Requesting article or something about Amanda Knox. I have never heard of her.
1st in Kommisar's 2009 SM Tournament 1st in I Love You`s 2009 New Year`s Tournament 3rd in EnR's Mashfest '08 tournament 5th in Phynx's Unofficial FFR Tournament 9th in D3 of the 2008-2009 4th Official FFR Tournament 10th in D5 of the 2010 5th Official FFR Tournament 10th in D6 of the 2011-2012 6th Official FFR Tournament FMO AAA Count:71 FGO AAA Count:10
Everybody please stop paying attention to bullshit media absurdity.
Shut up.
On topic, this is total bullshit. I don't believe she should have been acquitted of all the charges. Surprisingly the one charge against her happens to not even play a role in this because the sentence for whatever charge it was (changing her story/false evidence/telling lies, somewhere around there) was a 3 year sentence and she served 4 years already. How lucky can people get.
I have a feeling my law prof is going to talk about this since I have a law exam / lecture today, and he's very up to date about things in law - the guy himself is a lawyer. I will see if there is any class discussion based on the subject.
1st in Kommisar's 2009 SM Tournament 1st in I Love You`s 2009 New Year`s Tournament 3rd in EnR's Mashfest '08 tournament 5th in Phynx's Unofficial FFR Tournament 9th in D3 of the 2008-2009 4th Official FFR Tournament 10th in D5 of the 2010 5th Official FFR Tournament 10th in D6 of the 2011-2012 6th Official FFR Tournament FMO AAA Count:71 FGO AAA Count:10
I heard something on the news about it while playing FFR a few hours ago but I honestly don't know any details, so I will just move on and continue playing FFR. :3
Quickedit: Also note, the world is stupid, there is no justice, blah blah. My suggestion: build a bridge and get over it. It ain't gonna change.
948 AAAs | 1461 FCs | 549 TPs | 7 FMO AAAs Best AAAs: Exciting Hyper Highspeed Star (69), Nous (69), Pure Ruby (68), Heavenly Spores (68), Ambient Angels (66), Within Life (66), Defection (66) Southern Cross (65)
Whether or not she is really innocent (I really don't care to pass a judgment one way or another), it seems like this case is a victim of today's heavy reliance on scientific findings and DNA evidence at crime scenes. If there is no strong connection with DNA evidence, it becomes very difficult to convict a person of a crime. Judge and jury alike are biased to the scientific facts, which are important don't get me wrong, but said reliance results in the judge/jury neglecting to take note of circumstantial evidence and verbal testimonies from witnesses and the accused themselves, which appear as very strong evidence in this case.
Comment