Page 13 - Ted Simon News Today

To overturn her acquittal. amanda knoxs attorney, ted simon, said the ruling was disappointing but its hardly a time to panic. the supreme court has a much narrower scope of review. all theyre supposed to do is to look and see whether or not the appellate court jury acted within its jurisdiction and according to the proper rules. it does not relitigate or it does not reconsider or re-evaluate or reopen the facts. and thats why everyone remains reasonably hopeful without prejudging what they will...

Tuesday. to overturn her acquittal. amanda knoxs attorney, ted simon, said the ruling was disappointing but its hardly a time to panic. the supreme court has a much narrower scope of review. all theyre supposed to do is to look and see whether or not the appellate court jury acted within its jurisdiction and according to the proper rules. it does not relitigate or it does not reconsider or re-evaluate or reopen the facts. and thats why everyone remains reasonably hopeful without prejudging what ...

0 including the passage quote, im still lost. i mean, i cant get myself together. i sound crazy but i think im going crazy. its an amazing collection the likes of which we will probably never see again, mostly because, well, people just dont write letters anymore. somehow i just cant picture future auctions offering alec baldwins e-mails or chevy chases voice mails or kim kardashians tweets. you want to see a piece of actual history in person, the items will be exhibited april 8th through 16th a...

New trial, if theres new evidence? >> i have seen no evidence, anderson, that theres any new evidence but i think thats a problem for amanda knox. look, im a reporter, im going to report to you, theres no evidence she or raffaele did this crime. theres just none. but that same lack of evidence has convicted her in one trial and acquitted her in another trial, and now with the same evidence, it appears, theyre going back for trial number three. its like a tossup, flip of the coin. >> yeah. its am...

Some speaking for a growing number of americans who consider marriage a fundamental right for any loving adult couple. others representing a sizeable minority who disagree. inside, captured on audiotape only, justices grilled both sides, perhaps revealing clues about how theyre leaning. listen. >> when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1791, 1868? >> when did it become unconstitutional to prohibit interracial marriages? >> dont give me a question to my q...

The other hand questioning the attorney who argued to preserve californias same sex marriage ban and in his mind, preserve traditional marriage. >> it is very rare that both parties to the couple are infertile and the traditional -- >> if a couple -- i can just assure you if both the woman and the man are over the age of 55, there are not a lot of children coming out of that marriage. >> other justices questioned whether the case even belonged before the court, fueling speculation they will be l...

That theres going to be a retrial, youre saying we dont know that. >> we dont know precisely until the supreme court rules what theyre going to ask of the appellate court jury. they very well may have hearings. they may reconsider evidence. they may do a variety of things. but what happened in this case, the prosecution argued various points, and we dont know which ones until that supreme court ruling comes out, theyre going to rely on. once that happens, then the issues will be joined which bri...

But what happened in this case, the prosecution argued various points, and we dont know which ones until that supreme court ruling comes out, theyre going to rely on. once that happens, then the issues will be joined which brings us to the next misunderstood point. for this type of proceeding, there is no requirement for amanda to be present, and in fact, of the issues raised by the prosecution, its wholly unnecessary for her to be there. >> as an attorney for amanda knox, what do you tell your ...

So whats going to be new in this new trial, if there is a new trial, if theres new evidence? >> i have seen no evidence, anderson, that theres any new evidence but i think thats a problem for amanda knox. look, im a reporter, im going to report to you, theres no evidence she or raffaele did this crime. theres just none. but that same lack of evidence has convicted her in one trial and acquitted her in another trial, and now with the same evidence, it appears, theyre going back for trial number t...

Case and this nightmare unfortunately continues to endure. something we had hoped would not. but yet the bottom line is there was no evidence, there is no evidence, there never will be any evidence and we remain fully confident that in the end, when this next appellate court jury reviews the evidence, reviews all of the evidence, theyll come up with the same, you know, conclusion. i mean, amanda said it best. she issued a statement and what she said in part was no matter what happens, my family ...