The focus is on three consultations, unpublished audio and missing interceptions
There is a new witness in the Erba massacre and he offers an alternative lead on the culprits. He supports it the defense of Olindo Romano and Rosa Bazzi definitively sentenced to life imprisonment for the deaths of Raffaella Castagna, her 2-year-old son Youssef Marzouz, the little Paola Galli’s grandmother and a neighbor Valeria Cherubini, who rushed to the apartment in via Diaz on the evening of 11 December 2006. Only by chance, her husband Mario Frigerio, who died in September 2014, was an eyewitness of the quadruple homicide. A proof contained in the request for revision that “in a few days” the defenders, the lawyers Fabio Schembri, Nicola D’Ascola, Luisa Bordeaux and Patrizia Morello, assisted in the investigation by the lawyer Paolo Sevesi, will file with the Brescia court of appeal to request the reopening of the case.
After the sentence of the Cassation, which arrived on May 4, 2011, the lawyers worked for a long time – with a pool of experts – to try to overturn a sentence on which none of the judges has ever expressed a doubt. The defensive investigations led to the tracking down of a Tunisian man a few months agoended up in an investigation by the Guardia di Finanza and linked in business with the brother of Azouz Marzouk (companion and father of two of the victims), which would have offered an alternative track: a settlement of accounts between rival gangs, linked to the drug dealing marketwhich would have resulted in the ambush inside the apartment in via Diaz where, according to his story, drugs and money were hidden.
A element which, together with the alleged inconsistencies and anomalies of an investigation, leads the defense to try to dismantle – after almost 17 years from the facts – the three pieces of evidence (the spouses’ confessions, the words of the witness who recognizes Olindo and the bloodstain of Cherubini in the couple’s car) which force the Romano spouses in prison. A work that made use of the tools offered by the progress of science and technology and which are summarized in two substantial multidisciplinary consultancies and a forensic biological-genetic consultancy. “Every single piece of evidence does not hold up and now the new elements collected are going to affect the sentence” Schembri explains to Adnkronos.
Massacre Erba, judge condemns Azouz: he will have to compensate the Castagna brothers
THE lawyers reproduce testimonies, minutes, findings, audio and video that have always been present in the investigation, but according to them, never really analysed, valued or fully understood. It starts from reconstructing the versions of Frigerio who goes from not remembering, to offering the identikit of a stranger with olive skin and then pointing the finger at the well-known neighbor. A distorted memory, as well as “false”, he induced, are the confessions of Olindo and Rosa. In the substantial documentation of the lawyers there is a paragraph dedicated to the interceptions ‘disappeared’ in the hospital and at the home of the Romano spouses, as well as the “authenticity” of Valeria Cherubini’s bloodstain on the sill plate of Olindo’s car is called into question. She is unconvinced by the way she was found, as well as the result. If the defense has so far made a leap of faith on that blood trace, now it is backtracking: that trace does not exist, “it is an optical suggestion”.
But above all it is astonishing that in that ‘slaughter’, in that “bloodbath”, the two convicts managed not to leave any trace of themselves in the victims’ homes and not to ‘bring’ any trace into their home. The dynamics of Cherubini’s death are also under discussion, which suggests that the attackers were still present when the first rescuers rushed to put out the flames. And in the long cross-investigation the elements destroyed after the final sentence (on which the defense had requested investigations) return. The conclusions of the lawyers – as well as those that will arrive from the Milan public prosecutor’s office – will have to pass an initial admissibility check by the Brescia judges, only after which a hearing could be set to decide whether the case should be reopened.