What is the "circumstantial" evidence that Amanda Knox had anything to do with the murder? I don't think she even knew the murderer. It was a total character assassination like the Casey Anthony case, like the Margaret Kelly Michaels pre-school sex abuse case, like the McMartin pre-school case that imprisoned Ray Buckey for 5 years and resulted in no convictions for anything because the jury had the courage to say there was NO evidence, like the 5 teenagers who were imprisoned in the Central Park jogger attack and had nothing to do with it but police inveigled them into "confessions" that they signed so that they could go home (How do those cops live with themselves?).

Heres an example of the kind of "evidence" that is used to hop people up against a young woman like Amanda Knox: The police wouldn't let her get back into her apartment so she had to buy clothing. Above all, she needed underwear. The Italian press ran with photos of Amanda buying "panties" (whatever the raciest word for women's underpants is in Italy). The British press picked up a lot of that crap, too. "Her roommate brutally murdered and all she thinks about is getting herself new panties."

One thing though, its a lesson that parents and teachers should talk about with young people. Don't go through life thinking that cops are on your side. Be wary of the state, constantly wary.

This js a joke, right? Clan Justice? Like the Hatfields and McCoys?

"You was a lookin at mah Dauugter."

"No Sir."

"Ain't my Daughter purdy enough fer you?"

"Yes Sir."

"Then you was lookin at mah Daughter. Mah, fetch me that shotgun, yonder, we got ourselves a weddin."

That's clan justice for you. Ms. Knox? Well, "if she hadn't been where the crows were found, she'd be safe and sound."

I wish I could speak for Mark Twain right now.

Over at takimag Mr. Somerset rambles on about inverse racism in Mexico and Italy being a second world country, whatever that may be. Here we hear about the advantages of Pashtunwali. (Am I really exaggerating?)

As far as I can see, a young and inexperienced person clashed with police in a culture that was subtly different from her own - the differences being to small to make her or her parents sufficiently wary. Would she - given her imprudent behaviour towards members of a foreign culture have avoided trouble in a system of privatised law enforcement? I dare doubt it.

It seems she behaved in a rather unfortunate way. Nothing at all to merit being robbed of years of her life, but enough to cause a grave injustice comitted against her.

I notice that a century of Anglo-Saxon pseudomoralistic brainwashing has made it impossible to talk about causation without implying absurd moral judgement. Dr. Machan's screed about Ron Paul's so called foreign policy problems is a fine example of this mechanism. Explaining the victim's part in a crime or injustice is not blaming the victim. Nor is it exculpating the perpetrator. It's just thinking about how to avoid ugly surprises in the future.

The fact that Miss Knox seems to have been imprudent does not exculpate the italian prosecutor in the least - but it goes a long way towards explaining his unjust actions and this analysis helps us to either find a less provocative course or, if we are _really_ obliged to follow a course at least helps us anticipate adverse reactions. Do you see a parallel to Dr. Paul here?

Does anyone else see Rod Farmer's comment as near the height of ignorance?
So ignorant in fact it's not possible to respond.
Yeesh.

The "joke", is public justice and the jokers are those who don't see it for what it is.

Tribal justice is the only true judicial system. For tribal justice to work society has to be organized in extended family units and tribes. The PE have left no stone unturned to destroy the family unit and tribal character of human organization. Ever wonder why grandparents live in senior communities. Why so much noise about gay marriage nonsense. Why the children are supposed to move out of their parents house. Why estate tax. Why property taxes. Why immigration. Why war on Pushtoons. They are scared of humans who are organized in a tribal family.

Sir, I dare object. I doubt she would have escaped grave trouble had this happened in a privatised system of justice. Her problem was that her behaviour was deemed provocative by the host culture. This supposed provocation was then interpreted as a sign of guilt. What makes you certain this misunderstanding between similar but nonetheless different cultures would have been avoided in a privatised system?

Any system of "justice" is a sick joke, only the middle class doesn't get it, because usually they are not on the receiving end. Therefore they feel morally superiour and trust the police. Poor Miss Knox found herself in a position someone of her background never experiences under normal circumstances. When she realised police and press was after her, it was to late.

"Round up the usual suspects!"

I would agree. Seems TV and and the rest of the 'culture' has sufficiently numbed many. What qualifies the state to prosecute? Are 'they' smarter? More impartial? I would say quite the opposite as many are out to make a name for themselves and move into positions of more power. Private justice would bring about more personal resposibility. Not only in your actions but also in protecting yourself.

"In Pakistan and Afghanistan, for instance, the US regularly pays money to families whose loved ones have accidently been blow up by US bombs."

And it also pays money to families whose loved ones have been deliberately/not accidently killed by US citizens, which is more than somewhat perverse, is it not? ... ... . Click to view link ... . and then doesn't appear to prosecute them for the deed.

No wonder there are so many problems for Uncle Sam.

byrresheim wrote, "Sir, I dare object. I doubt she would have escaped grave trouble had this happened in a privatised system of justice."

Ahem, it's Not about escaping trouble - it's about a system that claims to be impartial when it is not - leading to trapping of the innocent, etc... etc... etc...

See this short example which applies here as well:

... "This is the inevitable result of leaving matters of "justice" in the hands of the State, and specifically protected state employees who always will favor their careers more than actual justice."... :

Click to view link

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks for the link.

Not so today. The Kercher family waits for "justice." They will not receive a monetary settlement from the Knox's that would in a different cultural context ease their pain, or at least recognize it. They are not in control of the process of justice and thus their pain, in fact, is magnified. As for Knox, the same can be said for her. Perhaps she had something to do with the murder, perhaps not. But the process that she has been subjected to is regrettable. She obviously didn't COMMIT the murder and the rest seems to be hearsay, or something approaching it.

I was just reading a 1934 article in my local paper where a fellow was shot while in another man's watermelon patch. The fellow who was shot was suing for $5000. The jury threw the case out in 20 minutes. How times have changed. Now I must not only wait for the intruder to break into my house,I might be required to retreat to a different room before I could shot him and then still risk a civil suit.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Not proper to defend yourself. Now there are "experts" to defend you ...

"Not proper to defend yourself. Now there are "experts" to defend you ... " ... ... Reply from the Daily Bell.

And cowards to defend you too in some cases, DB? ... ... Click to view link

you are so so right about that. Remember all--anything you say can and will be used against you.

logically it is surprising that a young person of this age does not know to say nothing.

however, emotionally and socially our children are trained to say something, are not permitted to say nothing or no.

We need to teach more kids how to say no so what they say and do cannot be used against them.

if you think Italy is a strange culture-- look at the USA to-day ---. I don't recognise it from years ago. When the President's office can murder a citizen without due porcess on some trumped up unproven theory or culpability ( the BS theory)then all i can say is here is Dachau coming again?

Have you been there?

I have--3 times at least, with most of the members of my family. It was and they ( the brownshirts) were precisely what we are seeing now. Murderers dancing around in the guise of power and authority. Liars, cheats, swine--pigs in brown.

Point taken !

We need not look much farther than "Gibson Guitars" to see American communism.

I too am strongly against the destruction of the family unit. I have been fighting these socialist bastards for a very long time.

Our government is supposed to be you and I, an extended "clan", if you like, based on family values and interests. Family, but not family law, because there is prejudice between families. We need an impartial being to moderate. That is what our constitution is all about!

Clark, never judge someone unless you understand that person. Never follow another's vission. Your truth is yours, that is the way God intended it, or, your truth is relative to everyone elses, in a relative universe.

So, what is your way, Clark, to defeat Socialism and strengthen the family?
We're on the same side. Whattaya thank?

Rod Farmer asked, "So, what is your way, Clark, to defeat Socialism and strengthen the family?"

A way (the Only way) is through the use of the free market, private courts and Panarchy

"... today's Governments, which are the visible workings of the world's States, violate primary rights and those rights (following Jefferson) are the means by which persons achieve Welfare, Safety, Security, and Happiness, then we can be certain that today's Governments reduce the Welfare, Safety, Security, and Happiness of great numbers of persons who do not voluntarily wish to associate themselves with those Governments." ...

Click to view link

The way to get there is by "Opting Out".

One could debate if some issues mentioned are excesses or the core of the system, but - from a libertarian point of view - some of the few responsibilities of the state is to guarantee the integrity of their citizens (as good as possible).

You won't really prefer the Afghan system of justice will you. We've seen in some South American countries how it looked like in a society culturally closer to ours, when the state is incapable to enforce law and order: They call it "impunidad" - people get murdered, everyone knows who did it - and noone is taken into justice. So people lose confidence and get cynical.

What's next is hiring private people to take revenge. And these folks tend to shoot first and ask then. Actually, this is the end of liberty as we know it.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Nope. The human race lived with private justice for tens of thousands of years. It may not have worked well, but it likely worked better than the out-of-control public justice we have currently.