Rudy Guede's Testimony (Hellmann) (English)

From The Murder of Meredith Kercher
Jump to: navigation, search

Summary

Rudy Guede has been called by the prosecution to refute evidence by the defence witnesses Mario Alessi and other prisoners, who have testified about conversations that Guede allegedly had with them in prison.

Guede confirms that he knew Alessi, De Cesare, Castellucio and Trinca but is unequivocal in his denial of discussing any details of the case with them.

The Judge has cautioned Guede that he cannot be compelled to make statements that compromise his own legal process. However, both the prosecution and the Knox/Sollecito defense try to broaden the scope of questioning, despite ineffectual objections from Guede's lawyer.

The prosecutor seizes the opportunity to produce a letter, written by Guede in 2010, that, according to him, was sent to his lawyers, but found its way to News Mediaset. The letter reiterates that Guede has never confided details of the case to Alessi or any other prison inmates. The letter ends "...I hope that sooner or later the Judges become aware of my complete innocence in what was a horrible murder of a splendid beautiful girl that was Meredith by Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox." He is pressed by Knox's defence to explain why he wrote this and firstly says, "I wrote it because it is a thought that is always been inside me." He goes on to say that what he wrote was "very true" and then further explains, "So, if I wrote those words is because they are and always have had them in my mind. It is not up to me to decide who is the one who killed Meredith, in my statements that I made in my trial I always said who had been in that house on that cursed night, therefore I am not saying anything new. I simply put down in writing my thoughts and I conveyed them in concrete terms, all here."

Translation

This is an English language translation of the testimony. See Rudy Guede's Testimony for the original Italian transcript.

Thank you to Jools from the PerugiaMurderfile.org community for this translation.

CPH Claudio Pratillo Hellmann Judge Presidente
GM Giuliano Mignini prosecutor pubblico ministero
RG Rudy Guede witness being questioned
CDV Carlo Dalla Vedova Knox defense lawyer avvocato
LG Luciano Ghirga Knox defense lawyer avvocato
DCS Defence Counsel Saccarelli Guede defense lawyer avvocato
GC Giancarlo Costagliola Prosecutor Procuratore Generale
FM Francesco Maresca Kercher civil lawyer
MZ Massimo Zanetti Judge

Translation of Guede's deposition at AK/RS appeals trial June 27, 2011. Translated from the Italian court transcript: Media:Testimony 06 27 11.pdf

WITNESS DEPOSITION –RUDY GUEDE
CDV:
Mr. President, excuse me, can I interrupt? Because my client would like to make a statement, if you allow me. Before we start Amanda Knox would like to make a statement.
GC:
We should remove the witness.
CPH:
Sorry?
CDV:
Amanda Knox would like to make a statement.
CPH:
She should have done so before the witness entered however. Its postpone to after, at the end of the deposition.
CDV:
All right, agree.
CPH:
Because to me it seems inappropriate to do it at this moment.

The witness was cautioned in accordance with Article 197.2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Legal practice Formula.

CPH:
Mr. Guede you must state your personal details, please.
RG:
My name is Rudy Hermann Guede, born on 26/12/1986 at Algouk, Ivory Coast.
CPH:
Listen, Mr. Guede, in this regard you have already been tried and convicted for a crime in a process linked to this one, in accordance with Article 197. 2, you can’t be compelled to make statements that in some way can conflict, this is a preventive warning that I am giving you, if in the process that concerns yourself, you had denied being responsible for, or whether you have not spoke or you have refused to speak, in this court you cannot be compelled to make statements that in some way could lead to your claim of responsibility for the crime for which you have been already tried. Having said that we pass the turn to the Prosecutor General who will be asking you questions. We acknowledge that his defence is in court.
GC:
How long have you been jailed in Viterbo prison?
RG:
It’s nearly three years.
GC:
Did you know Mario Alessi in prison?
RG:
Yes.
GC:
When did you meet him?
RG:
I’ve met him, well meeting him is a little… the term of meeting him needs explaining because on the other hand the place is such, that my meeting him is relative.
GC:
So regardless of when, how did you meet him?
RG:
So, practically let’s say that I met him around... when I just arrived in the prison of Viterbo, roughly around then, I think, if I am not mistaken... in 2008 because from Perugia I moved, I was moved to the Viterbo prison more or less at the beginning of December.
GC:
December 2008.
RG:
Yes. And there, that is the place and then I came to know who this person was. After something that happened, in the Viterbo prison, because it is divided into two sections, Precautionary blue and Precautionary red, at first I was in the Precautionary blue, I was assaulted by other inmates, two inmates, and so they moved me into the red side. In the red side at about that time there were six people including myself, if I remember correctly, and in that section was also Alessi. All here.
GC:
So you met him when you were transferred to the red section.
RG:
Yes, yes.
GC:
And where were you all situated exactly, the jail cells?
RG:
So... what do you mean?
GC:
You were situated in which cell, Alessi in which cell was he in, and so on...
RG:
Yes. I was situated, I think, in jail cell number 10 and Alessi... one cell or two cells a little more beyond that... he was in front of me but set aside towards, towards the right.
GC:
To your right?
RG:
Yes.
GC:
Understood. Have you ever spoken to Alessi? You with Alessi?
RG:
Well, as I said before, we were six people in that section and therefore, the good mornings and good nights were not denied to anyone and so my chats were those...
GC:
No, I mean, if I say have you spoken and of what about I’m referring to any conversation, not to the good morning and good night really.
RG:
Yes, yes. About this and that really, this and that.
GC:
For example?
RG:
For example one could speak, but not with Alessi, is not that I set my self to speak only to Alessi, with other prisoners who were there I spoke of this and that, football, cinema, or a particular movie, things like that.
GC:
But was there talk also from cell to cell?
RG:
Yes, this commonly happens, I think it happens in all prisons in Italy.
GC:
Have you ever spoke to Alessi about the proceedings against you for the Kercher murder?
RG:
Absolutely not.
GC:
Did you know Antonio De Cesare?
RG:
Yes, I also had... yes.
CPH:
Not even with De Cesare you spoke of the murder?
RG:
Absolutely not.
GC:
Did you know Marco Castelluccio?
RG:
Marco Castelluccio... well, I remember this person came in, if I remember correctly around... I don’t remember now the date but around 2010, I don’t know the exact date he arrived...
CG:
He arrived after you.
RG:
Yes he arrived way after. And with this person, you see, it was good morning and good evening, I never got to speak to him.
GC:
Not even about this and that.
RG:
Absolutely not.
CPH:
And did you also know Ciprian Trinca?
RG:
Yes, yes.
GC:
With this one...
RG:
With Ciprian Trinca I done the sociability with him, yes.
GC:
Okay, was the co-social in your jail cell?
RG:
No, in Trinca’s cell, this ...
GC:
In Trinca’s jail cell, right.
RG:
Yes, yes.
GC:
And which one was Trinca’s jail cell?
RG:
It was the cell next to mine.
GC:
And Trinca was on your left or your right?
RG:
So, Trinca was to my right and Alessi was to the front, I think it was in front of Trinca’s cell.
GC:
Alessi was facing Trinca.
RG:
Yes.
GC:
Instead where was De Cesare situated?
RG:
Instead?
GC:
De Cesare as where was he instead situated in the section?
RG:
He was towards my left, I don’t know, past two jail cells I think.
GC:
Two jail cells beyond.
RG:
If I'm not mistaken.
GC:
And Castelluccio?
RG:
Castelluccio… always to my left, but look, I can’t even tell you in which cell he was.
GC:
I understand, okay. During the period of sociability, when you were all watching television…
RG:
Yes.
GC:
…do you remember if you all heard on television news about the process?
RG:
Yes, look, the period was more or less in 2009 if I remember correctly and…
GC:
Yes.
RG:
And do realize that every day, yes, it was heard… it was during if I'm not mistaken the time of the trial against Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox, and so that’s yes.
GC:
Therefore you all did hear.
RG:
Yes when I was co-mingling in Ciprian Trinca’s.
GC:
Always in Trinca’s cell.
RG:
Yes.
GC:
And do you remember if there were any references about you in these TV comments?
RG:
In these comments that were being done through the television or…
GC:
Through the television.
RG:
Yes, definitely yes they were.
GC:
Have you ever said anything?
RG:
Yes, I did react I think like any other person would have when in a certain way feels defamed and talks… or… how can I say? Denigrated anyway and so I did have a reaction from hearing those sentences said by the Lawyers of the defendants.
GC:
And what where these saying?
RG:
Look, these sentences would range from… Now I don’t remember them but they would go to…
GC:
No all right, can you give me the general feeling, not…
RG:
The feeling was… the repudiation of the words that I was hearing against me, though.
GC:
They were accusations towards you?
RG:
Yes, these were made… usually accusations.
GC:
You have never spoken, again at [free-time] sociability, about Sollecito's graduation?
RG:
No, never.
GC:
And did you speak about Sollecito's father?
RG:
Always pertaining to the loud rumors that I was hearing about myself, against me, on television.
GC:
And what does that got to do with Sollecito’s father, the loud rumors on television?
RG:
Because he was given an opportunity anyway to make claims about myself and to certain loud rumors I had a reaction like any person would have. This is it.
GC:
You keep telling me, but I'd like to know the content of your reaction, what you said about Sollecito's father who was not even a co-defendant in the process?
RG:
No, certainly he was not a co-defendant, however, when you are up against certain words I think and I repeat again any person would have had a reaction like mine, that’s what I mean, look my exact words I don’t remember them precisely.
GC:
All right, then you don’t remember precisely…
RG:
I mean, right now.
GC:
Did you have a quarrel with Alessi?
RG:
I’ve never had a quarrel with Alessi look, because he is a person who anyway I repeat the place is such, so you are bound to speak to people who are there because you can not isolate yourself completely even if you don’t want to talk to certain people, we talked [small talk] about this and that, I have never had any quarrel with Alessi.
GC:
Therefore is a no…
RG:
It is.
GC:
…there wasn’t any incident…
RG:
Absolutely.
GC:
…of near aggression from Alessi?
RG:
No, absolutely not.
GC:
Do you know Giacomo Benedetti?
RG:
Yes.
GC:
Has he ever come to visit you in prison?
RG:
Yes, he’s come several times.
GC:
OK It's fine. I have no further questions President.
GM:
Listen, you knew that Alessi said, had made statements regarding yourself?
RG:
Yes I found out from television.
GM:
Right, and do you remember roughly when you found out?
RG:
Look, roughly we speaking of… if I’m not mistaken with the dates always in May 2010.
GM:
Listen, you decided to confirm or refute these statements made by Alessi trough the press?
RG:
Look, when I heard those ludicrous rumors I felt compelled to write a letter, several letters which I sent to my lawyers, in which I told them that everything that this person was saying was all lies.
GM:
You wrote, through your lawyers, I do not know whether or not directly a letter to News Mediaset?
RG:
Me directly no.
GM:
But who wrote this letter?
RG:
Look, as I said before I decided to write to my lawyers then soon after I do not know how my letter came to arrive at News Mediaset.
GM:
So look, if I may… if it can be shown, this would be the text and this is the content of this letter, if you confirm to have, that this is the content of the letter.
CPH:
But is this produced?
GC:
It will be produced if is admitted.
GM:
I wanted to ask the question if…
CPH:
If he recognizes the signature?
GM:
If he recognizes and if the content…
GC:
If he recognizes the content, this is one letter…
GM:
The content is that one in bold on the sheet. If you will… from the second page, look.
RG:
However I must say that from here you cannot read anything.
GM:
No no no but that’s the text. I wanted to know…
RG:
Anyhow yes.
GM:
… the content, if the content ...
DCS:
Excuse me Court, can I see the content of the letter?
CPH:
Please.
GM:
Then at the side it is the reference text which was then enlarged, in case the handwritten one is hard to read, but in short the content would be this one? The second page also, here is the one in bold.
RG:
Yes, I wrote this letter, yes.
GM:
The production of the letter is requested.
CPH:
Right.
DCS:
There is opposition in order from by the defence into the production of the letter.
CPH:
He was warned that he couldn’t be compelled to make a statement, now I don’t know what is on this letter.
DCS:
If you allow me I wanted to make a clarification to this Court. In the main vain I just wanted to say that Rudy Guede today is a witness only for the facts concerning the statements already made by Mario Alessi at the last hearing, he cannot report on other facts, only on these. I think the letter refers, however, from what I read, to the culpability of some persons and therefore it should not be admitted just because Rudy Guede is a witness, I repeat, today only the facts relating to declarations made by Alessi, witness assisted under Article 197 bis this is why I am opposed to the production because Rudy Hermann Guede has the right to remain silent about the facts on which he was sentenced and I think the letter reproduces also these facts, it does not speak only about Alessi.
CPH:
But it is an option that is up to him and not to counsel, it is him that must decide…
GM:
He’s responded.
DCS:
Yes, I know, he answered but he responds only about the facts of the case regarding Mario Alessi, he can not answer about other facts, he has the right to remain silent on facts pertaining to the culpability of other people.
GM:
The letter is in regard…
DCS:
He has the right to remain silent.
GPH:
Well, right now…
GB:
Can Sollecito’s defence have a word after?
CPH:
One moment…
GM:
I’m asking…
CPH:
Excuse me just a moment Prosecutor, I warned Guede before he can not be compelled to make statements that can in any way conflict with his position on the case proceedings by now definitive, I haven’t got the faintest idea what is in that letter, he made the evaluation, it can not be done by the defender obviously and he said, simply he acknowledged the letter then the content I do not know what could be…
GM:
However…
CPH:
He acknowledged that he wrote this letter himself.
RG:
If may I be allow to speak please.
DCS:
Excuse me, did you read it…
RG:
If may I be allow to speak.
GB:
The defence also asked to speak, sooner or later.
RG:
No in the sense that I did write that letter and I sent it to my lawyers, I was asked if I had send it to TGCOM, I have never sent it to TGCOM directly.
CPH:
I’ve not understood anything please repeat.
RG:
I said that the letter I wrote, when I wrote it I sent it direct to my lawyers but I personally did not send it, as I was asked, to TGCOM. This is it, as to whether the letter was written by me yes it was.
CPH:
You admit of having written that letter but not addressing…
RG:
… directly to TGCOM.
DCS:
President excuse me, Rudy Hermann Guede has acknowledged that it is a letter addressed to his legal defence, I request that the letter does not get admitted into the case file, to reject it.
CPH:
Okay, we will hold back on the outcome, till after we review what is written in this letter.
GM:
Or else I read it to you. “Viterbo, March 7, 2010. As usual in this beloved beautiful country of ours there are many false people, devoted to mendacity, just as there are those who give a voice to people without having the slightest conscience to ask whether it is worthwhile to provide space for certain speculations. In recent days I have heard nothing but profane allegations against me, false rumors that have done nothing other but looting from here and there for the news reporting TV channels, even though for those with common sense they are the pure inventions of a wicked mind. It must be said that what I heard in the past days from the media, about all that was falsely stated by this foul being called Mario Alessi, whose conscience is nothing but stinking scum, just and only ramblings of the sick and twisted mind of his, fantasized and false statements of a monster as it is known throughout Italy, stained with a horrendous murder, where he took life of a small human angel. That man mendaciously now is saying things that I’ve never said and I did not ever told him, things that are neither in heaven nor on earth, in his opinion or better call it his own rotten statements, my intention is to put pen to paper to clarify that I was never a confident to this be filthy man, apart from the fact that I have nothing to confess or in so far and in as much everything that I had to say I’ve already said it to the Judges and will continue as long as I live to scream and fight until the truth itself and justice itself prevails over such lies and moreover I’ve not spoken individually, or together with other inmates about what is my case proceedings and if in case I had something to say don’t you think that I would have spoken to my lawyers? To give rise to or credit to what is a profane statement from an unsound mind, a monster who had no mercy on a little boy, with this further stage-act, which myself, my lawyers and my family by now have become so accustomed on the part of - here illegible - this latest one Alessi the monster I hope that the Italian people and the rest of the world do realize what filth they’ve to deal with, who are the slime and stink of lies, but who nonetheless go around to show their faces and suffocate people with their stench of falsehood for their umpteenth stage-act does nothing but give me the strength and conscious awareness to fight more than ever so that the truth that they intending to hide be known to everyone. With regards to myself, I have the serenity and the tranquility of the full ataraxia mind of those who in fairness does not boast this unjust suffering but because in fairness I trust the justice system and the good sense of the Italian people and finally I hope that sooner or later the Judges become aware of my complete innocence in what was a horrible murder of a splendid beautiful girl that was Meredith by Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox. Guede Rudy”.
CPH:
However, there is no admission of culpability by Guede, indeed seems to me to be precisely the contrary, therefore it is not a case in which it can be abstain from testimony so we can admit it as evidence.
DCS:
I defer to the Court because they are also facts in which Rudy Hermann Guede deposed, facts pertaining only to Mario Alessi.
CPH:
Lets admit this letter. Has the prosecution finish with this witness?
GM:
Yes thank you.
CPH:
Is there anyone who wants to put questions to the witness?
GB:
Mr. Guede, you had opportunity of having lunch at least in one occasion in the jail cell with Antonio De Cesare?
RG:
Well, like I said before I went at free-time with Ciprian Trinca and it did happened, yes it happened one time or more that Mr. De Cesare as well as Mr. Alessi would come into Trinca’s cell and so I would have had lunch time together with them, yes.
GB:
Because before you told me that it was just a good evening relation, so the talk would be a bit more than.
RG:
No hold on, I went to Trinca’s ((“socialita”)) co-mingle and since I couldn’t denied other people taking the free-time with Trinca, those that wanted to come were welcome by Trinca and not by me and so this is how I came to be with these people.
GB:
These people they spoke to you, not you to them, they to you, did everyone at times spoke about the trials that you all had ongoing or nobody ever touch this conversation?
RG:
Look, I’ve seen one reality and I’m living a reality that, from the moment I saw these people, for example De Cesare they talked a lot about their own, their own cases or what their criminal life was like, but they talked…
GB:
So they all spoke about this to you, no.
RG:
Yes.
GB:
You instead didn’t talk about your…
RG:
Absolutely not.
GB:
… about your things.
RG:
Absolutely, absolutely, I was doing nothing more than listening to these people, period.
GB:
Have you ever asked Alessi for help to write a, to speak with the infirmary?
RG:
Me to Alessi to help Alessi?
GB:
Have you ever asked Alessi…
RG:
To help me?
GB:
YES.
RG:
No this not, absolutely no.
GB:
Have you ever had, have suffered from hemorrhoids?
RG:
Absolutely no.
GB:
Do you authorize this legal team, in view that this is a personal matter, to ask the infirmary if you made these requirements?
RG:
Certainly, certainly.
GB:
Listen, with regard to this letter that was read to you by the prosecutor, I want to ask you
RG:
It was let’s say an outlet, a reaction I had after these statements.
GB:
This letter you sent it to whom?
RG:
To my lawyers.
GB:
Mr. Guede, do you wish to speak about the murder of Meredith Kercher instead and about the things you do know?
DCS:
I object, they are not relevant facts… I strongly object.
CPH:
Its always a choice he has however, its not the defence’s.
GB:
Its clear that he can choose but at least let’s allow him to say so no?
CPH:
Exactly I say…
DCS:
But they’re facts that do not concern…

[Background voices].

DCS:
This is a cross examination, they’re not facts concerning the statements that he should render.

[Background voices]

DCS:
No, is not fear colleague, is just that they are not facts concerning the process.
CPH:
If you want you can respond, only you have the right not to do so. Therefore if you decide to respond then respond.
GB:
President, one thing must be said, that since we just heard read-out, a read-out of a letter has been given in which explicitly accuses my client and Amanda, I’m in evidence deduced in court, I believe is my right at least to tell Mr. Guede, after years that we chasing him, if he wants to tell the truth about this murder.
RG:
Can I respond? Right, as the letter was read out I think I am here today to respond as in the penal proceedings toward the statements, the false statements made by Mario Alessi and accordingly, like it is written in the letter, everything that I had to say I already told the Judges, the Public Prosecutor and my lawyers, therefore I have no intention to answer on this point.
GB:
Then you have no intention to respond.
RG:
Yes.
CPH:
All right. Other questions?
LG:
Good morning Rudy.
RG:
Good morning.
LG:
I am defence Counsel of Amanda, we met earlier. I was asking you about Giacomo Benedetti…
RG:
Yes.
LG:
… because I don’t understand how many times he’s visited you, the number of times that is, I’ve not understood properly. “He’s come to visit…”?
RG:
Me and Giacomo Benedetti have…
LG:
Look at the President.
RG:
Yes, me and Giacomo Benedetti have visit encounters, I reckon nearly one visit a month because being a third person he cannot come to visit me…
LG:
Currently though.
RG:
… like other people do and so all together, since I’ve been… he was already visiting me when I was in the Perugia jail, and the encounters between myself and Giacomo have continued even in the Viterbo prison and so let’s say that from the time I find myself in this situation Giacomo once a month has always come to visit me.
LG:
Listen, Giacomo Benedetti is that friend of yours that chatted, in quotes, with you when you were in Germany?
RG:
Okay, Giacomo Benedetti is my childhood friend and is the person in which I… I talked, on [computer] chatting, with whom when talking to I decided to return to Italy to proof my innocence, yes.
LG:
Thank you.
CPH:
All right. Tell me lawyer.
CDV:
My self also Mr. Guede, having had news today of this letter and after hearing its content, I’m obligated to question you as it was done by Sollecito’s defence, with all regards to all your decisions to a possible answer, because I think that you are making two very important assertions
RG:
But several people in what sense?
CDV:
… and because it seems to me very relevant, my question is
CPH:
This is more than a question, but Counsel Dalla Vedova more than a question it seems to me a consideration that you are making in sum, to a establish conclusion…
CDV:
No, in a certain point he says it in the letter…
CPH:
Yes, yes but this is not a question.
CDV:
The question is: which is the truth seeing that you have reported it now, in this letter, and seems to be a new truth.
RG:
Absolutely no is not a new truth.
CDV:
Because?
RG:
Is not a new truth because, as I said before one I’m not here to answer on a different criminal proceedings but on this one criminal proceedings, that letter was, a reaction to the statements I heard, to the absurd declarations of a certain person and, as I said before, I have not said anything new in this letter by me, I simply written down everything that I always told to investigators, to Judges and my lawyers.
CDV:
And so, Mr. Guede, when you textually write that it was “a horrible murder of a splendid beautiful girl that was Meredith by Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox” what do you mean to say exactly? Did you say this before?
RG:
Right, this part, explicitly in this manner I’ve never said it however I always believe it.
CDV:
So why did you write it?
RG:
I wrote it because it is a thought that is always been inside me.
CDV:
But then it is not true.
RG:
No it’s very true.
CDV:
And so can you elaborate better? What you mean?
RG:
It’s very true.
CDV:
Do you confirm this fact? The by?
RG:
Okay, I in the… right, like I said before, this is a thought which is always been in my mind, is a thought that in the end although I’ve decided to put it down in writing upon hearing certain absurdities, according to me and I assume all responsibility, after hearing a puppet manipulated by certain people, that’s all. So, if I wrote those words is because they are and always have had them in my mind. It is not up to me to decide who is the one who killed Meredith, in my statements that I made in my trial I always said who had been in that house on that cursed night, therefore I am not saying anything new. I simply put down in writing my thoughts and I conveyed them in concrete terms, all here. So I can’t see what other question I should answer.
CDV:
On this letter I still would like a clarification, because you said: “ I wrote this letter because I felt like a puppet and then…” …
RG:
No, it is not that I felt like a puppet, I did not say that.
CDV:
Then why did you write this letter?
RG:
I wrote this letter because there was a puppet that was being manipulated by certain people who were indeed the puppet masters.
CDV:
Listen what does “ataraxia of the mind” mean?
RG:
I think that the word ataraxia means state of calm.
CDV:
Listen, you have a friend on the area of Perugia who had a nickname, the nickname was “Il Ciccione”?
RG:
Sorry?
FM:
This is a cross-examination, President there’s objection.
CDV:
“Il Ciccione”.
FM:
Objection President.
CDV:
Why?
FM:
Because there haven’t been questions on “Ciccione” unless I wasn’t paying attention.
RG:
Apart from that I don’t know any “Il Ciccione”.
FM:
And nevertheless there is objection.
CPH:
“Il Ciccione” emerged from the previous…
CDV:
From Alessi’s testimony…
CPH:
Yes from Alessi…
RG:
I don’t know any “Il Ciccione”.
CPH:
… and so it can be a question put forward because Alessi spoke of him.
FM:
The cross-examination…
CPH:
But he always has the right to silence, is always within his rights…
FM:
Yes but President the cross-examination is on the examination of the Prosecution as their called witness.
CPH:
Yes, this is right.
FM:
Right, then since the Prosecution has not put any questions about “Il Ciccione” in my opinion not even Dalla Vedova can ask them.
CDV:
I think instead that the question is appropriate also because in the acts, there is an oral record, which we heard…

[Background voices overlapped]

CPH:
Yes but it’ll be also indirectly against culpability of the defendant in his own process really, so he first of all has the right to silence if he wants.
GM:
He’s already answered.
FM:
He has answered, President he said that he doesn’t know…
RG:
I do not know any “Il Ciccione”.
CPH:
Eh?
RG:
I don’t know any “Il Ciccione”. I definitely don’t know him.
CPH:
All right, he also answered therefore…
RG:
Never heard of.
CPH:
… implicitly has even responded. Thank you.
CDV:
Listen, back to your statement in this letter, you seem to reassert a claim that you already told, is that it?
RG:
That is?
CDV:
And that is that you have not participated in this murder…
FM:
President, he already answered. This is the third time he’s asking him the same question, its objection.
DCS:
[off microphone]
CPH:
We’ve already examined it in depth by now, we entering into an argument that is not part of cross interrogation of the witness.
GC:
[off microphone]
CPH:
The witness is called to answer if he has told or not certain confidences to Alessi.
CDV:
Did you write other letters to your lawyers?
RG:
Certainly, from the first day that I find myself in this situation I have written many letters to my lawyers.
CDV:
And do you write letters also to other people?
RG:
I write to every person who is very close to me.

[Background voices]

CDV:
And I wanted to ask, to Alessi have you ever written a letter?
DCS:
Excuse me, however there is objection on the part of the defence, these are not questions pertinent to the facts, Rudy Hermann Guede has already answered therefore these are suggestive questions that do not pertain to the facts in which he has to ask at this present day.
CPH:
But Counsel it was the Prosecutor General who asked if he wrote the letter, then he produced a…
DCS:
Yes but he didn’t give the letter and he already answered on this. He responded to the Prosecutor General therefore I object.
CPH:
The defence has the right to obviously cross-examine on this aspect.
DCS:
Yes but not by making suggestive questions.
CPH:
I don’t think they are suggestive.
CDV:
They are not suggestive questions; they’re questions in relation to a circumstantial fact that was reported by him. If I then put questions that will interfere on his procedural situation, just like so many times the colleague suggested, it will be up to the person who has the right not to answer, therefore in my opinion the question must be ask. So I shall repeat the question
RG:
Okay, as I told you I like any person who finds… himself in prison, writes to his family, to the persons, to the close friends and like they write also to their legal defenders and this I believe is something that happens every day in Italy and the world.
CDV:
Who are your relatives?
RG:
Right, my relatives are my father, my aunt and my friends are the people among whom Giacomo Benedetti and other persons.
CDV:
Have you ever written to the two co-defendants, it does not emerge from the letters on the part of the Prosecution.
CPH:
I think that…
GC:
That we are going too far.
CPH:
… we have exhausted no, Counsel?
CDV:
I only have one question that I must ask always in relation to the novelty that I read in this letter, often related…
FM:
[off microphone]
CDV:
President, can I explain the question…
CPH:
Yes, lets allow him to make the question then we’ll see.
CDV:
… after I’ll give all the time to all those opposing because I respect but I would like not to be interrupted, I think the novelty instead of this letter is in its content on the fact that Guede speaks of his own truth and reasserts the involvement of Raffaele and Amanda Knox…
CPH:
The question.
CDV:
… the novelty is this: why have you never said it before?
RG:
Look, I’m not speaking…
CDV:
Why that evening you…
RG:
Look, can I…
CDV:
… sorry, sorry…
CPH:
But this is part of…

[Background voices and superimposed]

GM:
But we’re talking about his process.
CPH:
Agreed, agreed. Is part of his own defence, the defence that… (inc. voices superimpose)
DCS:
After I wish to clarify one thing, in today’s date the answer…
CPH:
He already said he doesn’t want to answer.
CDV:
The President is talking, please.
DCS:
In the previous answer he said anyway that it was a thought, and this he wrote, he said that is his truth he’s already repeated it many times, I think is enough questions on this.
CPH:
Yes, yes, I agree, I am saying it if you let me speak.
CDV:
Yes the President is saying it.
CPH:
That’s it, so at this point we exhausted then.
RG:
If you can grant me one last word.
CDV:
But I see that the witness wants to…
RG:
No, if they grant me one last word, you see the problem is this, is not that there is my truth or the truth of every Tom or Dick, the truth that exists is what I experienced that night and which I always described, full stop.
CDV:
So you were there that evening.
RG:
I always said I was there that night.
CDV:
Eh, but then…
RG:
I think you very well know that I always said so.
CPH:
No no, let us not do that…
CDV:
Look at the President.
CPH:
This one I won’t allow it Counsel honestly, I will not admitted because we’re staying away from the argument, no?
CDV:
Yes but President I think that the…
CPH:
If he’s made confidential declarations to Alessi, yes or no, this is the argument.
CDV:
President I appreciate your observations but I clarify that Article 197 bis provides for this possibility and leaves the right not to answer to the witness that is here in this situation today, decidedly special, to answer or not.
CPH:
True, but I believe he already answered.
CDV:
Therefore no one, and I’m addressing my colleagues and also the Prosecutor, no one can stop the defence to ask a question, it will be after, if is concerning his own procedural situation, it will be up to the witness that, evidently is the interest of this defence to make these questions.
CPH:
Yes but he’s already answered.
DCS:
Is not that he is opposing to answer, he has the right not to, however he did already answered on these questions.
GC:
President may I…
DCS:
He should not… (off microphone).
GC:
… can I make one clarification? The witness immediately said that he had no intention to respond to questions related to the murder, it is pointless for the defence to continue to try in the hope that he could be distracted on the decision.
CPH:
No just that, but he has already answered the questions put to him, I’ve told you, he’s already answered before, we can not repeat to him ten times the same questions.
CDV:
Okay President.
CPH:
I would conclude.
CDV:
So, are you now in the Viterbo prison?
RG:
Yes.
CDV:
And you are in contact with Alessi, De Cesare, Trinca…
RG:
Look, I have never been in contact with these people, I will repeat it again, the only way… the only manner in which I was in, since a prison it is what it is and the spaces are what they are, the only way in which I could come in contact with these people I’ve just now described it to you, so… with these people now they’re no longer in Viterbo, I have no way, that is I can’t see how I would have contact with these people, given that I have nothing in common with these persons.
CDV:
You have answered thank you.
CPH:
Counsel Maresca have you any questions?
FM:
No questions.
MZ:
Some very simple questions. Listen, when in Viterbo prison, you were speaking before about the cells and the locations.
RG:
Yes.
MZ:
During the courtyard hour did you have the possibility, did you have the opportunity to speak to one or the other or not? During the courtyard hour, when you were outside.
RG:
Okay I repea… when we went to the courtyard hour it was just the same, the conversation was the same, it was the same dialogue that it was…
MZ:
Excuse me, I ask you only if you had the chance to talk or not, I didn’t ask you…
RG:
Certainly there’s a chance to talk, but about this and that, that is during the courtyard hour.
MZ:
Okay. Another question: you said you socialize with Trincia… [sic]
RG:
With Trinca yes.
MZ:
…in what language did you speak with Trincia?
RG:
In Italian.
MZ:
Because the other day here he needed an interpreter.
RG:
Look, this is true, he doesn’t speak, he doesn’t speak Italian well…
MZ:
But you managed to speak to him.
RG:
Lets say… how can I put it? I lowered my language to his level and then we didn’t even speak in a fluid way but a bit more, trying to make me understand.
MZ:
What qualifications of studies do you have?
RG:
Okay, at this moment I’m doing the qualification exams of the High School of human Sciences, so if everything goes well I should have the diploma.
MZ:
High School of human sciences?
RG:
Yes, that would be the old school institute.
MZ:
Thank you.
CPH:
Thank you, you can go.