Lucia reigns beaten by the former: “This sentence is a defeat of all. I cried reading it “

«This sentence is a defeat of all. Reading it I had the feeling of returning to the times of the old crime of honor, which fortunately no longer exists “. Speak to the newspaper Printing Lucia Regna. He does it after a meeting with the psychologist who supported him after reading the reasons for the sentence that He condemned the ex for injuries, but not for mistreatment. She, beaten so much to have The rebuilt face with 21 titanium plates and an eye from which she partially lost her viewhad denounced years of harassment.

The anti -violence associations intervened immediately expressing indignation and solidarity, but the position of the policy, all, from right to left, was also unanimous. The reasons for the sentence say that “this outburst must be understood”, “traced back to the logic of human relationships”, because the woman “flanked a marriage”, did so “for her personal initiative” and “communicated the separation in a brutal way”. For Eugenia Roccella, Minister for the family, the birth rate and equal opportunities, “the reasons for the sentence with words of understanding and justification towards a beating that led the victim to have to reconstruct his face with 21 titanium plaques, show that the culture that we must contrast and that it is the basis of violence and prevarications has been insinuated too often even among those who should contribute to repressing these phenomena”.

The PD parliamentarians of the bicameral commission feminicide speak of “a striking case of secondary victimization of a woman. The one who denounced and who was about to put his life back to us was judged corree compared to his attacker, guilty of having compromised the family unit founded on a marriage marked, however, by physical, psychological and economic violence “. Augusta Montaruli, deputy group leader of Fratelli d’Italia in the Chamber, adds: “We cannot allow us to calm the trust of women in denouncing facts that can lead to cases of femicide and that, in any case, remain a boulder in their lives”. For Simona Lanzoni, vice president of the Pangea Foundation, “once again the violence of men under the lenses of the Patriarchate is justified, the executioner is responsible and the woman is discredited, turning up the victim and aggressor”.

Lucia Regna received the text of the sentence while in the car. «I have combined. I arrived on the second page and a half, then I had to stop. I started crying. I haven’t continued anymore. It says that I would be the bearer of personal and property macroscopic interests. I lost my view closely from an eye after my ex beat me for seven consecutive minutes, breaking my face. I lost my job because I no longer see well. It is a sentence full of personal comments against me. They wounded me. It hurts me to read that since I had left it, he had a justification for everything, also to get to the maximum degree of violence. Thus men are left free to massacre their girlfriends. Thus the precedents are created ».

All the violence he suffered has not been condemned for the woman. “It was my psychologist who explained to me that feeling that the food I prepare sucks is a violence. What can I say that I do not earn anything too. According to the court no. He was acquitted. He shouted me whore, I’ll kill you, you are not a good mother. I left the job for him as a woman, because she wanted it so. I understood after it is wrong. I have not studied but I know, now, that the screams and insults are violence. Yet I read that he must be understood, because he was embittered ».

The thing that hurts her most are those who consider judgments about her. “My daughter is full of anger. This sentence is a defeat for everyone. I’m afraid for those who come after me, who will be able to suffer my own treatment. After my precedent a woman will think, but why do I have to report a man, if they then treat me as the attributed, after I took barrels and insults? I fear that a prejudice, or more than one, are the basis of this decision. Since I am a woman, and I separated, my thoughts are worth less than that of the accused, who is a man ».

What do you expect now? «That the sentence is changed. Fortunately there are three degrees of judgment. I would also like to be no longer mortified. I don’t judge man. But the thought of the judge, in which there is empathy towards him but not towards me. A male -sized thought. I say this about words, not to the person. The judges must apply the laws. Don’t judge women. If they do, they will take away them courage. And it will be a carnage ».