Rudy Guede now eligible for day release

[redheadedgal]

What I find confusing is people that complain about the Italian justice system being out to get certain people but then complaining about the lax sentencing.

there's no contradiction.

 

[dgfred]

Haha... a link is needed to show a deal so we get a reporter's statement???

They have been right on top of things so far. Not.

No deal unless you say AK and RS could have gotten the exact same DEAL. They decided differently.

Bad choice IMO.

 

[redheadedgal]

Haha... a link is needed to show a deal so we get a reporter's statement???

They have been right on top of things so far. Not.

No deal unless you say AK and RS could have gotten the exact same DEAL. They decided differently.

Bad choice IMO.

haha??

so it's amusing that both a pro-innocence author (burleigh) and a pro-guilt author (nadeau) are in agreement that a deal was struck?

imo, this only verifies most strongly that the event did, in fact, occur.

 

[dgfred]

Then it should be simple to explain the 'deal' in understandable terms.

If you take the short track trial and other factors he got the SAME sentence as the other killers. If they take the short track trial they get the SAME deal. Is that the deal that is being spoken about???

Can it be explained how it is different?

It seems simple to understand so I can't figure out why it is even being debated.

 

[otto]

30 years to 24 years to 16 years to day release after 6.5 years.

The reasons for his mitigation are absurd. They rationalized he had "acute stress disorder" and that's why he (a) didn't call for help (b) went dancing and (c) fled to Germany.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/2009-12-22_-_Borsini-Belardi_Report__Italian_.pdf

I'm sure you have a copy of Angel Face or can search the previous threads where Barbie confirms Guede's deal. Nina Burleigh mentioned it in her recent BBC interview.

If and when he kills again, what do you think his next victims family will be asking?

If the legal sentencing process that was applied to Guede is defined as a "deal", then every person that commits murder in Italy has the right to choose that "deal".

This criticism is related to the laws that apply to sentencing in the Italian justice system and has nothing to do with Guede. Since the laws that apply to young adults that commit murder are not unique to Italy, but in fact apply in several EU countries, the criticism is in fact related to EU law.

To claim that Guede is "only being released because he got a deal otherwise it would have been a life sentence" is extremely misleading. A more accurate statement would be that: young adults that commit murder in several EU countries can make choices resulting in early release from prison, sometimes as early as seven years after committing murder. This option is available to all young adults that commit murder. This is not a "deal", but a fact of law applicable to all young adults.

By omitting the big picture and focusing only on Guede's, one is left with the skewed perception that Guede had special treatment. This could not be farther from the truth.

 

[otto]

Then it should be simple to explain the 'deal' in understandable terms.

If you take the short track trial and other factors he got the SAME sentence as the other killers. If they take the short track trial they get the SAME deal. Is that the deal that is being spoken about???

Can it be explained how it is different?

It seems simple to understand so I can't figure out why it is even being debated.

It appears that there is some attempt to imply that Guede was treated differently from all others, or that he had special treatment. Now that "deal" has been explained as the legal right to the reduction in sentence based on the abbreviated trial option, time served awaiting trial, sentence reduction for good behavior, and standard parole eligibility, it is transparent that the objection to the "deal" is in reality an objection to EU laws governing young adults that commit murder.

 

[otto]

haha??

so it's amusing that both a pro-innocence author (burleigh) and a pro-guilt author (nadeau) are in agreement that a deal was struck?

imo, this only verifies most strongly that the event did, in fact, occur.

It's amusing that authors that write about the case are labelled one way or another based on whether Knox supporters approve or disapprove of the book contents.

There are no deals in Italian law. There are choices. Knox had the choice of opting for an abbreviated trial, or to choose a regular trial. She chose the regular trial. That meant seven years of court appearances and still no conclusion. Guede chose the abbreviated trial. That meant guilt was assumed, he immediately began serving his sentence, and he was guaranted reduction of sentence at the time his sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court. When his sentence was confirmed to be equal to that of Sollecito and Knox, his sentence was automatically reduced by one third.

It quite surprising that seven years after this happened, there are still misunderstandings about the process.

 

[redheadedgal]

it's amusing to post the truth about the viewpoint of an author? i guess anything to try to refute, diminish, negate a valid point...

the fact that guede changed his story -as posted earlier- and implicated both knox and sollecito, is sufficient proof for many that deal was made. off the record.

oh wait!! -- if there are "no deals in italian law", please explain the plea deals by the prosecution re: the costa concordia: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/05/20135141584507813.html

and, there are no "misunderstandings". some things are plain as day. (see above point).