Case Garlasco, the judge Stefano Vitelli, who acquitted Alberto Stasi at first instance: “There are at least three reasons why I did it. Better a culprit outside than an innocent in jail “

«In the case of concrete multidirectional uncertainty You should not run the risk of putting an innocent in jail, better to have a culprit out». The magistrate Stefano Vitelli, a judge who at first institutions acquitted Alberto StasiThen definitively sentenced to 16 years (and now in semi -liberty), has reopened the debate on the crime of Garlasco on TV. Guest in connection to Fourth republicVitelli explained why at the time he decided for the acquittal, indicating the clues that did not convince him and reaffirming the critical issues that remained still open today: from the time of the murder, to the doubts about the weapon never found, up to the fingerprints in the bathroom.

Three, in particular, the central elements.

The computer alibi

«The first is the computer alibi: It was ascertained that Stasi in the heart of the morning worked on the thesis. Not only did he do not say a lie, but in the central hours of the morning he was engaged in his home in an intellectually significant work, and he did it with substantial continuity, putting his hand and brain. “

The imprint in the bathroom

The second “is that surely the killer or one of the killers entered the bathroom. We have the bloody imprint on the mat in front of the mirror. We also have Alberto Stasi’s imprint on the dispenser, but his blood was missing in the siphon and on the dispenser himself. That sink was physiologically dirty, there were even hair, so it hadn’t been washed very well. It is reasonable to hypothesize that the killer entered the bathroom, but maybe he just mirrored and took the sheets. It is not unreasonable to think that that stasis imprint may have been left the night before, When he ate pizza with Chiara Poggi and, before working on the thesis, he trivially washed his hands ».

The times of the murder

Another key point concerns the time of the murder. According to accusatory reconstruction, stasis he would have had just 23 minutes to commit the crime, that August 13, 2007. For Vitelli, the temporal window is not compatible with the dynamic of the murder: «23 minutes are of problematic compatibility. It is not mathematically impossible, but in a murderous dynamic that did not materialize in a unique act – it was not a gunshot – and that between Alberto and Chiara must imagine itself characterized by a particularly violent quarrel … when it was there? The night before? The next morning? It takes time. And the weapon? Then we must also consider the time to get rid of it and clean up: 23 minutes are very few ».

The reasonable doubt, for him, “is not an expedient thanks to which the defendant makes it free despite being guilty, is a real guarantee”.

On current investigations in progress, the magistrate added: “We are all looking at the hole of a lock that is represented by the evidentiary accident and something else that has emerged, like the imprint in the cellar. But A serious investigation is made up of a series of elements on which there is the preliminary investigation. So we know very littleyou have to wait for the door to open. “

The weapon never found

During the broadcast, the lawyer Antonio De Rinesis also intervened, who hardly criticized the work done in Vigevano: «That investigation was one of the worst by the Prosecutor of Italian judicial history. Judge Vitelli carried out incredible insights, his consultants verified how much Alberto had worked on the days before August 13, how many bailouts did every hour, how long the phone calls lasted with his mother who was on vacation … and they verified that the process was always the same “. And he remarked the asymmetry of evaluations compared to the traces found: «Alberto who was Chiara’s boyfriend and frequented the house had the imprint on the dispenser because he had eaten the pizza and was washed his hands, and is in jail. Instead today they say it is normal that there are any traces of Andrea Semplioin that house ».

Finally, he raised a doubt that has never resolved: «Alberto sleeps in jail every night for 10 years. We have a sentence in which this is said that this is an impetus crime: If there is no premeditation, where has it been taken? Do you see how many aspects must still be analyzed? ».