- Join the France 24 community here
- Log in
Latest update: 21/12/2010
- censorship - Cuba - Facebook - football - Hugo Chavez - Internet - Italy - Journalism - Venezuela
Campaigning for Amanda Knox’s release from prison is growing online
Campaigning for Amanda Knox’s release from prison is growing online. Venezuelans are concerned about web censorship in the country. And Cuba launches its own version of Wikipedia.
ITALY: AMANDA KNOX TRIAL
The woman in this video is a member of the association “Friends of Amanda” and she is appealing for Amanda Knox’s freedom. In 2007, the American student was convicted alongside two accomplices of the murder of her English roommate, Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy. She was sentenced to 26 years in prison. The young woman’s appeal began on the 24th of November and is being widely discussed on the web.
Mobilisation in support of Amanda Knox’s plea for freedom is growing online and in the United States in particular. The web site “Amanda Defense Fund” was set up by members of her family and it hopes to convince the public of her innocence. The site has photos of a smiling Knox and also letters from friends and family all claiming the student could never have committed such a crime.
"Injustice in perugia" is also campaigning for Knox’s freedom. On this web site a former member of the FBI, and specialist in violent crimes says the enquiry was sloppy and Italian police officers relied more on their instincts than on material evidence: he thinks this proves the accused’s innocence.
And supporters are also using Facebook. Numerous groups like these ones, containing several thousand members are campaigning for Amanda Knox’s freedom.
Despite this strong mobilization, some doubt the young American’s innocence. This is the case for the founders of "true justice.org", a site set up in honour of the victim Meredith Kercher, they are reminding web users that everything in the files points towards Knox’s guilt.
WEB CENSORSHIP IN VENEZUELA
“The purpose of this bill is to censor remarks that are contrary to common decency, and this means the State is going to control what can be said on the web”.
This is how Carlos Frick a Venezuelan living in the U.S. reacted to the introduction of a telecommunications law in Venezuela on the 14th of December aimed at regulating Internet content in the country.
According to critics of this reform, it means that everything on the web can be controlled, including exchanges on social networks. Journalist Beatriz Adrian was interviewed on a freedom of online expression forum, and she believes that carrying out such controls is as good as interfering with people’s private lives.
In view of the political class’s silence, web users have decided to make a stand. In this video we see a student living in Venezuela describe the law as “another step towards totalitarianism” and compares his country to Cuba as far as media censorship is concerned. Luis Carlos Diaz meanwhile, says it is not up to the State to decide what should be allowed to stay online.
And some of Hugo Chavez’ supporters are concerned about the consequences this reform could have on the revolutionary process currently taking place in the country. Luigino Bracci Roa says the law could end up not working in the government’s favour. To prove their impartiality and avoid criticism, state bodies controlling the media might have to censor remarks and comments praising the head of state.
The resistance is already growing on social networks and on Twitter in particular. For several days now Venezuelans have been sharing this guide on the thread SOS Internet Venezuela. It explains how to get around the possible web censorship measures.
MAPPING AMERICA
We are hearing more and more about data journalism, and here is a concrete example. The New York Times has combined data from the latest American census report with Google maps to produce a sociological map of the US. You can study the distribution of ethnic groups in cities like Los Angeles or New York as well as household income distribution neighbourhood by neighbourhood. This is a great example of making public data available on the Internet.
ECURED
Last week, the Cuban government launched its own participative encyclopedia, based on the Wikipedia model. “Ecured” already has over 19 000 entries and seeks to give a Cuban and non-colonial viewpoint. Web users can post their articles and complete this encyclopedia of the Cuban revolution. But moderators will nonetheless have the final say on the site’s editorial content.
VIDEO OF THE DAY
Young players for Polish football team Lech Poznan, were treated to this amazing atmosphere in the stadium when they played at the 2010 Lech Cup, an international tournament for under twelve’s. The Polish club’s supporters came en masse to watch their junior team face Tottenham Hotspur, some of them even lit smoke devices. These young footballers are not likely to forget this experience in a hurry.

































React to the article
(11) Reactions
Amanda Knox innocent let her go home now
Let Amanda Knox go home now. What a stupid county she is held in.Their justice system sucks big time.Dna says she is innocent.
Just let her go. Now
This is a really good article
""Injustice in perugia" is also campaigning for Knox’s freedom. On this web site a former member of the FBI, and specialist in violent crimes says the enquiry was sloppy and Italian police officers relied more on their instincts than on material evidence: he thinks this proves the accused’s innocence."
I think the point of this article is that is abuse is going on. On THIS particular site, there is not. On many others there definitely IS.
Also, Steve Moore is saying much much more than is quoted here. Look him up on Google "Steve Moore Amanda Knox, Meredith Kercher, Rafaele Sollecito..." He's had the integrity that many of the sites have not been able to control themselves with. Ban the abusers for sure. "Injustice in Perugia", I believe, has several of Steve Moore's interviews on Television, Radio, and Newspapers.
Evidence Contamination
if there was contamination of DNA why is it still showing up on a multiple items, if the accused are innocent than why the inconsistencies in their alibis.
The murder scene, first perpetrators don't necessarily leave DNA behind, from what I understand the Meredith room was cleaned up pretty good that even Meredith finger prints were hard to find, a womans shoe footprint about the size of Knox was found on one of the sheets. How about blood drop that had Meredith and Amanda DNA mixed together. There have been cases where the accused were found guilty on circumstantial evidence alone.
What happened to my comments?
What happened to my comments?
Let Amanda FREE!
Amanda is totally INNOCENT anybody with common sense can tell you that. Amanda and Raffaele had nothing to do with this, and anybody that went through what Amanda went through during her interagation would of even said more false things then she said. This is a girl who has NEVER had any violence in her background and was terrified what was going and was pressured into naming somebody, and even that she did NOT just come out and name Patrick that is why I am so sick of people of saying she accused an innocent person, because she to be honest really didn't the police saw her phone and saw the "see you later" which means here in the US "see you next time" or "goodbye" it does NOT mean "lets meet up" and that is when I totally believe when she was hit and abused and became terrified. This is the biggest miscariage of justice I have ever seen, and will not stop fighting until Amanda and Raffaele are FREE!
TJMK Inaccurate as Usual
The poster from TJMK misstates and exagerates the evidence. The crime scene was unsecured, sloppy and contaminated, so DNA from Raffaele could have been tracked by anyone into the room. The other blood evidence is not as stated here--read the Injustice in Perugia forum for complete explanation. As for confessions, there is none as described. False statements and retractions are common from intense police interrogations of suspects who are without legal counsel--any journalist knows this.
I applaud France 24 for reporting about the reaction against the conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito and I hope that in future stories they will present more fully the reason for that reaction.
Amanda Knox's innocence
Nothing in the prosecution's case even suggests that Amanda is guilty. It comes down to this: There is no evidence that Amanda was at the murder scene. NOT THERE equals NOT GUILTY!
Campaigning For Amanda Knox
TJMK claim everything in the case points to Amanda Knox' guilt, but when you try to actually discuss the case with them, they evade the real questions. Why is there no evidence of Knox or Sollecito in the crime scene? They brush it off. "She was convicted unanimously in a court of law," they respond as though a court of law was never known to be mistaken.
Actually, in Italy, you're not really convicted until you've lost your second appeal.
Who these people claiming "true justice for Meredith Kercher" actually are and what their agenda is, is anybody's guess. None use their real names. True Justice for Meredith Kercher is certainly NOT locking up innocent people to share the misery with the Kercher family. True justice is discovering what really happened to Meredith Kercher that night 11/1/2007. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, according to all the physical evidence, were not there.
Amanda k.
omg give this girl her freedom and let her go home...what was Italy thinking or where were they thinking from...certainly not from ther heads...let amanda go home
online Campaign - Amanda Knox
"they are reminding web users that everything in the files points towards Knox’s guilt"
This is a categorically false statement, and points to the bias of the author of this article. There are many inconsistencies in this case that point to reasonable doubt. (1) There is no forensic evidence of Amanda Knox in the room where the brutal murder occurred - no footprints, no fingerprints, no DNA, no hair or fibers (2) DNA experts are divided (Perugians vs the rest of the world) over the significance of the DNA evidence used to convict Knox (3)Knox was pilloried and convicted in the press before even going to trial, which created potential bias among the nonsequestered jurors (4)The new judge has called for an independent review of the DNA to remove reasonable doubt...should I go on?
True Justice For Meredith Kercher
The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming. They gave completely different accounts of where they were, who they were with and what they were doing on the night of the murder. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis despite three attempts each. All the other people who were questioned had one credible alibi that could be verified. Innocent people don't give multiple conflicting alibis and lie repeatedly to the police.
The DNA didn't miraculously deposit itself in the most incriminating of places.
An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito's DNA was found on Meredith's bra clasp. Judge Massei pointed to the extremely clear RFU peaks associated with the DNA test, the lowest of which was 30% higher than the RFU test widely used for minimum reliability and the highest of which was more than 200% higher. Of the 17 loci tested in the sample, Sollecito's profile matched 17 out of 17. Dr. Torricelli for the Kerchers affirmed that the alleles (peaks) in the sample constituted the biological profile of Raffaele Sollecito.
According to Sollecito's forensic expert, Professor Vinci, Knox's DNA was on Meredith's bra.
Amanda Knox's DNA was found on the handle of the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts - Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli - categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.
There were five instances of Knox's DNA mixed with Meredith's blood in three different locations in the cottage.
Knox tracked Meredith's blood into the bathroom, the hallway, her room and Filomena's room, where the break-in was staged. Knox's DNA and Meredith's blood was found mixed together in Filomena's room, in a bare bloody footprint in the hallway and in three places in the bathroom.
Rudy Guede's bloody footprints led straight out of Meredith's room and out of the house. This means that he didn't stage the break-in in Filomena's room or go into the blood-spattered bathroom after Meredith had been stabbed.
Sollecito left a visible bloody footprint on the blue bathmat in the bathroom. Knox's and Sollecito's bare bloody footprints were revealed by luminol in the hallway.
It's not a coincidence that the three people - Knox, Sollecito and Guede - who kept telling the police a pack of lies are all implicated by the DNA and forensic evidence.
Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith's murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007.