Pardon my typo. The law against unauthorized entry into a dwelling is CP Article 614, as stated in the Google Translation English text.
Source: https://www.altalex.com/documents/news/2014/10/22/dei-delitti-contro-il-patrimonio
Marasca did not clear them. The verdict was 'insufficient evidence'. As for drugs, AK and RS themselves have confessed to extensive drug use. On the night of the murder they themselves claim they were doped up to the eyeballs. I don't believe the tests you claim were carried out can have been very accurate if they can't even identify marijuana and associated THC, together whatever additional stuff it is often mixed with.
It is conjecture as Guede was never made a suspect re Tramontano's claims, it was never corroborated nor tested in a court of law. Tramontano claimed he didn't even have the patience to report it at the Questura, claiming the queue was too long. It is not a fact Guede was a burglar, as he had no burglary convictions. Being in possession of stolen goods is a quite different criminal offence from burglary and breaking and entering. You don't really understand law. Your saying someone is a burglar doesn't make it so. The guys who produced the Netflix film claimed Guede was a prolific burglar based on zero verified evidence. IOW it was just a lie designed to mislead the viewer. As Micheli confirms in the MR, Guede had a clean record apart from the pending Milan nursery case, which rejected breaking and entering. I am not sure you understand law. Being charged with DV and alleged rape by his former girlfriend, who says she had no idea he was a convicted murderer, really has no bearing at all on the guilt or innocence of AK and RS in the 2007 case. Looking at RS, AK and RG all three had difficult backgrounds. AK single-parent working class, RG and RS middle class backgrounds but with hidden tragedy, yet Burleigh solely focussing heavily on RG being a poor immigrant, a supposed 'drifter' - when he had his own bedsit and did work - was a very clever piece of heavy MAGA-style appealing to people's prejudices. No doubt were Guede Mexican, Burleigh would be hinting heavily that he was undocumented and unskilled, as well as a criminal rapist invading 'our country'.
1. A tiresome lie. Knox and Sollecito were fully acquitted on the murder/rape charges because there was no credible evidence of their guilt. Thus, the legal conclusion was that they had not committed the act of the crime.
False. The verdict was "of the rubric for not having committed the act."
Predictably, you cherry-pick the one you like.
Blatant lie. AK has never said she used any drug outside of smoking weed. RS admitted to briefly using some drugs years before in his book:
Not one witness claimed to see or know of RS using hard drugs while in Perugia. If he had, you can be damn sure that someone would have come forward with that info and Mignini would have used it in court. He didn't.
No, they admitted to smoking weed like everyone else in that cottage including Meredith. Resorting to such hyperbolic nonsense as "doped up to the eyeballs" is just the usual rubbish.
Another perfect example of denying the scientific evidence when it doesn't suit you.
It's not conjecture as both Tramontano and his girlfriend gave a sworn deposition to the police. Both Massei and Hellmann refer to him with Hellmann (pg. 80) stating:
And you find this unreasonable?
Did Guede illegally access the kindergarten? Yes.
Don't play stupid games, Vixen. They couldn't prove Guede broke into the law office so they tried and convicted him on the lesser charge of being in possession of stolen goods.
You're right. The FACT that he was caught red-handed with a stolen knife in the kindergarten makes him a burglar. The FACT that two witnesses caught him burglarizing their apartment makes him a burglar.
Just stop it. Guede couldn't hold down a job and his former foster mother had to go behind her husband's back to get him a dinky little apartment because he was homeless and broke.
I'm not sure you understand that it goes to show his character and what he's capable of doing. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior.
LOL! Neither AK nor RS was abandoned by their parents or physically and mentally abused like RG.
He WAS a poor immigrant with no permanent home growing up. His "own bedsit" was only possible because Mrs. Caporali gave him a letter of reference after he was thrown out by Mr. Caporali for lying and failing to hold a job. He had no job and no savings so just how did he pay that rent? It's not a stretch to think he lived by theft and selling stolen goods. He only worked sporadically and was constantly quitting or getting fired.
Oh, just stop it! When you have to resort to this "MAGA" rubbish, you only make yourself look foolish. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Already covered this nonsense. You might want to contact the BBC and The Telegraph for printing misinformation:
Sigh. They smoked weed like most of the students and young people in Perugia, including everyone in the cottage. Silenzi even grew it downstairs. Sophie Purton told Mignini the boys downstairs provided Meredith with weed. Amanda said that Filomena and Laura provided the weed for the upstairs.
Buying weed for personal use is a civil infraction, not criminal offense, in Italy. SELLING it is a criminal offense.
Oh, brother. It does NOT turn someone into a homicidal maniac. Psychosis and paranoia can be displayed by some HEAVY and LONG TERM users, which is not RS or AK. According to you, Perugia must be rampant with psychotic weed smoking students running around killing people.
So now I'm "bragging" when I state a fact? Please refrain from the silly hyperbole.
Once again, you need to deny the results of forensic tests because they don't support your agenda.
Translation:
If they had found cocaine, meth, etc in their hair tests, you can be damn sure the prosecution would have presented the test results in court. They never did. Even you can figure out why they didn't. Or maybe not.
There you go again with the exaggerated nonsense! She met the guy for one day and part of one night in Florence and never saw or communicated with him again.
What you will not be able to provide is any evidence that Knox communicated with or bought drugs from 'Frederico".
I think you are missing the point in its entirety.
The original source of the allegation that Rudy Guede was a drug dealer is not a poster but sources in Italy, presumably the police. We can be confident that there was some official source, because the claim that Guede was a drug dealer appeared in Italian news media as early as 19 November 2007 when he was identified as the "4th suspect" in Kercher's death.
Source: https://www.quotidiano.net/cronaca/2007/11/20/47946-rudy_guede_ecco_quarto_uomo.shtml
You don't understand! The BBC, The Telegraph, and Quotidiano Nazionale are all "bent"! They probably just felt sorry for them and wanted to help them out like Altieri and Popovic.
<YAWN> Rationalization #101: 'Meredith Kercher's blood was really root vegetable juice; that is what the luminol footprints show'.
Vixen, thanks for providing this non-sequitur which is either an attempt at humor or a bizarre incoherence.
So, if the first sentence of the second paragraph is true, Rudy Guede became involved in drug dealing despite his other activities in school and sports. It claims he was noticed by the police because of that drug dealing. If the second sentence of that paragraph is true, Guede had been injured in a stabbing that happened during a violent fight over drugs. Again, if this sentence is true, then Guede's scholarly and sports activities did not prevent ventures into drug dealing.
Here's an excerpt from a brief summary of Rudy Guede's life as reported in Corriere.It (Corriere della Sera) on 20 November 2007 (Google Translated):
I cannot see any reference to Guede having been a drug dealer, as you claim. It simply says that five years ago, when he would have been 15 - he was aged 20 as of the time of the Kercher murder - that he was stabbed in a drugs-related dispute. Judge Micheli confirmed at Guede's trial that he had a clean record. There was no criminal record of burglary or drug dealing, thus we can conclude these claims are simply Gogerty-Marriott, Burleigh and the Friends of Amanda Knox attempts to fool people into believing Guede was the baddie and AK/RS the innocent goodies. In fact, unlike Guede, Sollecito AND Knox did have police records; ironically, Sollecito had a police caution for possession of DRUGS and Knox a police ticket and caution for a vile anti-social party. Sollecito even brags in his ghost written hagiography, in which he is the hero ('Honor Bound') of how he fooled the police on one occasion, when ...he was in possession of drugs. As for the British newspapers, they rely heavily on press agencies that syndicate news items and press releases, in particular AP News (of New York), Reuters and ANSA (Italy). Colleen Barry, who is responsible for many of the AP News press releases on the pair, is an avid Amanda Knox fan, consistently presenting Knox as being an innocent person who is the victim of a miscarriage of justice. In her press release re the latest Calunnia appeal she actually worded it in terms of, this is Amanda's last attempt to remove the 'final stain' [of the miscarriage]. Once you are aware of how PR, propaganda, misinformation, defamation and disinformation works, you can effectively guard yourself from being swayed by it. Most people here are either persuaded by the likes of Colleen Barry or they are openly advocates for the defence and couldn't care less whether the client is innocent or guilty, they are just here to put a spin on it and to pretend pretty much what Colleen Barry and Nina Burleigh likes to pretend and wants you to think. For the truth is, Guede is no more saint or sinner than Knox or Sollecito. Everybody is two-thirds saint and one-third jerk, or some such proportion of either and thus, when you attempt to persuade us that Guede was a confirmed drug dealer and burglar, when in reality, it is pure conjecture, not fact (such as being able to point to a criminal conviction or police caution), those of us who are immune to this type of spin are just going to sniff the bull butter and remain highly sceptical of the hype. Those of us who want to get to the real truth of what happened are likely to look at it from the POV of 'Did Guede do it all alone?' and one can only conclude that when looked at from this POV, things just don't add up. Yet when we look at the case constructed by the prosecution, OK so there are some grey areas, but the prosecution case stacks up: the objective scientific empirical evidence of the mixed blood DNA - HOW did Knox get her DNA mixed with Mez' blood - WHY are hers and RS's bare footprints highlighted by luminol, and his, as plain as day, on the bathmat (so hey, it is the victim's blood and not turnip juice!) - the phones being switched off for the duration of the murder, the massive flooding in RS' apartment, the to-ing and fro-ing of the mop - the overall behaviour simply not adding up; the false alibi of RS, which he has never rectified to this day; his refusal to take the witness box; AFAICS, the prosecution case is pretty solid. It is completely irrelevant whether Guede was adopted as a young boy. You could counter that with Sollecito's mother committing suicide, or Knox' father running off with another woman and dumping Knox and her sister. It helps explain background and character but the fact the three were young adults help explain a lot in itself, as a young adult thrill kill murder.
Again, your poor reading comprehension is clear. I have not "claimed" that Guede was a drug dealer. It was claimed in an article in an Italian media article, an excerpt of which I posted, but not in the one you are now quoting. The one that you are now quoting does not have that exact claim, but provides additional background on Guede, alleging that he had entered a drug underworld, possibly as a user (it's not that clear), and abandoned other opportunities in school, sports, and in the support offered by the wealthy Italian family that had previously helped him. It portrays him, based on statements from people who interacted with him, that is, that supporting Italian family, as someone who consistently tends to lie.
<YAWN> Rationalization #983: 'Disregard ALL lab results that don't support guilt. These tests are bent. Luminol never has false positives.'
<YAWN> Rationalization #817: 'Blame all media coverage not supporting AK/RS guilt on Marriott and the mythical PR supertanker.'