital the US could see that double jeapordy applies and thus could choose not to honour any extradition request. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
iirc there was one scientist who some time in advance said an earthquake was probably gonna happen - you folks better move. A group of government appointed scientists said "no no chill there is no earthquake" in order to not have panic but without having looked at any research before making the statement. That is the version I was told repeatedly at the time. Trufax ratio unknown.
Not totally different but somewhat different.
Fixed. The fact I feel this way is depressing in itself.
But yeah, I can't see how Amanda Knox could ever see a fair trial in Italy with how her case was argued last time. If I were an extradition judge I'd be tempted to block it on those grounds alone.
Well, that is literally all you can say about earthquake prediction, "it might happen today but probably not" because it is always more likely to not happen until right up to the moment when it does happen, which we cannot predict even slightly with current technology. Anyone saying "there is probably going to be an earthquake today" is just as wrong as someone saying "there will not be an earthquake today" if it happens later that day, the fact the first guy happened to be right by sheer chance does not make the second group criminally responsible for contradicting him.
We can predict where earthquakes are likely to happen, but as for when they might happen, the best geoscientist in the world is no more equipped to give guarantees than Mystic Meg and her crystal ball. It is the same as holding the police criminally responsible for failing to predict in advance where the next murder is going to happen.
To bring this back to the topic at hand, it’s just one example of how micky mouse the legal system is there, it’s the whims of the ruling elites at the time with an added dash of court of public opinion. People wanted someone to blame for an earthquake so the judiciary gave them someone to blame. It’s a farce.
Yeah, just checked. First guy predicted a big earthquake for March 29th because radon gas and perihelon with Venus....aka quackery. An earthquake later hit a different town, nearby.
I love lolItaly stories as much as the next person, this isn't quite what happen with the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake.
The guy who predicted the earthquake did it based on very dubious science and essentially got lucky, he got on tv beforehand and spread a lot of shit. The other scientists were all quite correctly saying 'we can't predict earthquakes this guy is talking out of his ass'. Because of this media argument the National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risks continued to not give clear information even after the preliminary tremors started despite these often indicating an earthquakes going to happen very soon, one of them even going so far as to say there was 'no danger' because they were still annoyed at the prediction guy.
Thus after the quake they were prosecuted for being 'falsely reassuring' during the tremors period, NOT for failing to predict the earthquake. The prosecution even cited a bunch of literature about the early tremors being important. Since it was the deadliest Italian earthquake in 30 years and a massive media show they lost their jobs and got 6 years, the latter of which I do think is ridiculous.
Ah, so it's the media making a big fuss about quackery that is at least a contributing factor. My Newswipe sense is tingling.
If the scientists can be held liable, I'd hold the media for spreading unreliable information equally responsible. However since I don't believe the scientists can be held criminably liable, the media get off the hook too.
Autistic 'Aliens!' hacker
I'm not sure it's even that. It's more like "decide on what happened and then do everything to make it stick". I've seen better judgement and reasoning from the Ministry of Magic.
Yea, the problem these scientists face is that an extremely small number (the chance of a major quake) even if multiplied by 100 to 500 times is still an extremely small number.
If you report the increase of 100 to 500 times you are going to have a fucking mad house way out of proportion to the increased danger. If you don't, because the public is horrible with numbers, you get six years in jail......I guess it's time for some more hysterical panics. I'm sure we can throw somebody in jail for them too.
Exactly, i wouldn't dream of calling Italy that consistant.
Judges in the US are not above using the "this is fucking stupid get it out of my court" legal standard.
This is a good standard, no matter how much it stymies Law & Order stories.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Extradition seems to be one of those things that, if another country is sufficiently confident in not honoring (I can't think of a better word, except maybe "not enforcing", but that's technically incorrect), there doesn't appear to be a lot to do besides gnash your teeth a great deal.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Well there was controversy over how the extradition agreement was enacted. It was one of those post-9/11 increased security deals and was meant to be bilateral. The UK passed legislation to make it law, and then the US was "whoops can't get it through congress" or something, so it's effectively an unbalanced situation in the US' favour.
That and it does feel to an extent they're making an example of him.
Well, yes, that's sort of the case when you're dealing with applying laws in new areas. But, from what I understand, there never was any contention that he didn't do what he was accused of, just a lot of victim blaming and pushes to prevent extradition on humane grounds. Further, I always felt that the geeks defended him more because they wanted to prevent the precedent his extradition and trial would have caused.
Given that, requesting extradition is a no-win situation for them.
However, I'd think this would limit Knox's movements in the future, since they could always pull what we pulled with Polanski and have another more sympathetic country (withbwhom they also have a treaty) snatch her up if she goes abroad. So it may not just be Italy this keeps her out of.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Whoa, lets be clear here, I was NOT comparing her to Polanski.
I was just using Polanski as an example of somebody being picked up in a third nation when their home nation refuses extradition. And it wouldn't just be Europe. It would be ANY country Italy had extradition treaties with that they could convince to pick her up.
Obviously "pissing off the US" would be a factor, but so would following the law and whatever international public perception if her case might be (which may not match perception here).
Leaving the US would, I'd think, carry some risk to her. Pretty much forever.
If I were Knox, I'd never leave the US again regardless of the outcome.
Not that every country is as bad as Italy, but fool me once...
That said, I'd be surprised to see another country snatch up another country's citizens and extradite them to a 3rd. ESPECIALLY if that's an American citizen. I guess if it was someone trying to make a 'fuck you America' point like Venezuela or something, but that's pretty ballsy.
Scientific analysis reports the following
The radiation produced by cell phone photons are <0.001 kJ/mole
The average molecule's energy at room temperature is about 2.5 kJ/mole
And the amount of energy transfer required to break apart covalent bonds is much higher than 2.5 kJ/mole, or else the chemical bonds required for life to exist would not be able to stay formed.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
At that point it's obviously going to be an international incident, but I'd think it'd at least be concievable that Italy could convince a third country to extradite over US objections.
pleasepaypreacher.net
It's conceivable, but unlikely.
We've got a lot more weight than Italy does, our justice system is much more highly valued, and we couldn't even get Polanski extradited. Unlike Knox, he wasn't acquitted.
Still, if I was Knox...I'd stay my ass in the good old USA.
pleasepaypreacher.net
See, and again this'll depend on local public opinion. For instance, it sounds like the common perception in the UK is that she's guilty. So if the British public wanted to see her extradited...
Unlikely, but with decades in an Italian prison on the line I wouldn't throw those dice.
Not just something as extreme as the death penalty. Countries have refused to extradite probation violators to the U.S, because we don't give them credit for the time they spent on probation. Not extraditing on double jeopardy grounds is pretty much a given.
The prosecution has a pretty dubious case, probably because the prosecution already has such an advantage in Italy, but the story offered by the defendants is nonsense. "Oh I can't remember whether or not my girlfriend & I were having sex at my apartment that night. Whatever she says is right."
It's a pretty good indicator that you're bullshitting when you can't independently keep a story straight. That and Ms. Knox changing the story from, "I was there and hid while she was murdered," to "Oh I was over at my amnesiac boyfriend's place having sex. And we smoked pot, which is somehow why our story isn't straight,"
Motive is up in the air. but meh. People kill other people with incredibly thin motives all of the time.