Foxy Noxy...

What is your reaction, Victim of circumstance or cold hearted drug fueled sex killer?

edit: wh00ps forgot the K in the title....

ignorant wrote: What is your reaction, Victim of circumstance or cold hearted drug fueled sex killer? edit: wh00ps forgot the K in the title....

?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/12/05/italy.kercher.react/index.html

I don't know. There certainly seemed to be enough to raise a reasonable doubt to me.

She seems and has seemed strangely cold about the whole thing. That could be because she knows her innocence...it's she could be some sort of devious mastermind that framed that other dude...

HeavyDuty wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/12/05/italy.kercher.react/index.html I don't know. There certainly seemed to be enough to raise a reasonable doubt to me.

I'm sure that we are seeing things in the news that the jury didn't have access to. I was on a jury over the summer and read the papers when I was done and there was a lot more in the paper than in court. I would asssume alt of whats out there wouldn't stand up in a trial. I do think she had something to do with it though.

i don't think she had anything to do with it. from reading about the prosecutor, he seems like a far piece beyond shady. the entire theory of the case borders on ridiculous, IMO. the italians should stick to food, wine, art, and cars. impartial administration of justice might be a little bit out of reach.

the dead chick's sister is pretty hot....

The whole good old american girl turns perverted drugged up sex killer actually kinda gets me worked up... It gives me hope for my wife...

I watched the story on one of the news programs (Dateline or whatever) and while I can't say she was definitely involved, something about her just doesn't seem right. Her room mate is murdered with blood everywhere in her apartment and she is taken to the police station for questioning and she decides to start doing cartwheels (in the police station)? Cue the Looney Tunes music.

Wally wrote: I'm sure that we are seeing things in the news that the jury didn't have access to. I was on a jury over the summer and read the papers when I was done and there was a lot more in the paper than in court.

In Italy, the jury is allowed to read the newspapers, watch tv reports of the trial, talk to the press, etc. while the trial is underway. Heck, some on the jury told reporters that they were going to vote guilty before all of the evidence was presented. Also, the defense was not allowed to present certain evidence that - in the U.S. - would have been a cornerstone of their case.

I haven't really followed this case but my gut tells me she's guilty of something less than murder and something more than innocent bystander.

I tend to think she may have been involved. Wasn't there a knife with he DNA and Kercher's blood on it at her boyfriend's apartment?

I also think the way the police and prosecturion handled it would lead to a mistrial in America, but she's not in America.

eastsidemav wrote: I tend to think she may have been involved. Wasn't there a knife with he DNA and Kercher's blood on it at her boyfriend's apartment?

DNA, not blood. and there are a thousand ways her DNA could have gotten there.

I think the biggest thing that convicted her was her ever changing story about where she was the night of the murder. She said she wasn't there. The said she was there and heard the screams. Then she said her ex boss did it. I may have the exact order wrong, but there is certainly something fishy there.

And the knife supposedly did not match the wound or the bloody imprint of the knife on the sheets. I don't think she would have been convicted in America but she is definitely a weird one.

Its hard to say, If she wasnt so weird things might have gone alot differently. But either way, she either got only 25 years for killing someone, or 25 years for being crazy when she maybe didnt really do anything else wrong. Who knows.