I happened to pass by and see this post.
Great avatar pic. And great anecdote from Barbie. This issue came up a few months ago I think, and Mach nearly blew a gasket trying to explain. Here's what I gathered -
The highest sentence you can get in Italy is "life". But a "Life sentence means the most you can serve is 30 years.
Thecnically incorrect. Normally, "life" means complete freedom after 26 years (whilst usually inmates obtain to work outside prison after about 18 years).
Instead, "30 years" usually means complete freedom after "only" 19-20 years.
(the benefits above however are awarded only on good behaviour, and not to mafiosi or terrorists).
You could get a 30 year sentence, but that's still not considered the equivalent of a "life" sentence.
A "Fast Track" trial, where the defendant concedes the evidence put forward by the prosecutor, isn't the same as "pleading guilty". But your rights to challenge evidence looks like its more limited, and the trial moves more quickly. The compensation to defendants, is that they get a 1/3rd discount off of their sentence.
In fact the defendant does not "concede" the evidence. Accepts that the discussion will be on the evidence that has been already collected and that no further evidence will be entered (unless the "fast track" is "conditioned" to a defemìndant request to enter some particular evidence, call some witnesses etc.)
If you got sentenced to "30 years" in a fast track process, you would get 1/3 off, and wind up with a "20 year" sentence.
However, if you got a "Life" sentence in a fast track proceeding, your sentence would only be "reduced from Life" to "30 years". (The fact that you can only serve 30 years for a life sentence isn't relevant to the calculation).
It's correct.
So Rudy's original fast track reduction would have been 'Life' to "30 years", technically the same amount of time, but the sentence is considered different nevertheless.
This was the first reduction that he had obtained after Micheli found him guilty of multi-aggravated murder without mitigation.
At Rudy's appeal, Rudy asked for mitigation, and he received it. This is where I'm not sure how it worked, but Rudy's sentence went from being "Life" to a 30 year sentence with mitigation, and the mitigation brought Rudy's sentence down to 24 years.
No. This is
incorrect.
The mitigation ("generic mitigation") he obtained was
a cut from "life" to "24 years". (
NOT a cut from "life to 30 years"). Be carful not to make this calculation mistake.
"generic mitigation" gave him a time cut off bigger than you think; it was directly from "life" to "24".
Pay attention to the fact that this (life-24y) was a true "mitigation", NOT a "reduction" (or "discount").
This is exactly the same mitigation obtained by Knox and Sollecito.
So they applied a "fast track discount" to Rudy's 24 years, and that left Rudy with a 16 year sentence (I'm not dividing 24 by 3 for you).
That one was instead just the usual "reduction" (an automatic discount).
The extraordinary part about all this, is that Mignini asked for a got a life sentence for Rudy in his fast track trial before Judge Micheli.
No. This is incorrect. Mignini had asked for life, but obtained 30 years.
It must be said that his request for "life" was an unrealistic demand under a fast track trial for a single muder. However there is a theoretical possibility to obtain "life" even with the fast track discount, because the maxiimum penalty under the code is not "life", a higher penalty actually exists, called "life plus isolation". Mignini attempted to ask for this extreme penalty to be obtained, that would have turned into a "life" sentence under fast track discount.
Such penalty however could not be realistically obtained for a one-time trivial murderer like Guede.
Mignini's request to obtain "life" as discounted from a formal "life plus isolation", was actually rhetoric aiming at obtaining "30 years" as discounted from a formal "life".
When Mignini/Comodi obtained that, they were satisfied and walked out from the trial (at that point the trial had finished, for them).
But at the appeal, Mignini, IIUC, didn't object to Rudy getting mitigation because Mignini believed Rudy had shown remorse (by cooperating with his prosecution of Amanda and Raf would be my guess, but I'm not sure what Mignini's reason was for taking this position in regard to Rudy).
No.
Absolutely false. Actually, Mignini and Comodi had no longer anything to do with the case. They did not take part to the appeal at all. The appeal was dealt with by the deputy Prosecutor General at the time.
The Prosecutor General (I think he was Petrazzini) actually did try to maintain the original 30 years, but he lost on this basically because Knox and Sollecito had managed to obtain "generic mitigation" for the same crime.
So guilters like to use the math and say Rudy just got the usual discount for taking a fast track trial, but that's really not true. Mignini needed to sign off at Rudy's appeal, on the mitigation that busted Rudy's sentence down from "Life" to "not life" (30 years, and even then reduced to 24 years for mitigation for youth, 1st time offender, remorse??) for the fast track math discount to kick in.
No.
Absolutely false. Mignini (nor Comodi, nor any other prosecutor) had signed off absolutely anything.
Your assumption is completely made up.
So Mignini went out for a "Life sentence" for all defendants at the first trial levels. But at Rudy's appeal, Mignini did Rudy a solid by going along with the leniency in sentencing.
Absolutely false and made up. See above. Mignini was not even part in that trial. And the PG had asked to confirm 30 years.
I'd say its obvious Rudy got a sweetheart deal after he agreed to help convict Amanda and Raf. That's why I think Rudy's fast track discount discount should be revoked, cause otherwise he profits from giving false testimony about that night.
What you say is absurd and false under the law.
