She was convicted, then acquitted, and then re-convicted. Today, after more than seven years of legal limbo in the Italian justice system, Amanda Knox is expected to hear a verdict from Italy’s highest court to determine if her murder conviction will be upheld. If found guilty for a third time, Knox may find herself in an extradition battle between the U.S. and Italy.

Judgment day: Court to decide Amanda Knox’s future http://t.co/uS1fyoEhHH via http://t.co/nyDdMYjJKC pic.twitter.com/D4oULavgWT

— TODAY (@TODAYshow) March 27, 2015

If you are not familiar with the Knox case, or just a little hazy on all of the details, here’s a quick refresher:

In 2009 Knox and her former boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito were convicted of murdering 21-year-old British student Meredith Kercher, who in 2007 was found stabbed to death in the Perugia, Italy villa that she shared with Knox. Knox was sentenced to 26 years, and Sollecito to 25 years. Then in 2011, after having already served four years behind Italian bars, both Knox and Sollecito were found not guilty on appeal and released. Knox returned to Seattle. That acquittal was short lived because in 2014, the Italian Supreme Court overturned the appeal, convicting Knox yet again. This time, Knox was sentenced to 28.5 years in prison, Sollecito received 25 years. Now the Italian Supreme Court will decide if they will uphold Knox and Sollecito’s murder convictions, enter a new appeals round, or issue a ruling that amounts to an acquittal.

Knox, who never returned to Italy after being released, awaits a verdict from Seattle, while Sollecito, who has had his passport seized, has attended court proceedings in Italy.

So what does this all mean for Amanda Knox?

If found guilty, again, the Italian government may attempt to extradite the 27-year-old to Italy in order to serve out the remainder of her sentence. Normally that would be the case because of a 1983 extradition treaty between Washington and Rome, which allows individuals charged or convicted of certain crimes in one country to be detained and sent back to the other. However, it’s doubtful this will ever happen for Knox. In accordance with that treaty, the United States will not extradite a person who has previously been acquitted, which Knox was at one point. The U.S. Constitution also protects Knox from double jeopardy, which forbids an individual from being retried for the same charges they’ve been legitimately acquitted or convicted of.

According to CNN, the statute of limitations is double the sentence, meaning the Italians have 57 years to bring her back to the country. In order for Knox to be sent back to Italy, the American Secretary of State must first sign off. But due to the high profile nature of the case, including Amanda’s large number of supporters, and accusations of Italian police mishandling, this outcome is highly unlikely.

If Knox is found guilty and refuses to go back to Italy she will have an international arrest warrant lingering over her head, essentially making international travel for her an impossibility. Sollecito, on the other hand, has way more to lose, given that he is already in Italy and can be taken into custody immediately following the verdict.

Both Knox and Sollecito have never wavered in insisting their innocence in Kirchner’s murder. A judgment is expected to be handed out sometime Friday. We’ll continue to watch with the rest of the world to see what Amanda’s fate may be, but as of now it’s very uncertain.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Amanda Knox’s Legal Limbo Almost Over appeared first on Law Street.

Crimes against humanity such as those committed by the Nazis during the Holocaust should never go unpunished. That seems like a completely obvious statement, one that everyone can get behind. But what if the crime was committed 70 years ago by man who is now 89 years old? That’s the question at issue in the case of Johann Breyer.

Since the end of World War II, the world has been on the hunt for members of Hitler’s administration. If a suspected perpetrator was found, he was usually extradited to Germany and put on trial there. This practice has continued all the way into 2014. But should Breyer, an 89-year-old man with signs of dementia, face trial for crimes he is accused of committing at the Auschwitz Death Camp many decades ago?

Johann Breyer has lived in the United States since 1952 when he immigrated here from Czechoslovakia. His mother was born in the United States, which granted him American citizenship. He worked as a toolmaker in Philadelphia, got married and had kids. Then, in 1992, he was accused of having Nazi ties and the Justice Department attempted to deport him.

He was ultimately allowed to stay, as the Justice Department lacked evidence to prove he took an active role in the killings. Breyer claimed he was a guard in the prison section of the camp, and since he was a minor when he served, he could not be held responsible for his actions. Basically, his argument was he took no active role in the killings and was instead forced to be there. This whole debate had little actual impact on Breyer’s life, as his name stayed out of the public eye.

After its failed deportation effort, the Justice Department attempted to persuade the German government to extradite Breyer, but the Germans didn’t act until very recently. After examining camp rosters and newly disclosed documents, the German government now claims that Breyer was not part of the prison guards, but rather a member of the infamous SS battalion, “Death’s Head,” trained to be particularly brutal to prisoners. The German government has charged Breyer with 158 counts of aiding and abetting murder — one for each train that arrived at the Auschwitz Death Camp during the six months Breyer was present. To put that number in perspective, those trains carried approximately 216,000 Jews.

Breyer faced these charges and potential extradition to Germany on Wednesday morning. Though he seemed confused, he told the judge he understood the charges against him, and he is now being held without bail until his extradition hearing on August 21.

The DOJ has charged more than 130 Nazi suspects in the last 35 years, but none were as old as Breyer. This brings us back to my original question — should a man that old, suffering from the onset of dementia, face charges for the crimes he perpetrated more than half a century ago?

My gut reaction to the thought of a nearly 90-year-old man in jail is that no, he shouldn’t be tried at this point; however, it angers me that Breyer got to live a normal, fulfilling life. He is innocent until proven guilty, but if he is proven guilty he does not deserve to die a free man. If guilty, he was complicit in the deaths of more than 200,000 people, yet has gotten to live without consequences. I would imagine that a Holocaust survivor probably feels quite enraged when he hears that a Nazi responsible for such horrific crimes has gotten to live a free life. We owe it to those victims and their families to bring anyone involved in these crimes to justice, regardless of age. Its been 70 years since Breyer committed these crimes, but time hasn’t run out yet.

—

Matt DeWilde (@matt_dewilde25) is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Greg Heywood via Flickr]

Matt DeWilde

Matt DeWilde is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Accused 89-Year-Old Nazi Facing Extradition to Germany appeared first on Law Street.