Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pnwmom

(109,032 posts)
48. That wasn't part of the trial.
Sat Mar 28, 2015, 02:48 PM
Mar 2015

Last edited Sat Mar 28, 2015, 03:38 PM - Edit history (1)

That same link you just gave me is to the Hellman report, where it explains what was going on in the transcript you just linked to. A jailhouse snitch had claimed that Guede had confessed to him, and Guede was disputing that. That's all that discussion pertained to. But Guede was never questioned about the murder itself in connection with Amanda and Raffaele's trial.

From Judge Hellman's report:

https://hellmannreport.wordpress.com/contents/reasons-for-the-decision/statements-of-rudy-guede-2/

As surprising as it may seem, Rudy Guede has never been questioned during the present trial about the facts that occurred on the night between 1st and 2nd November 2007 on Via Della Pergola: neither previously under C.P.P. Article 210, nor afterwards under C.P.P Article 197 bis, so that, regardless of his reliability or otherwise, no statements exist in this capacity concerning the main facts of the trial.

The first time that Rudy Guede appeared before the Corte di Assise during the criminal proceedings against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito was only when, after having seen the defense of the accused admit to this Court as witnesses Mario Alessi and other prisoners, in relation to what was revealed to them in prison by Rudy Guede about the two defendants’ [Knox and Sollecito] non-involvement [estraneità] in the act of the crimes for which they have been charged [chiamati a rispondere], the General Prosecutor requested that he be heard as a rebuttal witness [a prova contraria] on such alleged disclosures [confidenze]. The General Prosecutor, it should be said, did not request the admission of Rudy Guede so that he could respond regarding the facts of that night (if he was alone or together with the defendants or with others, what was the real unfolding of events in its details, etc…) but only to prove that he had not made to Mario Alessi and the other fellow prisoners any disclosure [confidenza].

Despite the admission of Rudy Guede as a witness limited to such facts (alleged disclosures in prison), the defense tried, given the presence finally of Rudy Guede at a hearing (hearing of 6.27.2011) before the Court and the defendants, to ask some questions directly regarding the facts of that night and not only concerning the alleged disclosures made to fellow prisoners.

But, in truth, even before the same Rudy Guede could assert that he did not want to respond on the facts of that night, the attorney that represented the aforementioned [Guede], Ms. Saccarelli, and the General Prosecutor (even if, having spoken off-microphone, his words are not found in the transcripts), to which the lawyer for the civil party Maresca gave full support, reminding [the court] of the limits of the cross-examination, they objected to the formulation of questions concerning directly the facts that occurred that night rather than merely the interactions [rapporti intrattenuti] with Alessi and the other prisoners, called to testify (Castelluci, De Cesare, Trincia).

I am glad that her ordeal is over Gothmog Mar 2015 #1
Me too. yeoman6987 Mar 2015 #2
The decision for innocence couldn't have been more clearcut. The high court in Italy pnwmom Mar 2015 #18
In the end, the incompetence of the investigators worked out in her favor, ironically. DanTex Mar 2015 #3
There is no way in blazing hell she was guilty. alphafemale Mar 2015 #4
What do you mean "let the murderer skate"? DanTex Mar 2015 #5
16 years for a brutal murder? alphafemale Mar 2015 #8
Oh I see, I thought you were implying there was some fourth person. DanTex Mar 2015 #9
About the unflushed toilet TexasMommaWithAHat Mar 2015 #16
So the likely "one attacker" story is that he broke in, then decided to take a dump. DanTex Mar 2015 #17
"Judicial Truth" TexasMommaWithAHat Mar 2015 #23
The only evidence there was more than one attacker was Rudy's statement. pnwmom Mar 2015 #26
Obviously, testimony given in exchange for 9 years off is suspect. DanTex Mar 2015 #32
The glass on top of the clothes is no evidence that the burglary was faked. As you know, pnwmom Mar 2015 #41
Right, that's why I'm wondering if they asked Filomena whether she remembers DanTex Mar 2015 #43
They claimed to have asked her and that she recalled her room being neater. pnwmom Mar 2015 #45
pnwmom, don't mean to duck out on you, but I have to go. DanTex Mar 2015 #44
Thanks for letting me know. pnwmom Mar 2015 #46
People who question that must never have lived with teenagers! TexasMommaWithAHat Mar 2015 #47
Thank you for that video of the nursery school owner. I'd never seen that before, pnwmom Mar 2015 #21
They sentenced Amanda Knox for much longer for a crime she obviously didn't do. cpwm17 Mar 2015 #11
Yes, I see. Originally, Rudy got a longer sentence, but it was shortened. DanTex Mar 2015 #12
Amanda isn't comparable. Guede is a murderer. She was another innocent victim. n/t pnwmom Mar 2015 #22
He got a reduced sentence for taking what is essentially a no-contest agreement that pointed at the students. pnwmom Mar 2015 #27
After eight years he's already out on day-release. All because they gave him a reduced pnwmom Mar 2015 #20
But that's a common thing, even in the US. Good behavior, parole, cutting a deal DanTex Mar 2015 #29
What NEVER happens in the US is that the prosecutors in the Knox case wouldn't allow the students' attorneys pnwmom Mar 2015 #31
I agree, the right to cross-examine is essential. DanTex Mar 2015 #34
Don't you remember you already showed me that transcript and I proved to you pnwmom Mar 2015 #40
I don't remember that, but I'll take your word for it. DanTex Mar 2015 #42
That wasn't part of the trial. pnwmom Mar 2015 #48
No, the incompetence of the investigators didn't worked out in her favor cpwm17 Mar 2015 #6
Obviously this debate could go on forever. DanTex Mar 2015 #13
Unflushed toilet: he got interrupted when Meredith came into the house pnwmom Mar 2015 #30
The Supreme Court said Knox And Raff did not commit this crime TexasMommaWithAHat Mar 2015 #7
Like I said, this is JMHO. DanTex Mar 2015 #14
No,there's a zero chance that she did it. Your day or two of googling wasn't sufficient to inform pnwmom Mar 2015 #19
I answered DanTx question about the bra clasp on the other thread riderinthestorm Mar 2015 #24
Well, I'll answer now. DanTex Mar 2015 #28
There was evidence of DNA from at least two other unidentified men TexasMommaWithAHat Mar 2015 #36
I read that that was in smaller quantities though. DanTex Mar 2015 #38
Where did you read that? There was so much contamination, according to the report of pnwmom Mar 2015 #49
The court appointed experts had another explanation. pnwmom Mar 2015 #35
That works for me as well riderinthestorm Mar 2015 #39
Zero is a very low number. True, maybe my googling wasn't enough to inform me. DanTex Mar 2015 #25
You're right. We can argue forever. TexasMommaWithAHat Mar 2015 #33
Yes. In the end what matters is that they are both now free. DanTex Mar 2015 #37
It was very nice having a civil discussion with you TexasMommaWithAHat Mar 2015 #50
The puzzle you need to solve is why you sort of think she is guilty elias7 Mar 2015 #54
Good! Now society needs to leave her alone! Takket Mar 2015 #10
Theoretically, the drawn out Italian system of appeals could be TexasMommaWithAHat Mar 2015 #15
Good It's Over HassleCat Mar 2015 #51
Her situation is NOTHING like OJ Simpsons. What is the first thing he did after his wife died? pnwmom Mar 2015 #52
Unfortunately Knox has to live with people like you who remain uninformed riderinthestorm Mar 2015 #53
No, she doesn't HassleCat Mar 2015 #55
She has to live knowing that everywhere she goes people recognize her pnwmom Mar 2015 #57
"We can still have our doubts". Yes you are exactly the problem riderinthestorm Mar 2015 #58
BSU professor who helped in Amanda Knox case finally relieved IDemo Mar 2015 #56
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Amanda Knox's brief but v...»Reply #48