In the last few days he has returned to keep the bench in the media, on TV and in so much of the court of miracles which is the so -called judicial infotainment in which the so -called Garlasco case are ruffled and tightened.
It happens because a hypothesis, additional with respect to the conclusions of the trial passed by judged with the abbreviated rite sentence to 16 by Alberto Stasi, appeared in the rooms of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Pavia who for some months has started to investigate for some months.
How the investigations have left
To trigger the new truncation of investigation, a new revaluation, requested by the defense of Stasi, of the DNA tracks, detected under the nails of the victim, Chiara Poggi, analyzed by Francesco De Stefano in the appeal process bis. They conducted it independently of two geneticists, the Italian Ugo Ricci and the German Ludz Roewer, with more recent technologies, has given results that From there they would exclude the DNA of Stasi but would not exclude in two samples acquired out of nine that of Andrea Semplio, friend of the victim’s brother, already investigated and archived once in 2017, in relation to this story, while in the first trial he had entered only as a witness.
This is one of the elements that would have pushed the Pavia prosecutor to start new investigations on the hypothesis of competition in murder. Which means evaluating the possibility of another person on the scene of that crime with a role in it. An eventuality that, only if proven to lead to a sentence incompatible with the conclusions of the other process already defined, could open the way to a review and to the remission of the final sentence against Stasi.
What should we realistically expect
But we are still in the preliminary phase. A starting point, therefore, not a point of arrival, which suggests caution in precipitating the conclusions. Especially since it is a starting point that is grafted on the story of a complicated circumstantial process. A starting point that, not being able to bring the clock back until you reset the critical issues of the initial phase of the 2007 investigations, will probably open to a new intense comparison between expertson finds collected in 2007, already evaluated in a scientific report of 2014, merged into the ruling of Appeal Bis: «For which according to the conclusions of the expert Prof. De Stefano in the undercrung material of the victim there were traces of degraded and contaminated men’s DNA for the course of time, which does not allow any positive or negative of identity. In his opinion it could also be DNA already present before the murder. ” Ricci himself about his new conclusions on DNA, in an interview on the day of 13 March, spoke of it as “of partial profiles, we worked from a biostatist point of view, the results give a very low statistical probability. To be clear, this is not a DNA profile that is enough to accuse a murder ». Assuming that the prosecutor had other elements in hand.
For this reason hearing for the evidentiary accident are underway (an anticipation during the investigation of an unrepeatable act and which is for this reason it is open to the parties) which will lead to the comparison of the results of these new assessments on previous finds with the Semdio DNA, recently taken twice.
For the moment we are at a partial mosaic, with many gaps, and groups of scattered cards. It is possible, perhaps probable, that the Public Prosecutor’s Office, led by Fabio Napoleone, with investigations coordinated by the addition Stefano Civardi and the substitute Valentina De Stefano and Giuliana Rizza, has other cards for the hands and a clearer picture of that that appeared from the rumors – because they are still -, but we cannot know him, not yet and therefore we must wait for their developments by resisting the temptation to fill the holes with the risk of distributing the Street culpableness and acquittals.
The imprint, between suggestions and reality
A press release from the Prosecutor’s Office, in this regard, has a little reduced the suggestion on the already infamous “footprint” palm found on the stairs that lead to the basement where the corpse of Chiara Poggi was found, correcting “inaccuracies and inaccuracies”. It is an imprint found in the documents with the number 33, which was already present in the first investigations of the Ris of Parma and initially classified as “not useful” for the typewritten investigations, that is, for the detection of fingerprints.
The technical consultants “appointed by the prosecutor to carry out the dactiloscopic investigations again”, reads the statement signed by the prosecutor of Pavia Napoleon, “on all the footprints at the time of the facts not attributed or considered” not useful “, in a short time they concluded that, in light of the new technical potential available, both hardware and software,” the imprint 33, highlighted through the use of the use of the use Ninidrina, it was left by the right palm of Semplio Andrea, for the correspondence of nr.», But, in confirming this aspect, The detail is highlighted on the treatment of footprints with “nidridine spray” which implicitly lets the reddish color that is seen in the photo deduce, it is not at all the blood that many have believed to see, but an effect of the reagent that colors a range ranging from blue to reddish the latent imprints that must bring out: “The surfaces of the walls and ceiling”, writes, the prosecutor, “in the first stretch of the staircase leading to the Cellar of the Poggi house, were treated, during the technical and finding operations carried out on 21 August 2007 by the Ris of Parma, with a ninidrine spray solution in order to highlight imprints and latent traces;
-In the date 29 August 2007 the Ris of Parma proceeded to inspect the walls and the ceiling of the cellar stairs previously treated with elderly by identifying the aforementioned imprint “33” which was digitally photographed on the same date;
– On September 5, 2007 a part of the “33” imprint without potentially useful crests for the typewritten investigations was removed from the wall by scratching the plaster with a sterile scalpel. The office is proceeding with further investigations on the point; – as emerges from the technical consultancy report no. 3306 – 2007 of the Ris of Parma The remaining part of the imprint “33”, potentially useful for the typewritten investigations, had been considered “not useful” “.
On the fact that there was blood in that imprint n.33 the Ris of Parma had already expressed themselves at the time, excluding it: “Part of the track completely free of crews potentially useful for the typewritten investigations was removed from the wall by scratching the plaster with a sterile scalpel,” wrote in 2007, as the prosecutor Napoleon reports in his press release now. Meanwhile, they clarified that: “The track was tested with the Combur Test which provided doubt and with the Obti Test which provided negative outcome”. The two tests are used, in the diagnostic field, to detect hidden traces of blood: they are also used in the forensic field, of the two the first test is considered orientation the second most sensitive in detecting human blood. According to the first analyzes, Chiara Poggi’s blood would not have been in that imprint which in these days for the first time makes news and whose relevance will be included in the overall framework.
How scientific evidence works: because it is not always a “signature”
If it is true that in 2020 a information from the carabinieri defined as a “logical-fault” data the fact that imprint 33 could belong to the alleged killer, it would be precipitous to imagine it as a “signature” at present. Once all the investigations of the case has been made, in fact, it would be necessary to demonstrate (it applies to the imprint and applies to the DNA and it will be worth the other elements that should emerge) that those traces, if confirmed, cannot have been leaving lawfully at times other than the murder, by a person who had first frequented the victim’s house.
Because a scientific proof, even very clear, alone always says and only that a person has been in a certain place and/or that he entered directly or indirectly in contact with another. The fact that that person can be contested by a murder is a subsequent step that asks for other evidence or at least serious, precise and concordant clues.
