The Forgotten Killer: Rudy Guede and the Murder of Meredith Kercher (Kindle Single) by Douglas Preston, John Douglas, Mark Olshaker, Steve Moore, Judge Michael Heavey, Jim Lovering, Thomas Lee Wright Page B
Authors: Douglas Preston, John Douglas, Mark Olshaker, Steve Moore, Judge Michael Heavey, Jim Lovering, Thomas Lee Wright
Ads: Link
testing of that stain. Why? Read on.
•
Failure to disclose the police relationship with suspect Rudy Guede.
All indications are that burglar/murderer Rudy Guede was a police informant.
He had been found culpable for several burglaries in Perugia with the exact same M.O. In fact, just days prior to the Kercher murder, Rudy had been arrested in Milan for breaking into a day care center, where he was found.
Inexplicably, the Perugian authorities requested that Milanese authorities release Rudy, drop charges, return his knife to him, and send him back to Perugia on the next train. Why? Usually, if a petty burglar and drug dealer from your town is caught in another town, it’s cause for celebration: “Now he’s
their
problem!” But not this time; Perugia needed him back. And why? The only possible reason you would need a burglar and a drug dealer back in the town you are responsible for protecting is if he is an informant.
As an FBI agent, I “ran” informants myself—dozens of them. And many got into petty criminal mischief. One even tried to stab someone over a drug deal. Each time I had them released after a petty offense, I knew that I “owned” whatever they did while they should have been serving a month in jail. These are things the cops would be thinking about when they surveyed the body of the slain woman and recognized the oh-too-familiar method of break in. I can imagine that they felt sickened by what they were seeing,as much by the gore and tragedy as they were by the realization of who was responsible for the crime.
•
The prosecution refused to give the defense (or anyone else) adequate access to alleged DNA test results—which seemingly “proved” that Knox and Sollecito were parties to the murder.
When the appeals court ordered the testing, the DNA allegations were proved false.
•
Perjury.
In open court, the prosecution characterized footprints suspected to be Knox’s as made in “the victim’s blood.” They said that they had not, however, tested the footprints to determine whether they were made in blood but strongly inferred that the footprints could be made with no other substance.
In discovery, though, it was determined that the footprints
were
tested and that they were found
not
to have been made in blood. Whoever made the footprints did so in bleach or a similar substance, and they have no relevance to who killed Meredith Kercher. Blatant perjury.
•
Wildly misleading and incriminating photos of Amanda Knox’s bathroom were given to the press.
In the photos, a chemical substance used in forensics made what appeared to be blood streaks all across the bathroom—which Knox had earlier said did not have obvious blood in it.
•
Italian law requires that all interrogations of murder suspects be videotaped or at least audiotaped.
In one of the biggest cases to ever hit Perugia, the interrogations were not videotaped. An oversight? Hardly.
Whether the tapes were made and then hidden or weren’t made at all, it is indicative of the prosecution’s belief that the tapes of Knox and Sollecito’s statements would not be helpful in their quest to prove them murderers.
•
Failure to test the broken glass from the break-in.
The prosecutors created a theory of a “staged break-in” to convict Knox and Sollecito and protect Guede. Their theory was that the rock used to break the window was thrown from the inside out. Despite being easily dispelled by physical evidence on scene, they held on tenaciously to their flawed story, even when simple testing could settle the matter.
Broken glass can be examined scientifically to determine the direction from which the breaking force came. It is well within the capabilities of forensic
•
Failure to disclose the police relationship with suspect Rudy Guede.
All indications are that burglar/murderer Rudy Guede was a police informant.
He had been found culpable for several burglaries in Perugia with the exact same M.O. In fact, just days prior to the Kercher murder, Rudy had been arrested in Milan for breaking into a day care center, where he was found.
Inexplicably, the Perugian authorities requested that Milanese authorities release Rudy, drop charges, return his knife to him, and send him back to Perugia on the next train. Why? Usually, if a petty burglar and drug dealer from your town is caught in another town, it’s cause for celebration: “Now he’s
their
problem!” But not this time; Perugia needed him back. And why? The only possible reason you would need a burglar and a drug dealer back in the town you are responsible for protecting is if he is an informant.
As an FBI agent, I “ran” informants myself—dozens of them. And many got into petty criminal mischief. One even tried to stab someone over a drug deal. Each time I had them released after a petty offense, I knew that I “owned” whatever they did while they should have been serving a month in jail. These are things the cops would be thinking about when they surveyed the body of the slain woman and recognized the oh-too-familiar method of break in. I can imagine that they felt sickened by what they were seeing,as much by the gore and tragedy as they were by the realization of who was responsible for the crime.
•
The prosecution refused to give the defense (or anyone else) adequate access to alleged DNA test results—which seemingly “proved” that Knox and Sollecito were parties to the murder.
When the appeals court ordered the testing, the DNA allegations were proved false.
•
Perjury.
In open court, the prosecution characterized footprints suspected to be Knox’s as made in “the victim’s blood.” They said that they had not, however, tested the footprints to determine whether they were made in blood but strongly inferred that the footprints could be made with no other substance.
In discovery, though, it was determined that the footprints
were
tested and that they were found
not
to have been made in blood. Whoever made the footprints did so in bleach or a similar substance, and they have no relevance to who killed Meredith Kercher. Blatant perjury.
•
Wildly misleading and incriminating photos of Amanda Knox’s bathroom were given to the press.
In the photos, a chemical substance used in forensics made what appeared to be blood streaks all across the bathroom—which Knox had earlier said did not have obvious blood in it.
•
Italian law requires that all interrogations of murder suspects be videotaped or at least audiotaped.
In one of the biggest cases to ever hit Perugia, the interrogations were not videotaped. An oversight? Hardly.
Whether the tapes were made and then hidden or weren’t made at all, it is indicative of the prosecution’s belief that the tapes of Knox and Sollecito’s statements would not be helpful in their quest to prove them murderers.
•
Failure to test the broken glass from the break-in.
The prosecutors created a theory of a “staged break-in” to convict Knox and Sollecito and protect Guede. Their theory was that the rock used to break the window was thrown from the inside out. Despite being easily dispelled by physical evidence on scene, they held on tenaciously to their flawed story, even when simple testing could settle the matter.
Broken glass can be examined scientifically to determine the direction from which the breaking force came. It is well within the capabilities of forensic
Similar Books
