Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #5

[Allusonz]

Yes, I, too, get that the fast-track reduction is essentially the Italian equivalent of an American defendant taking a plea bargain: the defendant gives up many of his rights in return for a shorter sentence. (The difference being, IIRC, that Italian law doesn't allow for actual bargaining; it's simply the defendant's choice.) This by no means clears up the rest of the sentencing confusion, but this much makes sense to me.

But the same links above say the sentence reduction in a case where a life sentence is possible is to 30 years. Yet RG got his sentence reduced to 24 (and we have more than one reason cited for that), and then and only then that sentence was reduced by one-third. Apparently RG was never eligible for a life sentence.

At the same time, the prosecutor is appealing AK's and RS' sentences, asking they get life instead of 24 or even 30 years! Apparently on the ground of "overwhelming evidence."

So we have RG, whose DNA is all over the death room and body of the victim somehow only eligible for a max of 30 years (and even that reduced), but AK and RS, who left little or no physical traces in MK's room or on MK's body, eligible for life in prison.

I don't think anyone need wonder why some of us find the prosecutor "spiteful."

Sometimes i wish i could hit the thanks button more than once rofl

 

[otto]

Then i am sorry i simply do not understand your conflicting statements. I dont believe any of them want this movie to be made and that is what they are all saying

That seems to be the case. Meredith's family objects for one reason, Amanda objects for another reason. Still, I think that it's important that the facts of the case be accurately portrayed for the purpose of clarifying the Knox story. There is no reason to include gruesome details that resulted in the 44 injuries.

 

[Nova]

The end result is all the same ... Rudy was sentenced as a result of a fair trial, and his circumstances are different from those of Amanda and Raffaele not because they have different degrees of responsibility for the murder or because one or the other has been treated unfairly, but because they elected different trial methods.

Therefore ... Rudy could not be sentenced for longer than 30 years, but Amanda and Raffaele can be sentenced for some number of years, or they can be released ... depending on the findings of the appeal court.

True, RG could not end up with more than 30 years, thanks to the fast-track system. (Well, he could have if he were charged with some of the "extras" the prosecutor chose to throw at AK and RS, but never mind that for the moment.)

The wonder is that he ended up with fewer and why. The fast-track system doesn't explain the entire reduction unless one assumes some Italian principle of "automatic parity for co-defendants," but (a) thus far, nobody has produced any evidence of that; and (b) the "parity" only comes into play when it benefits RG, not if it benefits AK or RS.

And yet RG declined to exonerate AK or RS at trial. I'm shocked!

 

[Nova]

Of course Meredith's parents would be horrified that their daughter's murder is being turned into film entertainment for the masses.

I'm sure Amanda's parents consider this a tragedy for their daughter as well. Not an EQUAL tragedy, surely, but no more a fit subject for popular entertainment.

 

[Allusonz]

True, RG could not end up with more than 30 years, thanks to the fast-track system. (Well, he could have if he were charged with some of the "extras" the prosecutor chose to throw at AK and RS, but never mind that for the moment.)

The wonder is that he ended up with fewer and why. The fast-track system doesn't explain the entire reduction unless one assumes some Italian principle of "automatic parity for co-defendants," but (a) thus far, nobody has produced any evidence of that; and (b) the "parity" only comes into play when it benefits RG, not if it benefits AK or RS.

And yet RG declined to exonerate AK or RS at trial. I'm shocked!

Amazingly done in Chambers thus no public how convenient !!

 

[otto]

I'm sure Amanda's parents consider this a tragedy for their daughter as well. Not an EQUAL tragedy, surely, but no more a fit subject for popular entertainment.

A film about a young woman that goes to Europe, lets loose, and gets into serious trouble sounds like a really important film for the US public ... at the very least it's a warning to others that Italy is not some backwards, banana republic where people can do whatever they want, regardless of laws and cultural values.

 

[Nova]

That seems to be the case. Meredith's family objects for one reason, Amanda objects for another reason. Still, I think that it's important that the facts of the case be accurately portrayed for the purpose of clarifying the Knox story. There is no reason to include gruesome details that resulted in the 44 injuries.

Again, there is no reason to believe the facts will be "accurately portrayed" (and how could they be when we can't even agree on the facts here?) and there is no mechanism by which the filmmaker can be required to be accurate.

Further, as I said above, this has been a tragedy for AK and RS as well.

No wonder nobody actually involved wants a TV-movie made!

 

[otto]

Again, there is no reason to believe the facts will be "accurately portrayed" (and how could they be when we can't even agree on the facts here?) and there is no mechanism by which the filmmaker can be required to be accurate.

Further, as I said above, this has been a tragedy for AK and RS as well.

No wonder nobody actually involved wants a TV-movie made!

I do .. I'd lik to see a movie about the case, but I see no reason to include footage of the actual attack that resulted in 44 injuries. A good director knows how to convey that information without blood, gore, screams, and visuals.

We already have enough docudramas that are heavily influenced by Doug Preston ... we sure don't need a remake of that fiction!

 

[Nova]

A film about a young woman that goes to Europe, lets loose, and gets into serious trouble sounds like a really important film for the US public ... at the very least it's a warning to others that Italy is not some backwards, banana republic where people can do whatever they want, regardless of laws and cultural values.

So-called "banana republics" aren't characterized by a lack of laws, but by an arbitrariness of laws. At the moment, I think the verdict is out on Italy, at least in Perugia.

As for cautionary tales, one may create one without showing wild and unsupported claims made by a prosecutor in a real case.

 

[Nova]

I do .. I'd lik to see a movie about the case, but I see no reason to include footage of the actual attack that resulted in 44 injuries. A good director knows how to convey that information without blood, gore, screams, and visuals.

We already have enough docudramas that are heavily influenced by Doug Preston ... we sure don't need a remake of that fiction!

One can make a film without showing graphic violence, but let's don't kid ourselves that anyone is going to do so nowadays.

The greater problem is that unless one takes a very artful approach in which different views are given equal screen time and emphasis (and this never happens with Lifetime movies), whatever is shown will only reflect the filmmakers' opinion, but it will become "fact" for millions of viewers.

Under U.S. law, I doubt this film can be stopped. But I don't blame any of the parties for wishing it could be.

 

[otto]

So-called "banana republics" aren't characterized by a lack of laws, but by an arbitrariness of laws. At the moment, I think the verdict is out on Italy, at least in Perugia.

As for cautionary tales, one may create one without showing wild and unsupported claims made by a prosecutor in a real case.

Why rely on fiction when we have a true story about a woman from Seattle going to Italy and cutting loose, so loose that she was convicted of murdering her roommate after a drug-fueled night?

That's where we differ. I see an abundance of forensic and circumstantial evidence, but not everyone does. I'd like to see a film that includes all that forensic and circumstantial evidence ... since discussing all the little points in isolation really doesn't do this conviction justice.

As Aristotle said: "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts"

 

[Nova]

Why rely on fiction when we have a true story about a woman from Seattle going to Italy and cutting loose, so loose that she was convicted of murdering her roommate after a drug-fueled night?

That's where we differ. I see an abundance of forensic and circumstantial evidence, but not everyone does. I'd like to see a film that includes all that forensic and circumstantial evidence ... since discussing all the little points in isolation really doesn't do this conviction justice.

As Aristotle said: "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts"

Why rely on fiction indeed? You'll have to ask Lifetime, but if they're honest, they'll tell you: "Fiction sells."

I keep waiting for the claimed abundance of circumstantial evidence, but thus far, every piece of evidence turns out to be less than advertised and the argument quickly shifts to supposedly character evidence.

I get it: some people don't like Amanda Knox. I don't know what that has to do with whether she participated in a murder.

 

[otto]

Why rely on fiction indeed? You'll have to ask Lifetime, but if they're honest, they'll tell you: "Fiction sells."

I keep waiting for the claimed abundance of circumstantial evidence, but thus far, every piece of evidence turns out to be less than advertised and the argument quickly shifts to supposedly character evidence.

I get it: some people don't like Amanda Knox. I don't know what that has to do with whether she participated in a murder.

I find this to be a very interesting case and although I've read the timeline, testimony and court reports, I would find it enlightening to see it all strung together in movie format.

 

[Nova]

I find this to be a very interesting case and although I've read the timeline, testimony and court reports, I would find it enlightening to see it all strung together in movie format.

Unfortunately, the average viewer doesn't have your knowledge of the case and won't be able to view the film critically. The average viewer will accept whatever is dramatized as gospel. I don't blame AK's family for being unhappy about it (which isn't to say I think the first amendment should be discarded and the film banned).

 

[otto]

Another report about the movie, and Kercher's objections

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371487

This is interesting: "The producers are reported not to have spoken to any of the families, instead working from media reports and a 400-page report drawn up by the judge in the case"

I am more interested in the film now ... if only producers could tone down the graphic representation of the film to respect Meredith and her family.

 

[otto]

Here's the movie trailer:

http://www.diredonna.it/amanda-knox-i-genitori-diffidano-il-film-tv-25951.html

 

[otto]

Clip about the film, including comments from the producer

[video=youtube;jg9eSyhgzBw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg9eSyhgzBw[/video]

 

[otto]

Another comment about the parties opposing the film, and comments from the "amanda" actress.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...efends-vile-Meredith-Kercher-murder-film.html

 

[otto]

Meet Meredith's father: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sol...athers-bedtime-book-for-Meredith-Kercher.html

 

[Malkmus]

Acclaimed director Michael Winterbottom is also said to have a movie based on the case in the works.

If a movie were made which adhered strictly to the facts, which plot points do you think would be more compelling to an audience and director: The story of a typical home burglary turned deadly, a corrupt prosecutor convicted of his own crimes, the many blunders of the police involved, Amanda’s demonization in the media, and three families’ lives ruined as a result…

Or, the story of Amanda maybe lying about what time she ate dinner, and maybe she should have called the cops as soon as she saw a streak of blood in the sink, and maybe she was referring to her boss as a friend in the letter, and maybe she retracted her accusation of an innocent man, and maybe she should have cried more. This movie would be called "Definitely, Maybe"... if only the title weren't already taken.

As a television producer I think I know which parts I’d find meaningful and which parts the audience would find completely meaningless and convoluted. I’d almost like to see a movie which depicts the prosecution’s narrative and the circumstantial evidence in a serious manner. A movie about a girl who moves to Italy and puts a large kitchen knife in her purse for protection, which just so happens to come in handy a few nights later when she gets stoned, and instead of spending the evening relaxing like most people in her condition would do, she gets turned on by seeing a guy she barely knows rape her roommate and immediately recruits her boyfriend to help her and the near-stranger stab and torture the roommate to death. Sounds like a bunch of fantasy, not real life. Mignini should produce horror movies.