Amanda Knox’s Retrial Judge Up For Disciplinary Action? Alessandro Nencini’s Comments “Inappropriate”

Amanda Knox's retrial judge who found her and former boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito guilty for the murder of her roommate, Meredith Kercher, in 2007 could face disciplinary action after his comments during an interview with the media regarding the verdict were deemed "inappropriate."

In a report by UK's Guardian, the defense lawyers claimed that chief judge Alessandro Nencini's comments only showed his bias in convicting Amanda Knox and her boyfriend for the killing of British student Meredith Kercher.

"The conviction is the result of a clear bias on the part of the judges against the defendants, and in particular against Raffaele Sollecito, and that interview proves it," defence lawyer Luca Maori said in an interview with Corriere della Sera.

The defense counsel of Raffaele Sollecito then went on to add that his team would discuss today, Monday, what legal actions to take next. They will also confer with the Amanda Knox's lawyers to appeal the retrial's verdict before the Court of Cassation, considered to be Italy's highest court.

The head of the Italian National Associaton of Judges, Rodolfo Sabelli, called Nencini's statements in the interview as "inappropriate."

Amanda Knox was recently snapped walking in New York with boyfriend James Terrano, even as Italy is going through with the plan to petition her extradition. While the extradition petition will be heard, she will spend her time in a federal prison in the U.S.

The lawyers criticized Judge Nencini particularly his statements to Corriere della Sera that, "if Amanda had gone to work, we probably wouldn't be here."

Giulia Bongiorno, Sollecito's chief defence lawyer, also told the same newspaper that the judge's criticism of the defense's strategy was uncalled for.

In that same interview, the judge claimed that while it's the defendant's right not to testify,
"but it certainly deprived the process of a voice."

"He (Rafaele Sollecito) limited himself to spontaneous declarations. He said only what he wanted to say without letting himself be cross-examined," the judge said.