Thanks for finding that. I understand that the point they want to make is that the Italian judicial system permits the prosecutor to appeal an acquittal, and since that constitutes double jeopardy in the US, any decision after that acquittal should be considered: "a classic case of wrongful conviction".
Essentially, they are taking the position that if a country permits the prosecution to appeal a decision, that country is practicing "wrongful conviction". It sounds like a very thin argument. As I've mentioned before, by this definition, Canada and Italy fall into the category of practicing "wrongful conviction" on a daily basis. Basically, they seem to be saying that if Knox's conviction is upheld, she should not be extradited because, regardless of the evidence, if she were being prosecuted in the US, the case would have been over after the acquittal. Reading between the lines, what I see is an attempt to get out from under a conviction on the basis of a legal technicality, one that doesn't even exist in the country where the murder occurred. The whole argument seems to be based on the concept that US law should apply internationally.