That didn't even engage my argument.
Again, it was the way this case was prosecuted and the evidence (and 'evidence') presented in court which led to Rudy Guede's being eligible to walk the streets soon. Amanda and Raffaele were convicted of 'staging' Rudy's break-in and for committing Rudy's theft and were given primary roles in the murder while Rudy's was dimished in contradiction to all the evidence
.
But No! Because, the way this case was prosecuted,
has lead to the sentencing of Rudy Guede to 30 year imprisonment.
This is where the way the case was prosecuted brougt Rudy Guede,
until the other two co-accused managed to obtain generic mitigation on very vague grounds.
Prior to this event, Guede did not obtain any mitigation.
Guede, Sollecito and Knox roles in the murder were identical before the law. There is no difference between "primary" and "secondary" roles. This was seen as a gang-crime. It is the effect of group dynamic. None of the perps, taken alone, would have been capable of committing the murder. All three of them were necessary to the occurrence of the crime.
This is the way the crime has been prosecuted.
Also, Rudy could have been prosecuted for his previous recent burglaries, which was the duty of Mignini and/or Comodi as PMs, was it not?
Those additional crimes would have led to Rudy being put away for longer as well.
For what, for imaginary burglaries? What are those imaginary burglaries? You are talking about the only witness, Christian Tramontano, who did not report any burglary to the police, told a story after the Kercher murder and he was not sure about Guede's identity (and found unreliable by judge Micheli). This is the alleged burglary?
And definitely, NO, he could NOT be put behind bars for longer. He could not even be sentenced for alleged offences within any useful time. You forget he would ever serve time for those, or that the opening of prosecution cases against him for other offences could influence his murder trial. There would be no legal chance for that. It's impossible. If he had criminal records, previous sentences, that could have been used. But start procedings ex novo as a way to prosecute him, that is impossible.
However had an investigation been done and evidence gathered and Rudy properly prosecuted for those crimes it would have been damned deadly difficult to pretend that there was a 'staged break-in' and the two innocents left over from their bungled first arrest had conspired with Rudy to murder Meredith for no definable reason anyone has been able to support.
No, it would not be damned difficult to
find out that the break in was staged, because it was obviously staged. And if you want to play this game, you could as well claim that it would have been difficult to pretend that Amanda Knox had no contacts with drug dealers in Piazza Grimana, had the drug dealers exchanging phone calls with her being investigated and tried before.
And also, what are "those crimes"? You only have Tramontano's non reliable account, dismissed by a judge. The second episode: he had a stolen laptop in Milan and entered a property unauthorized, without causing damages. That was one week before and in another jurisdiction, and there is nothing that makes the case Kercher murder case become different (autopsy report, luminol print, bathmat print, blood drops, cleanup, lies etc.: the problem is that you don't acknowledge this evidence. If you don't see it, you have no case).
