U.S. Student Amanda Knox Convicted Of . . .

You probably thought I was going to write that Amanda Knox was convicted of murder. And while you’re correct that Ms. Knox was convicted of that crime in Italy today, that’s not what I was going to write.

Did you know that Ms. Knox was also convicted of defamation?

It’s true. Ms. Knox implicated another man in the murder earlier in the investigation and, guess what, defamation happens to be a crime in Italy. 

Now, as I’ve said before defamation is a crime in many other countries and even in some of the united states.

So here’s the point of the post.

Even though this story is a matter of widespread public because it involves an american young woman who was convicted of murder in a foreign country, it is also significant because it is a high-profile case about criminal defamation.  But, of course, no one is talking about this.

I have my thoughts on whether defamation should be punishable as a criminal offense, but I am going to reserve my opinion until I hear from you.

What do you think? Do you believe defamation should be a crime? If so, how should it be applied?

I would love to hear from you. Leave a comment below. 

 

 

 

Comments

  1. Annie says

    I do believe defamation should be a criminal defense, having been the victim of a defamation incident. I am currently seeking legal advice regarding a case whereas another member of my neighborhood country club has decided to spread malicious rumors about me and my husband. Some of these rumors involve implications regarding criminal activity. These accusations are untrue and can be proven to be untrue. This person has a history of being malicious and the club is also seeking advice as to how to handle her. I believe people would be more careful about what they say about one another if they knew it was potentially a criminal offense.

  2. LTP says

    Within minutes a person can post defamation on the internet about a person. This defamation is then available to anyone searching for information on that person. The person might experience permanent severe financial, social, mental and physical damage as a result of the defamation. Defamation should be made a serious crime everywhere. We should also strive to create a culture in the world where the thought of defaming someone would not be considered.

  3. tlc says

    I believe defamation should be a criminal offence. We should have a deterrent in place to ensure one’s reputation isn’t unfairly tarnished.
    In the case of Amanda Knox, we should be clear. Yes, she was found guilty. However, we have reason to doubt she purposefully defamed this man. The police were the ones who raised this man’s name, and this was after a significant amount of time in interrogation. The police were the ones who suggested AK was going to meet up with this man later and go to the cottage. The police were the ones who asked AK to imagine what might have happened. Confused and scared, she told the police the story they wanted to hear.
    The next day, she tried to clarify that what she said seemed unreal and untrue. While this sounds strange, you have to understand the context with which the statement was made. The police told her she was at the house that night, that they had evidence. She was totally confused, to the point that she wasn’t sure what was real and what wasn’t.
    So, my view… Yes, defamation if malicious intent can be proven… In the case of AK, I feel it’s a stretch… but as the jury found her guilty, I suppose the logic they used to arrive at such a conclusion also led them to believe she purposefully defamed the man in question.

  4. Enzo Zoff says

    just surfing and happened to land here …
    whether defamation should be a crime or a civil matter should be determined on a case by case basis. I would say that one would have to look at what the ultimate ‘intention’ was and in concert with the final ‘damages’ caused decide which path it goes down … but I certainly believe it should be a criminal offense .
    and so should deliberate, malicious lies reported by the media which ultimately serves no purpose other than to perpetuate more lies, distortions and cause public harm.
    A case in point is the the above comment by tic (?) …
    No issue with the writer and her comment were it based on facts; but it’s not, and not because the writer is not fair-minded but merely and only because she has relied on information she believes is true.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *