As reported here last August, Amanda Knox’s co-defendant in the murder of Meredith Kercher trial, Rudy Guede, applied for a retrial. Now the news has recently been published all over Italian media and barely mentioned in the American media. Rudy Guede has been granted a review for a retrial. It is set to take place on December 20, 2016.
This has no doubt sent seismic waves traveling from the recently earthquake rattled Perugian countryside all the way to Puget Sound. While Amanda Knox continues to explain why she stabbed President Trump in the back, what is really eating away at her Hillary-loving-heart is Guede’s upcoming trial.
Dec 20: Florence appeals court to hear Rudy Guede’s revision request. He claims #amandaknox rulings conflict w/judgments in his case.
— Andrea Vogt (@andreavogt) November 17, 2016
Rudy Guede has sent the cart-wheeling-one spinning, no doubt, with the news of his upcoming trial. Guede and his legal team started the ball rolling when he gave an interview on national Italian TV last January. He clearly and firmly stated that Amanda Knox was there at the crime scene when Meredith Kercher was murdered. You can watch his full interview with English subtitles here.
Why does this new retrial for Rudy Guede upset Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito so much? For one thing, Guede was only convicted of being an “accomplice to murder.” He was never found to be the sole killer – as Knox and her followers would like you to believe. Guede’s retrial could reverse, not only his own conviction, but it also throws a spotlight back on Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito’s controversial acquittal.
Knox and Sollecito’s successful defense rested on the notion that the evidence was contaminated. The Italian Supreme Court agreed and acquitted the pair in 2015. The problem for them now with Guede’s December retrial, is that if the police bungled everything and all of the DNA was so poorly handled leading to suspected (not proven) contamination, then how can the white suspects be freed while the black suspect be imprisoned for 16 years based on the exact same allegedly contaminated evidence? This will be the question for the courts to decide.