Il Delitto del DAMS |Parte2| Telefono Giallo 1989 [CrimeCult]

DivinumCrime

Francesca Alinovi venne uccisa, presumibilmente nel tardo pomeriggio del 12 giugno del 1983, nel suo appartamento bolognese. In base alla sentenza definitiva, il delitto fu attribuito a Francesco Ciancabilla, un giovane pittore residente a Pescara con cui la donna aveva instaurato una travagliata relazione, fuggito all'estero prima del verdetto. La puntata si apre sotto l'ombra di una diffida che Brenna Alinovi, sorella della vittima, ha fatto notificare dalla polizia giudiziaria alla redazione di "Telefono giallo", per tentare di bloccare la trasmissione.   1989 - Telefono giallo 1989 - Bologna_ il delitto del DAMS - 02   #Delitto #DAMS #Bologna #Crime #TrueCrime #ColdCase #Cronaca #CronacaNera #Nera #CronacaItaliana #Crimini #Criminali #CasiIrrisolti #Misteri #Mistero #Documentari #DocITA #CrimeDoc #Indagine #Giallo #Omicidio #Assassino #Killer #SerialKiller #Noir #Racconto #Cattura #CSI #CriminalMinds #SubENG #Delitto #Delitti #Crimine #Criminale #DivinumCrime #Blu #Notte #Carlo #Lucarelli #Misteri #Italiani #Documentario #Docu #Doc #DocuITA #Netflix #Streaming #SerieTV #Serie #TV #Stagione #Completa #StagioneCompleta #Tutte #Puntate #Puntata #Episodi #Episodio

Transcript

00:00:05Music

00:00:58Music

00:01:28Music

00:01:46Why did we reconstruct this moment?

00:01:48Why drugs are important, the use of a portion, even a modest dose of drugs

00:01:53It is important for establishing the time of death.

00:01:56In the office with us is Professor Marozzi, good evening, Professor, who is a toxicology expert,

00:02:00he was a court-appointed expert witness, I believe, if I'm correct, in the trial.

00:02:05Exactly.

00:02:06Why is drug use important in determining the time of death? Can you explain?

00:02:12Because based on the elements, on the results of the analysis, we can, taking into account

00:02:21of the elements, of knowledge that we have on drug metabolism, we can trace

00:02:28at the time the drug was taken.

00:02:33What happens to a portion of a drug when it is inhaled into the body?

00:02:39How is it metabolized?

00:02:41So, let's clarify that the drug was cocaine and let's also clarify that in this case

00:02:47Morphine, that is, heroin, had also been searched for, and the heroin had not been found.

00:02:54The drug is taken through the nasal passages and then ends up in the blood and then is

00:03:03It is subsequently metabolised and transformed into degradation products to be eliminated.

00:03:09What we found were degradation products, it was the degradation product.

00:03:15of cocaine.

00:03:16Which?

00:03:16What is his name?

00:03:17Which is called benzoyl and gonine, which is a demethylation product of cocaine.

00:03:23Cocaine.

00:03:25Here's the speech...

00:03:28Say it, say it.

00:03:29The discussion regarding the discovery of the metabolite...

00:03:33Excuse me.

00:03:34Ready?

00:03:35Ready?

00:03:36Ready?

00:03:37Yes.

00:03:37And I'm speaking from Bologna.

00:03:39Yes, yes.

00:03:39Sinta, I wanted...

00:03:41I followed a trial of this kind extensively in the first and second instance.

00:03:45It's not that I have any new elements to bring to the case, but I wanted to say a little about what

00:03:50those were my impressions.

00:03:52Say it quickly.

00:03:53Well, these were my impressions.

00:03:55It is true that this writing was talked about, the lawyer from Modena talked about it a lot, about this

00:04:00written like that, but...

00:04:03About these glasses.

00:04:04But it is likely that Linovi, given that she had many friends to whom she gave the key, excludes nothing

00:04:09that in the time interval between noon and six o'clock someone could have passed by there,

00:04:14I didn't find it and made this writing.

00:04:17That is, the writing doesn't say much, perhaps the traces of blood on the switch say more.

00:04:22But that wasn't the point.

00:04:24I got the idea, following these inferences a lot, that this boy actually

00:04:30in my opinion he should be guilty.

00:04:33In my opinion it is.

00:04:35The problem is this, that what I seemed to understand is this, that this

00:04:40the boy may have been acting under the influence of cocaine, in short, these narcotics.

00:04:48So then he felt almost irresponsible for the fact because he missed her lucidly, recovering

00:04:56conscience, she lacked the reason why she could have done it, having been dragged

00:05:02in a game where perhaps she was as much a protagonist as he was.

00:05:07Madam, yes, this is a very reasonable hypothesis, it is a hypothesis that we have put forward.

00:05:12practically us too.

00:05:14I thank you for this testimony.

00:05:17But now I would like to hear frankly, given that it is 10 o'clock, there are only a few minutes left

00:05:21and at 10 the news has to be broadcast, what Marocci was saying.

00:05:24Let's listen to it together, thank you sir.

00:05:26Please.

00:05:27Continue, professor.

00:05:28So back to the...

00:05:29No, don't continue, professor.

00:05:31On the other hand, it's already called a telephone here.

00:05:34Ready?

00:05:35Yes, good evening.

00:05:35Good evening, I'm Dario, I'm calling from Venice and I have very few tokens so I don't know if I can do it

00:05:40in time.

00:05:41However, I received a phone call from Francesca Linovi at 7.40, so it is not possible

00:05:46that there was a state before this period.

00:05:49Excuse me, Mr. Dario, but did you say these things?

00:05:51No, I absolutely didn't say them, because unfortunately I don't...

00:05:57But excuse me, you make a phone call of this importance with three tokens in your pocket, we'll call you back.

00:06:01us, tell us where it is.

00:06:03I left my phone number on the answering machine, so...

00:06:07Okay, wait, we're closing here now, the tokens are finished, but we'll obviously call you back.

00:06:13But now let's see what basis this phone call has.

00:06:18She calmly continued to tell herself what she was saying.

00:06:20I said this in the trial and I reiterate it here.

00:06:24No more unchanged cocaine was found, so certainly between the time of intake

00:06:31and at least 6-7 hours had passed by the time of death.

00:06:36This is the one for sure.

00:06:38Then, all the other inferences that have been made, all the questions, the queries that have been posed to me,

00:06:45I cannot answer these questions with certainty, because it is necessary to take into account

00:06:52of the individual behavior of the subject which in this case plays a determining role,

00:06:59the state of asphyxiation, several elements that can alter behavior, let's say,

00:07:07regarding drugs.

00:07:08Because we always have to refer to stereotypes, we don't have the elements to establish

00:07:14how a subject eliminates the drug and in what time frame.

00:07:18But his conclusion, if he may say, we are not in a court of law here, this

00:07:23it's just a TV show, what's the bottom line?

00:07:26My conclusion is that at least 7-8 hours have passed since the time of intake.

00:07:31Thank you, Professor Marozzi.

00:07:32Let's stop here for now.

00:07:33Wait, wait, because we'll talk about this again in the second part, Professor Marozzi.

00:07:38Franca Leosini, it's 10 o'clock, we have to close, the news is about to go on air.

00:07:43But she has something to say.

00:07:45Yes, and I think that's quite serious.

00:07:47That is, the judges of the appeal court made a serious mistake in evaluating the movements

00:07:54of the watch that was stopped on Francesca Linovi's wrist.

00:07:57Calm.

00:07:57Before talking about a serious error by the judges, calm down.

00:08:00What was the thesis that was put forward on the basis of that watch?

00:08:05The thesis based on an expert opinion on the watch was this.

00:08:10This was on the clock.

00:08:11That the watch stopped on Francesca Linovi's wrist...

00:08:14Did she score?

00:08:15It was a self-winding Rolex watch.

00:08:18And did it tell the time?

00:08:19And it marked an ambiguous hour.

00:08:20It could have been 5.12am or 5.12pm on June 14th.

00:08:25A clock always shows two hours, either in the morning or in the evening.

00:08:28Of the 14th of June.

00:08:30Only I have to add one thing, that the police, since they had a date,

00:08:33the clock, the police at the bottom to establish what time it was, maybe he could do a little

00:08:38movement, operating it by hand would have been known.

00:08:41Let's stop here for now.

00:08:41But this is not the mistake.

00:08:43What's the mistake?

00:08:43The mistake is a mistake that the judges made.

00:08:45Because they misjudged the movements of the watch that was stopped on Francesca Linovi's wrist.

00:08:50And they basically, based on that, they made a mistake that built

00:08:57a clue that later led to the conviction of Francesco Ciancabilla.

00:09:00Thank you.

00:09:01Please.

00:09:01I would say that we can close with the launch of this hypothesis that Franca Leosini has just put forward.

00:09:10We can close the first part here.

00:09:11It's 10:01.

00:09:12The news is now on air, which is a news program, let us remember, of a historic day.

00:09:18like this, not even in a program like Telefono Giallo can we remain silent

00:09:22that the history of Europe is changing in these hours.

00:09:26I was saying, let's put the news on air, we'll see each other here in about ten minutes.

00:09:30Thanks, see you soon.

00:09:40At 10.15pm you will be connected again with Telefono Giallo, part two.

00:09:45We are discussing the case of the murder of Francesca Alinovi in Bologna.

00:09:49I would like to introduce the guests, as always at the beginning of the second part,

00:09:53starting with Franca Leosini, who you saw in the closing finale of the first part,

00:09:58next to her colleague and journalist Pino Agnetti,

00:10:03and then again Professor Marozzi, who is a toxicology expert,

00:10:09Alfonso Salvi, graphologist,

00:10:12Dr. Angelo Fabri, who is a watch expert,

00:10:15He is a Rolex expert and we will have our reasons for talking to a Rolex expert.

00:10:20Dr. Antonino Scopelliti is Deputy Attorney General of the Court of Cassation

00:10:24and we will start talking to him right after this presentation is over.

00:10:29Claudio Santini is the colleague, good evening Santini, of the rest of the Carlino of Bologna.

00:10:35Mr. and Mrs. Ciancabilla, Luigi and Lina.

00:10:39Luigi and Lina Ciancabilla are the parents of convicted murderer Francesco Ciancabilla.

00:10:47Dr. Otello Lupacchini was a judge at the first instance trial,

00:10:54the one who acquitted Ciancabilla due to insufficient evidence.

00:10:58And finally, Dr. Enrico Marino is now the vice-police commissioner of Genoa,

00:11:02he was then, good evening again, the head of the Bologna forensic science unit.

00:11:09Doctor Scopelliti, you are the Attorney General of the Court of Cassation,

00:11:13Deputy Attorney General of the Court of Cassation,

00:11:16What is the point of a Supreme Court proceeding in a case like this?

00:11:21What is its purpose?

00:11:23I must say that I was not the prosecutor at the trial,

00:11:27I followed him for a professional reason.

00:11:29The question, yes, that's fine, but that's the point.

00:11:34Yes, agreed.

00:11:35The Court of Cassation, I would say, is the controlling judge.

00:11:41Control, because it neither absolves nor condemns.

00:11:45I would say he controls the acquittals and convictions of others.

00:11:49And this control, I would say, has two objectives in particular.

00:11:54The first is to check compliance with the formalities of the process.

00:12:01Because form is not really an abstract and cumbersome concept,

00:12:05but in my opinion it is the principle of substance.

00:12:07Let's take the case of a telephone interception

00:12:11arranged without respecting formalities.

00:12:14In this case, the contents of the conversation are not usable.

00:12:18because precisely those formalities have been violated.

00:12:21Therefore a principle of guarantee for citizens.

00:12:24And for everyone, those who have to deal with justice.

00:12:26The footprints of a datiloscopic expertise

00:12:30cannot be used

00:12:32if the fingerprints were not taken

00:12:34according to those precise formalities.

00:12:36In case of failure to comply with these formalities,

00:12:39the results of those requests

00:12:42cannot be used.

00:12:43There has been much talk about footprints in connection with the Palermo crow.

00:12:47In general.

00:12:48Therefore respect for form is the principle of substance.

00:12:51But there's more.

00:12:53I would say targeted control to verify

00:12:57of the correctness and motivation of the sentences.

00:13:01In a trial like this, with two conflicting sentences?

00:13:04Here you are.

00:13:05What is the aim of this control?

00:13:10Check if the motivation

00:13:12it is from the point of view of rigorous and correct logic.

00:13:19Then check if it is complete.

00:13:23That is, if it concerned all the acquired elements

00:13:26in cases relevant to the decision.

00:13:29And above all if the evaluation criteria of the tests

00:13:32have been respected.

00:13:33Note the point of the case here.

00:13:35The Court of Cassation withdraws from the judgment

00:13:39on the evaluation of evidence.

00:13:41But just check the evaluation criteria of the test.

00:13:45Let me give you an example.

00:13:46To be clearer.

00:13:47This way we understand better.

00:13:48Certain.

00:13:48The judge who should say in the sentence

00:13:50there are 12 witnesses who are for the prosecution

00:13:53and one instead who is for innocence.

00:13:56Therefore the accused must be convicted.

00:13:59This is not correct.

00:14:02Because we know that 12 witnesses

00:14:05may be less valid in their judgments

00:14:08of a single good witness.

00:14:10So if the Court of Cassation were to ascertain

00:14:12this type of test evaluation

00:14:14he will say on the evaluation I do not argue.

00:14:16But the evaluation criterion is inaccurate.

00:14:19Thank you, Dr. Scoperiti.

00:14:20I'll stop here for now.

00:14:22Because now I remind the listeners

00:14:25that we had a dramatic phone call.

00:14:28Everything to be checked, everything to be verified.

00:14:30During the interval, Dr. Enrico Marino

00:14:33he made his skepticism known to me

00:14:36motivated by long experience

00:14:38I imagine this kind of thing.

00:14:40But that phone call said

00:14:42I heard the voice of Ali Novi

00:14:46at half past seven.

00:14:47We will talk to that gentleman again

00:14:48he made it in time before his tokens

00:14:50they ended up giving us his phone number.

00:14:53But then we have the first part of the final tight

00:14:57we were talking with Franca Leosini

00:14:59which is here

00:15:00of what she calls

00:15:02the judges' mistake.

00:15:04Franca Leosini

00:15:05we want to see what kind of error

00:15:07it would be

00:15:08and we want to see it

00:15:10on this board

00:15:12for example.

00:15:13So, she follows a line of reasoning.

00:15:15What is this reasoning?

00:15:16I really follow the reasoning

00:15:18what the appeal judges did

00:15:20which is this.

00:15:22The time frame

00:15:23indicated by the expert

00:15:25autopsy for the death of Francesca Alinovi

00:15:27it goes from 5pm to 11pm

00:15:30of June 12th

00:15:34Sunday, June 12

00:15:36of this period of time

00:15:37Francesco Ciancabilla takes up only two and a half hours

00:15:40that is, from 5pm to 7.30pm

00:15:42because we know that he goes to the station

00:15:43from Bologna headed to Pescara.

00:15:46Now the judges have to arrive

00:15:48to a convention

00:15:49that is to indicate in Ciancabilla

00:15:52the culprit of the crime

00:15:54must establish with certainty

00:15:56that the watch stopped on Francesca Alinovi's wrist

00:15:59when he died

00:16:02had the maximum charge

00:16:03which is 35 hours.

00:16:05The watch is found

00:16:08Francesca Alinovi's wrist clip

00:16:10with this date

00:16:11it was 5.12am

00:16:13or 5.12pm

00:16:14of June 14th

00:16:17the clock

00:16:19follows

00:16:19practically

00:16:20to a series of

00:16:21movements

00:16:22that we jump

00:16:23for simplicity

00:16:25and through these movements

00:16:27receives impulses

00:16:28and advances.

00:16:29Now

00:16:30according to the judges

00:16:31of the Court of Appeal

00:16:32this watch

00:16:33in 8-9 hours

00:16:35advances by 18 hours

00:16:37No, I want exactly that.

00:16:39first of all ask

00:16:40if for her a watch

00:16:41in 8 hours

00:16:41on the wrist

00:16:42can move forward

00:16:4318 hours

00:16:43I wanted to hear first

00:16:45the sentence

00:16:45of the school

00:16:46of the sentence

00:16:47At that time

00:16:48this watch

00:16:49it was also

00:16:50in the pocket

00:16:50by Professor Coscelli

00:16:51who is the brother-in-law

00:16:52of Linovi

00:16:52and it remained in the pocket

00:16:53of this one

00:16:53approximately

00:16:54from 10.30 am

00:16:56at 6.19 pm

00:16:57there is no one who does not see

00:16:59how it is of singular importance

00:17:01the finding

00:17:02That

00:17:02because of the impulse

00:17:03of movements

00:17:04completely normal

00:17:05but surely

00:17:06somewhat less effective

00:17:07of those transmitted

00:17:08from the movement

00:17:09of a wrist

00:17:10prolonged movements

00:17:11for about

00:17:128-9 hours

00:17:13the hands advanced

00:17:15of approximately

00:17:1617-18 hours

00:17:19Here you are

00:17:19let's stop

00:17:21one moment here

00:17:22and we talk

00:17:23with Dr. Fabri

00:17:24that maybe

00:17:25he understood better

00:17:26about us

00:17:26this reasoning

00:17:28She followed

00:17:29what he was saying

00:17:30justice

00:17:30The judges say

00:17:32in 7

00:17:348-9 hours

00:17:35the clock

00:17:36it is advanced

00:17:3718 hours

00:17:39This is one thing

00:17:40impossible

00:17:41because if one does

00:17:428 km

00:17:43with a car

00:17:45a path

00:17:45road

00:17:46the odometer

00:17:47must score

00:17:478 km

00:17:48can't score

00:17:4916

00:17:49Evidently

00:17:50But unless it is

00:17:51an odometer

00:17:52that doesn't work well

00:17:53But since

00:17:53probably

00:17:54will have been checked

00:17:55this watch

00:17:56it was said

00:17:57that the clock

00:17:57it worked

00:17:57it was checked

00:17:59so there shouldn't be any

00:18:00to be defects

00:18:01nor of construction

00:18:02nor at that time

00:18:03had defects

00:18:04it was an evaluation

00:18:05which probably

00:18:06it was poorly rated

00:18:07they can be done

00:18:09some examples

00:18:09if for example

00:18:11instead of 11

00:18:135am

00:18:14assuming it was

00:18:15Do you want to come here?

00:18:17Permit

00:18:20Here we have prepared

00:18:22a multiplication table

00:18:24rather we have prepared

00:18:25two watches

00:18:26Now we have to look for

00:18:28to establish

00:18:29with the movements

00:18:30and the various possibilities

00:18:32that are given to us

00:18:33review

00:18:34if they are

00:18:35at the moment

00:18:36of the discovery

00:18:36of the victim

00:18:37if it was 5:12

00:18:39or 5:12 PM

00:18:41Exact

00:18:41Then we have to do

00:18:42a series

00:18:43of movements

00:18:44The clock did

00:18:46of the movements

00:18:47both from the moment

00:18:48which was taken

00:18:49on the victim

00:18:50until

00:18:52away

00:18:54Here you are

00:18:54Alright

00:18:55Yes I would like

00:18:56that you

00:18:57you retraced

00:18:58if not we'll get lost

00:18:59in that passage

00:18:59So anyway I can say

00:19:00only the 8 hours

00:19:01Let's get to the essentials

00:19:02The 8 hours

00:19:03which have been

00:19:03and the clock

00:19:04it was kept in the pocket

00:19:05he will have made some movements

00:19:07but he won't have made many

00:19:08to be able to download

00:19:10beyond

00:19:10a certain limit

00:19:12of hours

00:19:12because logically

00:19:13of times

00:19:13not even on the wrist

00:19:14you can load it

00:19:15a clock

00:19:16let alone in your pocket

00:19:17so for 8 hours

00:19:18of clock

00:19:20that was in your pocket

00:19:20he will also have suffered

00:19:21of the stops

00:19:23So

00:19:24Excuse me

00:19:26Holy cards

00:19:26fellow journalists

00:19:29and the two magistrates

00:19:30I wish that

00:19:31Dr. Marino

00:19:32follow you

00:19:32in particular

00:19:33very carefully

00:19:34this reasoning

00:19:35I would like to answer

00:19:35to this relief

00:19:36No wait

00:19:36let it end

00:19:37Toscopellites

00:19:38why this reasoning

00:19:39it has never been done

00:19:40will have the value

00:19:41which will have

00:19:42but it's a reasoning

00:19:43which must be followed

00:19:43with attention

00:19:44Doctor Marino

00:19:44she too

00:19:45who is the most skeptical

00:19:46of all

00:19:47We don't have this

00:19:48very certain evidence

00:19:49because to do

00:19:50this analysis

00:19:50it should be examined

00:19:51the clock

00:19:52the quality of the oil

00:19:53and the density

00:19:53because every clock

00:19:54if you take another one

00:19:55clock

00:19:56and they do the same things

00:19:56can change

00:19:57reacts

00:19:58so you have to think

00:19:59This

00:19:59At that time

00:20:00assuming that

00:20:01within eight hours

00:20:02the clock

00:20:02walked

00:20:03he started moving

00:20:04about 5-6 hours

00:20:06we're coming

00:20:07from 5 in the morning

00:20:09at 11

00:20:10always in the morning

00:20:13let's make this hypothesis

00:20:14that the clock

00:20:15yes it is

00:20:15stopped

00:20:16Here you are

00:20:17it was 11 o'clock

00:20:20assuming that

00:20:21these are

00:20:2211 in the morning

00:20:23the clock

00:20:23from 5 in the morning

00:20:25morning

00:20:26until 11

00:20:27in the morning

00:20:27one hour before noon

00:20:29but we also know

00:20:31That

00:20:32the next day

00:20:33we saw

00:20:34that the clock

00:20:35it was 11pm

00:20:37so what

00:20:38it's there to prove

00:20:39That

00:20:40it's there to prove

00:20:41which practically

00:20:43after courses

00:20:44a few hours in your pocket

00:20:45the clock

00:20:45in addition to having walked

00:20:46only

00:20:47let's say

00:20:476 hours

00:20:48he had a reservation

00:20:49of march

00:20:49for another 12 hours

00:20:51impossible thing

00:20:51because it triggered

00:20:52the date stamp

00:20:53in the moment

00:20:53that was

00:20:54to take the date

00:20:55they had passed

00:20:56another 12 hours

00:20:57and so practically

00:20:58it meant

00:20:59that a clock

00:20:59carried in the pocket

00:21:00only for 4

00:21:02even if they were

00:21:04for 8 hours

00:21:04but not consecutive

00:21:05because it will have stopped

00:21:06there was the break

00:21:07of breakfast

00:21:09so it will have been

00:21:10even a little bit still

00:21:11it will not have been

00:21:12certainly sufficient

00:21:13I have my doubts

00:21:14many reservations

00:21:15on this subject

00:21:16Therefore

00:21:16I on these bodies

00:21:17I would shoot

00:21:18that is, with 6 hours

00:21:19let's say

00:21:20of march

00:21:21of charge

00:21:21the clock walked

00:21:23For

00:21:23with 8 hours

00:21:24of pocket watch

00:21:25will have loaded

00:21:25about 4-5 hours

00:21:27with all the others

00:21:28and instead in this house

00:21:29how many did he do?

00:21:30he made 18 of them

00:21:30that is, over 6 hours

00:21:32who walked

00:21:33another 12 hours

00:21:34which was possible

00:21:35to arrive

00:21:35not at 11

00:21:36but at 11pm

00:21:38and 30

00:21:38and that is

00:21:39at the moment

00:21:39that was

00:21:40to take a picture

00:21:40the date stamp

00:21:41that the date

00:21:42snap

00:21:42let's stop

00:21:43let's stop

00:21:43one moment here

00:21:44gentlemen

00:21:45this is an element

00:21:46which is never

00:21:47been evaluated

00:21:49I would like

00:21:49that you appreciated it

00:21:50Dr. Scopelli

00:21:51I'll tell you this right away

00:21:53I am pleased

00:21:54first of all

00:21:54with Mrs. Leosini

00:21:55because it was

00:21:56very precise

00:21:56in this relief

00:21:58but I have to say

00:21:59That

00:22:00the result

00:22:01of this

00:22:02his investigation

00:22:04doesn't move

00:22:04the problem

00:22:05not at all

00:22:05in judgment

00:22:06he doesn't move it

00:22:08Why

00:22:08to return

00:22:09to the speech

00:22:10that the Court of Cassation

00:22:11even if not

00:22:13revisiting

00:22:13the evaluation

00:22:14of the test

00:22:16check

00:22:16the criteria

00:22:17of evaluation

00:22:18of the test

00:22:18and the Court of Cassation

00:22:19in the sentence

00:22:21which defines

00:22:23with grace

00:22:25sometimes excessive

00:22:27and redundant

00:22:28the appeal one

00:22:29we're running out of time

00:22:31Here you are

00:22:32the Court of Cassation

00:22:32he says this

00:22:33with regard to

00:22:34the clock

00:22:35the clock

00:22:35and the time

00:22:36this topic

00:22:38which would be decisive

00:22:40if there were

00:22:41the absolute certainty

00:22:43about the premises

00:22:44that is

00:22:44the clock

00:22:45he marked

00:22:455:12 in the morning

00:22:47and not 5.12pm

00:22:48in the afternoon

00:22:49and that at the moment

00:22:50of death

00:22:51it owned

00:22:52the maximum charge

00:22:53of 35 hours

00:22:53indicated by the expert

00:22:54but since it is about

00:22:55of uncertain postulates

00:22:56the conclusions

00:22:57they cannot be

00:22:58Excuse me

00:22:59I have to oppose

00:23:01because she read

00:23:02only the first part

00:23:02of the page

00:23:03but now I read them

00:23:03the second

00:23:04I'm talking about the sentence

00:23:05of the Court of Cassation

00:23:05I have the sentence

00:23:06of the Court of Cassation

00:23:07page 25

00:23:08you have to excuse me

00:23:09in the sentence

00:23:10of the Court of Cassation

00:23:10it's written

00:23:11where the second part

00:23:12which she reads about

00:23:13this type of test

00:23:15even if there is none

00:23:16mentioned total security

00:23:17on the postulates

00:23:18starting point

00:23:19takes on the very strong

00:23:21evidentiary value

00:23:22attributed by the sentence

00:23:24of appeal

00:23:24for the notable degree

00:23:26of probability

00:23:26which taking into account

00:23:28some considerations

00:23:29that translate

00:23:29at 5:12 in the morning

00:23:31the other uncertain element

00:23:33reaches the conclusion

00:23:34according to which

00:23:35the crime

00:23:36it would have happened

00:23:36at 6.12pm

00:23:37agree

00:23:38No

00:23:38Cianca Bill

00:23:38he was alone

00:23:39together with life

00:23:39but it doesn't move anything

00:23:40Excuse me

00:23:41he talks about circumstantial evidence

00:23:42not of certainty

00:23:43wonderful discovery

00:23:43no she says

00:23:44circumstantial evidence

00:23:45Cianca Leosini

00:23:45Please

00:23:46Please

00:23:47the rule of the game

00:23:49the phone

00:23:49ready

00:23:50ready

00:23:50Here you are

00:23:51Good evening

00:23:52Good evening

00:23:53Dr. Auger

00:23:53Excuse me

00:23:55I'm listening

00:23:56this passage

00:23:57which seems fundamental to me

00:23:59because if the clue

00:24:01was

00:24:02built

00:24:03on the basis

00:24:05of the evaluation

00:24:06of the timetable

00:24:07and clearly

00:24:09if it fails

00:24:10at a certain point

00:24:11the evaluation itself

00:24:13if even the clue falls away

00:24:15if it falls as a consequence

00:24:16the sentence too

00:24:17it is possible

00:24:18to believe

00:24:19That

00:24:20When

00:24:21The

00:24:23brother in law

00:24:24of the deceased

00:24:25That

00:24:26he extracted

00:24:27the clock

00:24:28from the pocket

00:24:28he looked

00:24:30the time

00:24:31and it seems to me

00:24:32that they indicated

00:24:3311:30

00:24:34or 11:30 pm

00:24:36Exactly

00:24:37could

00:24:38this watch

00:24:39rather than

00:24:39indicate 11.30pm

00:24:41indicate 11:30

00:24:43in the morning

00:24:43and it is therefore

00:24:44possible

00:24:45that the clock

00:24:46had accumulated

00:24:48a charge

00:24:49sufficient

00:24:50not to do it

00:24:51move

00:24:52half an hour

00:24:52from the evening

00:24:54in the morning

00:24:55subsequent

00:24:55but make it move

00:24:5712 hours and 30 minutes

00:24:58I can answer

00:24:59you have to answer

00:25:00blacksmiths

00:25:00so look

00:25:01I can tell you

00:25:02which would be a coincidence

00:25:03very anomalous

00:25:03also because

00:25:04all the watches

00:25:05pocket-sized

00:25:06that the factories

00:25:07Swiss do

00:25:08they are all charged

00:25:09manual or quartz

00:25:10there is no automatic

00:25:11what does it prove?

00:25:12This

00:25:13that the clocks

00:25:14automatic

00:25:15they only work

00:25:16to the movement of the well

00:25:17otherwise they would have done

00:25:18even the watches

00:25:19automatic pocket watches

00:25:20since the movement

00:25:21of the pocket

00:25:21it's not enough

00:25:23and it is not valid

00:25:24and it is not

00:25:26Safe

00:25:27of trial

00:25:27also because

00:25:28must

00:25:28why one does

00:25:29or the marathon runner

00:25:30or even

00:25:30let him start running

00:25:31all day long

00:25:33and it's very difficult

00:25:34I for this here

00:25:35I have my strong doubts

00:25:36and so it never happened to me

00:25:37to admit a clock

00:25:38in your pocket

00:25:39and make him walk

00:25:40so much so that it is true

00:25:41that there are also

00:25:42of customers

00:25:42that carry

00:25:43the clocks

00:25:44on the wrist

00:25:44and it stops

00:25:45even after

00:25:4612 hours

00:25:47because he doesn't have

00:25:48the sufficient charge

00:25:48yet carrying it on the wrist

00:25:50so about this

00:25:51I strongly

00:25:51thanks Fabri

00:25:53Excuse me

00:25:53I'll interrupt you for a moment

00:25:54why this thing

00:25:56which is very important

00:25:57I'm realizing

00:25:58which is quite important

00:25:59we are tilting

00:26:00his skepticism

00:26:01Dr. Marino

00:26:01or not?

00:26:02allow me

00:26:03I'm not a skeptic at all

00:26:04I am neither guilty nor guilty

00:26:06nor innocent

00:26:07she does her job

00:26:09for goodness sake

00:26:10my job

00:26:11That's not it

00:26:11to play the blame game

00:26:12of the utmost

00:26:13no for goodness sake

00:26:14but she is surprised

00:26:16like me

00:26:17from this reasoning

00:26:18or not?

00:26:18yes but I would like to hear

00:26:20even the opposite version

00:26:21Meaning what

00:26:22to make the hypothesis

00:26:23that they are instead

00:26:245pm

00:26:26and I can prove it

00:26:28here's a look

00:26:30I want to prove it

00:26:30We see

00:26:31let's go back

00:26:32let's go back

00:26:33on the scoreboard

00:26:35At that time

00:26:36assuming they are

00:26:385pm

00:26:38of day 14

00:26:40the movements

00:26:42of the pocket

00:26:42they did yes

00:26:43that it moved

00:26:44about 6 hours

00:26:46roughly speaking

00:26:46why a watch

00:26:47in your pocket

00:26:48he can't walk

00:26:49in 8 hours

00:26:50can walk

00:26:50about 5-6 hours

00:26:51so let's move

00:26:53the clock

00:26:53Excuse me

00:26:55why is it for me

00:26:56a little clearer

00:26:57we have to remove

00:26:58excuse me a moment

00:26:59he said that in reality

00:27:00Yes

00:27:01these watches

00:27:02in your pocket

00:27:03they don't go

00:27:04it's not that they don't go

00:27:05they walk very little

00:27:06also because

00:27:06First of all we had to see

00:27:07at that moment

00:27:08the clock

00:27:09the state of lubrication

00:27:10which was very important

00:27:11because if the clock

00:27:12it is well lubricated

00:27:13has a melting point

00:27:15a scroll

00:27:16much more

00:27:17than he doesn't have

00:27:17a clock

00:27:18which maybe is three years

00:27:19that is not revised

00:27:20I know about this

00:27:21in the dark

00:27:22I can't determine

00:27:23let's make some hypotheses

00:27:25we make a reasoning

00:27:26It seems to have been analyzed

00:27:26the clock

00:27:27it has been analyzed

00:27:28probably analyzed

00:27:29but not specified

00:27:30Exactly

00:27:31of lubrication

00:27:32a clock

00:27:32we make a reasoning

00:27:34general

00:27:35because obviously

00:27:35this is not a trial

00:27:37and why we don't know

00:27:38what kind of watch was it

00:27:39it can also work

00:27:41how it was

00:27:42you need to know

00:27:42Here you are

00:27:43it can also work

00:27:44but have three years to live

00:27:45walk to the well

00:27:46but he doesn't walk

00:27:47or maybe it arrives

00:27:48to a reserve power

00:27:49just 20 hours ago

00:27:50how many hours can he do

00:27:51standing at the well

00:27:52of a person

00:27:52but in general

00:27:53if he takes it

00:27:53all day

00:27:54from morning to 8

00:27:56until the evening

00:27:56who doesn't go to bed

00:27:57and lives a normal life

00:27:58has a reserve

00:27:59from 32 to 35 hours

00:28:00but he has to take it to the well

00:28:02on the wrist

00:28:02if I stop

00:28:03or I do

00:28:03now we have been sitting

00:28:05for many hours

00:28:05if we had had

00:28:06a watch in your pocket

00:28:07it's not that it would have been

00:28:08moved a lot

00:28:09but on the wrist

00:28:10good or bad

00:28:10everyone

00:28:11we made some moves

00:28:12and so it's easier

00:28:13that a watch on the wrist

00:28:14move

00:28:15and recharges

00:28:16or tends to remain

00:28:18more or less on time

00:28:19without accumulating energy

00:28:20that not standing still

00:28:21What did the date display show?

00:28:23the date marked

00:28:24at the moment

00:28:25the 14th

00:28:26but we don't know

00:28:27at the moment

00:28:28which was found

00:28:28on the body of life

00:28:30no after it was then

00:28:30returned

00:28:31was between 14

00:28:33and the 15th

00:28:34so he was

00:28:34Exactly

00:28:35between 11pm

00:28:36and 24

00:28:37so he was about to shoot

00:28:38At that time

00:28:39if the time

00:28:41found

00:28:41in the second hypothesis

00:28:43if it had been 5pm

00:28:44with the move

00:28:45of the pockets

00:28:46we arrive at 11pm

00:28:47and about 30

00:28:48which means

00:28:50that at this moment

00:28:51the date stamp

00:28:51is about to shoot

00:28:53the next day

00:28:53and it's about to shoot

00:28:54the next day

00:28:55so as probability

00:28:56it is more likely

00:28:57that they have been

00:28:585pm

00:28:58and not 5 in the morning

00:29:00Here you are

00:29:00this seems to me

00:29:01this seems to me

00:29:02it's just suggestive

00:29:02this seems to me

00:29:03it's just suggestive

00:29:05but not

00:29:05not a false problem

00:29:07it's just suggestive

00:29:07because if we were certain

00:29:09based on that speech

00:29:10it cannot be given with certainty

00:29:11mathematics

00:29:12it's just

00:29:13based on that speech

00:29:14what does the court of appeal do?

00:29:15that the murder

00:29:16it happened

00:29:17at 6:12

00:29:17we would be facing

00:29:18not to a circumstantial trial

00:29:19but to a proven process

00:29:20because at 6:12

00:29:21there was Ciancabilla

00:29:22with linen

00:29:23Attention

00:29:23I'll start by telling you one thing

00:29:24I'm sorry

00:29:25Please

00:29:25if as the Court of Appeal says

00:29:27we are certain

00:29:28that the murder

00:29:29based on that speech

00:29:30on the clock

00:29:31it happened

00:29:32at 6:12

00:29:33at 5

00:29:33at 6.12pm

00:29:3418 and 12

00:29:3518 and 12

00:29:3618 and 12

00:29:36of that tragic afternoon

00:29:38of June 12th

00:29:40we would be here

00:29:41to discuss a process

00:29:42with full proof

00:29:42not circumstantial

00:29:54I know though

00:29:55we know

00:29:56for a certain fact

00:29:56because it was not contested

00:29:57in deeds not even

00:29:58from the expert

00:29:59biased

00:30:00that death

00:30:01as given

00:30:02It dates back to a period

00:30:03we marked it

00:30:04time frame

00:30:04from 5pm to 11pm

00:30:06at most further ahead

00:30:07in the morning hours

00:30:09Therefore

00:30:10another certain fact

00:30:11Which?

00:30:12that there is an arch

00:30:13from 5pm

00:30:14at 7:30 pm

00:30:15in which there is one

00:30:16with the girl

00:30:17and it certainly is

00:30:18the Cacciabilla

00:30:19so the police

00:30:20at this point

00:30:21when there is this bow

00:30:22of time

00:30:23in which there may have been

00:30:24death verified

00:30:25and there is a person

00:30:26which certainly

00:30:27she was with the woman

00:30:29between 5pm

00:30:30and 7:30 pm

00:30:31What does he do first?

00:30:33investigate this person

00:30:35which certainly

00:30:36was present

00:30:37in that space

00:30:37and the other 4 hours?

00:30:38everything else

00:30:39which is found

00:30:40about the boy

00:30:42that I hope

00:30:43be innocent

00:30:44because I'm talking here

00:30:45I hope he is innocent

00:30:46I would be very happy

00:30:47and a whole complex

00:30:50of clues

00:30:51that the Court of Cassation

00:30:52he says

00:30:52they are univocal

00:30:53conclusive

00:30:54etc.

00:30:55that carry

00:30:55then to consider

00:30:56that Cacciabilla

00:30:57present

00:30:58Cacciabilla

00:30:59present in that arch

00:31:00of time

00:31:00it may have been

00:31:01with reasonable certainty

00:31:03the perpetrator of the crime

00:31:24sorry Franco

00:31:24Exactly

00:31:25I'll list them now

00:31:26schematic

00:31:27Certain

00:31:27Cacciabilla

00:31:29change the program

00:31:30during the day

00:31:31Sunday 12th

00:31:34in fact

00:31:35he had to phone

00:31:36a girl

00:31:37saying that

00:31:38he takes the train

00:31:39next

00:31:40he goes to the station

00:31:42by bus

00:31:44while other times

00:31:46he had been accompanied

00:31:47by bus

00:31:47from Linovi

00:31:48because this time

00:31:49he goes there by bus

00:31:50makes a series

00:31:52of phone calls

00:31:53we saw before

00:31:55in which

00:31:55make an appointment

00:31:57at the station

00:31:58he makes himself meet again

00:32:00in Pescara

00:32:00almost as if he wanted

00:32:02to pre-establish oneself

00:32:03an alibi

00:32:04the people

00:32:05who call

00:32:06they don't notice

00:32:08they don't hear

00:32:08no noise

00:32:09and it was notorious

00:32:10That

00:32:11the Linovi

00:32:12he always had

00:32:13he lived

00:32:14with a background

00:32:15musical

00:32:16who doesn't hear us

00:32:17after 7.30pm

00:32:19Nobody

00:32:20he feels

00:32:21Excuse me

00:32:21the people

00:32:22who call

00:32:22and they talk

00:32:23with

00:32:23and they talk

00:32:24with Ciancabini

00:32:25with Ciancabini

00:32:25This

00:32:26it must be clarified

00:32:27there are no signs

00:32:28of struggle

00:32:29Therefore

00:32:30presumably

00:32:31the Linovi

00:32:33he knew

00:32:34the killer

00:32:36we had

00:32:37of the testimonies

00:32:39in which

00:32:40we're talking

00:32:40that in certain

00:32:41moments

00:32:42Francis

00:32:44he was losing

00:32:44the control

00:32:46we saw

00:32:47That

00:32:48Also

00:32:48there have been

00:32:49of arguments

00:32:50the relationship

00:32:53between the two

00:32:53could

00:32:54to be

00:32:55worn out

00:32:55for a series

00:32:56of situations

00:32:58Also

00:32:58tied

00:32:59to the

00:33:00he was worn out

00:33:02it was finished

00:33:04it was finished

00:33:05Then

00:33:06it won't count

00:33:07maybe nothing

00:33:09only

00:33:09That

00:33:10It is true

00:33:11who accuse each other

00:33:12of having stolen

00:33:13the Leaning Tower of Pisa

00:33:14I'll run away first

00:33:16and then I defend myself

00:33:17but

00:33:17before the verdict

00:33:19second degree

00:33:20Ciancabilla

00:33:21he runs away

00:33:21here it is

00:33:22everyone

00:33:23the elements

00:33:24they come

00:33:26condensates

00:33:27And

00:33:27made more

00:33:29univocal

00:33:30and accusers

00:33:31even from the test

00:33:32of the clock

00:33:33but not only

00:33:33from their

00:33:34I'm happy

00:33:35that Santini

00:33:37he said this

00:33:37why now

00:33:38there is the doctor

00:33:39Lupacchini

00:33:39which is

00:33:40magistrate

00:33:41who was part of

00:33:42of the court

00:33:43first degree

00:33:43there is

00:33:44there are two more

00:33:46what can be said

00:33:48sorry doctor

00:33:49Scopelli

00:33:49ready

00:33:50Good evening

00:33:51I'm calling too

00:33:52from Bologna

00:33:52Good evening

00:33:54I wanted to make up for it

00:33:56as it had been said

00:33:57at the start

00:33:57of the transmission

00:33:58that is from

00:33:59what he had said

00:34:00Dr. Marino

00:34:01and the lady

00:34:03Ciancabilla

00:34:03first of all

00:34:04Dr. Marino

00:34:05excludes

00:34:06That

00:34:06the murder

00:34:07may be

00:34:08been accomplished

00:34:09elsewhere

00:34:09and everything

00:34:11then leaving

00:34:12from the assumption

00:34:12that there

00:34:13they are not here

00:34:13signs

00:34:14of violence

00:34:16in the sense

00:34:17That

00:34:17it wasn't

00:34:18nothing removed

00:34:19Here you are

00:34:20and this could

00:34:21also to support

00:34:22the thesis

00:34:22for example

00:34:23That

00:34:23it's not a tart

00:34:25a single person

00:34:25to kill

00:34:26the New Wings

00:34:27but two

00:34:27a moment

00:34:29stop here immediately

00:34:30Dr. Marino

00:34:31have you considered

00:34:32this hypothesis

00:34:33that it was more

00:34:34of a murderer

00:34:38you can't

00:34:39to exclude

00:34:40a priori

00:34:40that can

00:34:41to have been

00:34:41more of a murderer

00:34:42I don't see

00:34:43how can it be

00:34:43to exclude

00:34:44undoubtedly

00:34:45Anyway

00:34:45the weapon was unique

00:34:46Therefore

00:34:47the weapon was unique

00:34:48if there were two

00:34:49assassins

00:34:50only one

00:34:50he was armed

00:34:51but this

00:34:52it doesn't mean

00:34:53Nothing

00:34:53precisely for this reason

00:34:54reason

00:34:54precisely because

00:34:55they are not here

00:34:56signs

00:34:56of violence

00:34:57elsewhere

00:34:57one could

00:34:58hold her still

00:34:59and the other

00:34:59hit

00:35:00coincidentally

00:35:01own

00:35:02little time

00:35:03Before

00:35:03in Bologna

00:35:04it had happened

00:35:05the crime

00:35:06by Angelo

00:35:06Fabri

00:35:07he too

00:35:08belonging

00:35:09to the environment

00:35:09of the Dams

00:35:10and he too

00:35:11it had been

00:35:12stabbed

00:35:13on the back

00:35:14at home

00:35:15and then

00:35:15transported

00:35:16on the hills

00:35:18Bolognese

00:35:19listen though

00:35:19if I have to

00:35:20I can say

00:35:21one thing

00:35:21I

00:35:21it seems to me

00:35:22that that

00:35:22who said

00:35:22Dr. Marino

00:35:23Before

00:35:23was enough

00:35:24convincing

00:35:26on the fact

00:35:27that the crime

00:35:27it took place

00:35:29in that room

00:35:30I understand

00:35:31bad

00:35:32Excuse me

00:35:33let's stop

00:35:34on this point

00:35:35she doctor

00:35:36he has an idea

00:35:37on this

00:35:38in the meantime there are

00:35:39some inaccuracies

00:35:40in the reconstruction

00:35:41scenic

00:35:42maybe it would be the case

00:35:44to correct

00:35:45immediately

00:35:46that idea

00:35:47of the order

00:35:48which would be

00:35:49reigned

00:35:49in the rooms

00:35:51in which

00:35:51it happened

00:35:52the murder

00:35:53or in which

00:35:55probably

00:35:55it happened

00:35:56the murder

00:35:57because here too

00:35:58it's not the right one

00:35:59doubts arise

00:36:00in order

00:36:01in the presence

00:36:01of the little blood

00:36:02which clearly

00:36:03can give rise

00:36:04to a plurality

00:36:05of interpretations

00:36:06on this point too

00:36:08it wasn't really

00:36:10that order

00:36:10which has been described

00:36:11one had the impression

00:36:13at least to see

00:36:14from the photographs

00:36:15me obviously

00:36:15I didn't enter

00:36:16in the apartment

00:36:17on site

00:36:18of intervention

00:36:20of the judicial police

00:36:22one gets the impression

00:36:23that someone

00:36:23had rummaged around

00:36:24at least

00:36:25among the books

00:36:25and among the papers

00:36:27of the woman

00:36:27as they are all

00:36:28upside-down seeds

00:36:29as it turns out

00:36:30from the photographs

00:36:32that it may be

00:36:33happened

00:36:34at work

00:36:34of more people

00:36:35this is a hypothesis

00:36:36that at least

00:36:37in the trial documents

00:36:38it was not expressed

00:36:40although

00:36:41it may have been done

00:36:42it does not appear

00:36:43at least

00:36:43as far as I remember

00:36:44from no act

00:36:45of the process

00:36:47I would rather

00:36:48return

00:36:48with a dutiful

00:36:50initial clarification

00:36:51to what it is

00:36:51the catalog

00:36:52some clues

00:36:52that have been

00:36:53stated here

00:36:54the obligatory one

00:36:55this is the clarification

00:36:56the sentence

00:36:57first degree

00:36:58who has acquitted

00:36:59Francesco Ciancabilla

00:37:01due to insufficiency

00:37:02of evidence

00:37:02from the murder

00:37:03by Alinovi

00:37:03now legally

00:37:07it's worth less than nothing

00:37:08it is degraded

00:37:09to a mere historical fact

00:37:10for effect

00:37:11of the passage

00:37:12unjudged

00:37:13for effect

00:37:14of the passage

00:37:14unjudged

00:37:15of the sentence

00:37:16of condemnation

00:37:16so the fact

00:37:17legally

00:37:18relevant

00:37:19in this location

00:37:20it's the sentence

00:37:21by Ciancabilla

00:37:21so the statement

00:37:23who was he

00:37:23to accomplish

00:37:24of the murder

00:37:25according to the modalities

00:37:26described

00:37:27in the prosecution

00:37:28this does not take away

00:37:29that it can still be done

00:37:30discuss

00:37:31at least

00:37:31under the profile

00:37:32of the historian

00:37:33who has hands

00:37:34less tied

00:37:34how much

00:37:35the judge doesn't have them

00:37:36in order

00:37:37to the catalog

00:37:38some clues

00:37:38which have been adduced

00:37:39It is true

00:37:41that one must

00:37:42check

00:37:43that is, it's true

00:37:43that from one point

00:37:44from a legal point of view

00:37:45they exist

00:37:45of the rules

00:37:47very precise

00:37:48of evaluation

00:37:49of the test

00:37:49there are rules

00:37:51of exclusion

00:37:52certain tests

00:37:53etc.

00:37:53and of this

00:37:54the Court of Cassation

00:37:55probably

00:37:56indeed certainly

00:37:57will have taken charge

00:37:58I don't know

00:37:59the sentence

00:37:59of Cassation

00:38:00as I must admit

00:38:01I don't know

00:38:02not even the sentence

00:38:03second degree

00:38:04of one thing

00:38:05I'm sure

00:38:06That

00:38:07to reading

00:38:08of the acts

00:38:09to a reading

00:38:10be careful

00:38:10of the acts

00:38:11they emerged

00:38:12of situations

00:38:13rather singular

00:38:14first of all

00:38:15the expertise

00:38:16medico-legal

00:38:17on the causes

00:38:18and the time

00:38:18of death

00:38:20first of all

00:38:21we have a double

00:38:22causality

00:38:23of death

00:38:23detected

00:38:24from the expert

00:38:25probably

00:38:26indeed certainly

00:38:27after

00:38:28the autopsy

00:38:28it had been

00:38:29done

00:38:30the 18th

00:38:32of June

00:38:34of 1983

00:38:35Professor Ricci

00:38:37deposit

00:38:38an expert opinion

00:38:39describing

00:38:40a certain causality

00:38:41the autopsy

00:38:41had been performed

00:38:42the previous 16th

00:38:44and then

00:38:45he had to know

00:38:46at least

00:38:47the state

00:38:48of the corpse

00:38:50to the section

00:38:51and describes

00:38:52death

00:38:53as an effect

00:38:54of an anemia

00:38:55due

00:38:56to the loss

00:38:57hemorrhagic

00:38:58to bleeding

00:38:58is she still there?

00:39:01he goes ahead

00:39:02subsequently

00:39:05at about

00:39:068 months

00:39:07from those first

00:39:09notes

00:39:10of expertise

00:39:11is deposited

00:39:12the expertise

00:39:13real and proper

00:39:14in which

00:39:14causality

00:39:15of death

00:39:15is re-described

00:39:17in terms

00:39:18of suffocation

00:39:20due

00:39:21at the exit

00:39:22of blood

00:39:22and it is said

00:39:23textually

00:39:25leave leave

00:39:25rebuild

00:39:26and it is said

00:39:27textually

00:39:28which in essence

00:39:29compared to that

00:39:30first version

00:39:31the second

00:39:31it could seem

00:39:33more unlikely

00:39:34but then in fact

00:39:34had proven itself

00:39:35the real one

00:39:36now this entailed

00:39:38necessarily

00:39:39a modification

00:39:40under the profile

00:39:42of the phenomena

00:39:43putrefactive

00:39:44because the time

00:39:46of death

00:39:47it was established

00:39:48with these criteria

00:39:49and clearly

00:39:50this was carrying

00:39:51to a move

00:39:52as

00:39:52the blood

00:39:53in the corpse

00:39:55it was the cause

00:39:56moreover

00:40:00immediate

00:40:01putrefaction

00:40:02that not

00:40:02the absence

00:40:03of blood

00:40:04Excuse me

00:40:04I wish she would

00:40:05is

00:40:05Excuse me

00:40:06doctor

00:40:06if I say

00:40:06less analytical

00:40:07because if not

00:40:08have your say

00:40:09opinion in brief

00:40:11he said it a lot

00:40:11his is history

00:40:13this is chronicle

00:40:14so it can be

00:40:14Calm

00:40:15I want to rectify

00:40:16I didn't say

00:40:17that my story

00:40:17this is chronicle

00:40:18it is now a historical fact

00:40:20that has value

00:40:20only as a historical fact

00:40:22what he said

00:40:22the first assize court

00:40:23it has no value

00:40:24legal plus

00:40:25it has only historical value

00:40:26this has value only

00:40:27journalistic

00:40:27so it can be

00:40:28absolutely calm

00:40:29tell me in short

00:40:30what he means

00:40:31that that concatenation

00:40:32logic of clues

00:40:33by virtue of which

00:40:34the antagonistic probabilities

00:40:38they come to eliminate each other

00:40:39until only one remains

00:40:40in essence

00:40:41it cannot be reached

00:40:43first of all because

00:40:44many of those

00:40:44which are called clues

00:40:45technically I don't know

00:40:47why consider

00:40:48a clue

00:40:49the hour of death

00:40:50it's not correct

00:40:52as the clue

00:40:54it's a fact

00:40:54and the fact is that

00:40:55and the fact that we have

00:40:57it's a span of time

00:40:58which extends

00:41:00for 5, 6 or 7 hours

00:41:01of which we have

00:41:034 blankets by Cianca Pilla

00:41:04and 4 no

00:41:05and 4 not covered by anyone

00:41:08but clearly

00:41:09as it was said

00:41:10allow me

00:41:11this is important

00:41:14but she doesn't know it

00:41:15Certain

00:41:15I do not know

00:41:16but I want to say

00:41:17that Cianca Pilla

00:41:18it is certain that it was

00:41:19Cianca Pilla

00:41:19but this could be

00:41:22a clue

00:41:23driver

00:41:24as it lends itself

00:41:25to an alternative

00:41:25it's the most important moment

00:41:26of the cause

00:41:26without this

00:41:27the cause would not have

00:41:28sense of existence

00:41:30there is no discussion

00:41:31it's the basis

00:41:32the assumption

00:41:33if we take away

00:41:35Cianca Pilla

00:41:36from those 2 hours

00:41:37and a half

00:41:37in that cause

00:41:39there is no more

00:41:40but then it's a draw

00:41:41I mean, I mean

00:41:42you have to know how

00:41:43there was no one

00:41:43for him

00:41:43this is a process

00:41:45circumstantial evidence

00:41:45but in the process

00:41:46circumstantial evidence

00:41:47the clues

00:41:47must be indisputable

00:41:49it's already starting

00:41:49that the clue

00:41:50on the clock

00:41:50it's not a beginning

00:41:52and it's debatable

00:41:52if there are 100 clues

00:41:53which are worth 0

00:41:54the sum is 0

00:41:55but she knows it

00:41:55what he writes

00:41:56the appellate judge

00:41:57he says that this

00:41:59clock clue

00:42:00it is the solid

00:42:01cornice

00:42:01agree

00:42:02it's wrong

00:42:02I'm saying it

00:42:03hand

00:42:03she doesn't know

00:42:04what am I saying

00:42:04line but iron

00:42:05within which

00:42:06imprisoned hill

00:42:07the guilt

00:42:09by Francesco Cianca Pilla

00:42:10the other clues

00:42:12he considers them

00:42:13junk

00:42:14of countless

00:42:15other elements

00:42:15that is, even

00:42:17the sentence

00:42:18of appeal

00:42:18gives such value

00:42:19to this clue

00:42:20which is considered

00:42:21junk

00:42:22this clue

00:42:22it's the clock one

00:42:24and there practically

00:42:24I'm telling him

00:42:25giving credit

00:42:26of all this

00:42:27and that the words

00:42:29they are gone

00:42:29beyond thought

00:42:30Excuse me

00:42:32the same

00:42:33Court of Appeal

00:42:34still spends

00:42:3530 pages

00:42:36to explain

00:42:36the other clues

00:42:37while if that

00:42:38had it been the truth

00:42:39it would have ended there

00:42:39the process

00:42:41judge

00:42:41I would like to say one thing

00:42:42on this point

00:42:43because that's the point

00:42:45there are many elements

00:42:47until the presence

00:42:48by Cianca Pilla

00:42:49until 7.30pm

00:42:50in the apartment

00:42:51of Dice Street

00:42:52number 7

00:42:52but in reality

00:42:53the problem too

00:42:54of this broadcast

00:42:55Augers

00:42:56is to ask yourself

00:42:57if he could

00:42:58intervene

00:42:59something new

00:43:00Meaning what

00:43:01a third man

00:43:03another

00:43:04potential killer

00:43:05from 7.30pm

00:43:07onwards

00:43:07I am in the meantime

00:43:09pending

00:43:09as I think all of us

00:43:10to listen again

00:43:12that person

00:43:13who called

00:43:14but I would like

00:43:16say

00:43:16because it doesn't seem like it to me

00:43:17that it is coming

00:43:18the phone call again

00:43:18I would like to say this

00:43:19and that is

00:43:21It seems to me that there is

00:43:22a contradiction

00:43:22underlying

00:43:23in this whole affair

00:43:25which part

00:43:26from the fact

00:43:27through

00:43:27two processes

00:43:28the Court of Cassation

00:43:29and if you allow me

00:43:30this broadcast too

00:43:32and that is

00:43:33to be able to arrive

00:43:34to say

00:43:35I'm not talking

00:43:36of guilt

00:43:37of innocence

00:43:37by Ciancavilla

00:43:39but to be able to get there

00:43:40to say

00:43:40that there was

00:43:42another man

00:43:43must

00:43:44as it has been said

00:43:45in the courtroom

00:43:47describe

00:43:48Francesca Linovi

00:43:49as

00:43:50a person

00:43:51that could

00:43:52open the door

00:43:54to anyone

00:43:55or take to the streets

00:43:56and take it home

00:43:58the first person

00:43:59that he had met

00:44:00Excuse me

00:44:01this has been said

00:44:03and this was written

00:44:04but it's not true

00:44:04at that time

00:44:06in the process

00:44:07this does not match

00:44:08this does not match

00:44:09I didn't say

00:44:10that it has been said

00:44:11Today

00:44:11this evening

00:44:12this does not match

00:44:13to the description

00:44:15effective

00:44:16of the person

00:44:17Francesca Linovi

00:44:18this does not lead

00:44:19Nothing

00:44:20nor in favor

00:44:21nor against

00:44:21Francesca Ciancavilla

00:44:22but this is one thing

00:44:24but this is one thing

00:44:25that needs to be said

00:44:26Why

00:44:27Francesca Linovi

00:44:29that as a victim

00:44:31it transforms

00:44:32in potential

00:44:33lure

00:44:34was

00:44:36an element

00:44:36on which

00:44:37a certain defensive line

00:44:38by Ciancavilla

00:44:39which I believe

00:44:40have disadvantaged him

00:44:41for other things

00:44:42he carried forward

00:44:43the attempt

00:44:45to demonstrate

00:44:46that there could be

00:44:46another person

00:44:48in play

00:44:48I say here

00:44:50one last thing

00:44:51Mr. Ciancavilla

00:44:52because I'm not doing

00:44:53the part of the public prosecutor

00:44:55I'm saying

00:44:56why didn't I say this before?

00:44:58in the first intervention

00:44:59at the start of the broadcast

00:45:00that I am also convinced

00:45:01that there have been

00:45:02I say this as a neophyte

00:45:04but some shortcomings

00:45:06in the phase

00:45:07of the investigations

00:45:08that do not allow

00:45:10the certainty

00:45:12but this

00:45:13can play

00:45:14For

00:45:15or against

00:45:16the defendant

00:45:17Surely

00:45:18but there is a fact

00:45:19that you can't

00:45:20condemn no one

00:45:22claiming that the victim

00:45:23she is a man-eater

00:45:25Thank you

00:45:26I want an offense

00:45:26to the victim

00:45:27but this nobody

00:45:28no one said it

00:45:29not tonight

00:45:30not tonight

00:45:31in the process

00:45:31but we are working

00:45:32this evening

00:45:33you also have to listen

00:45:34what was said

00:45:35in the process

00:45:35you have to read the newspapers

00:45:36of then

00:45:37Agnetti

00:45:39I would like to reply to this gentleman

00:45:40then there was

00:45:41Lupacchini who wanted to finish

00:45:42ready?

00:45:43yes but

00:45:43I'm calling from Bologna

00:45:44so I called

00:45:46because some

00:45:46time after the murder

00:45:48I met

00:45:49Anna Gari

00:45:50I wanted to say that

00:45:51first of all

00:45:52this girl

00:45:53it's not as it was

00:45:54his image

00:45:55also physics

00:45:56it's not the same

00:45:57which was given

00:45:57in your videos

00:45:58this girl

00:45:59she was a girl

00:46:00weakened

00:46:01she was a girl

00:46:02depressed

00:46:03who took drugs

00:46:04to the point

00:46:05that she herself

00:46:06he told me

00:46:06which was forced

00:46:08occasionally

00:46:09to prostitute oneself

00:46:09to get the money

00:46:11for drugs

00:46:13so this

00:46:14that's what I mean

00:46:15That

00:46:16herself

00:46:17he told me

00:46:18to have

00:46:19several times

00:46:20changed

00:46:21version

00:46:22compared to that

00:46:22what had happened

00:46:23on that day

00:46:24with the police

00:46:25it was in a period

00:46:26in which she

00:46:26she was very disoriented

00:46:29probably

00:46:29the same day

00:46:30where it happened

00:46:30the fact

00:46:31was under

00:46:31the effect

00:46:32of drugs

00:46:35he told me

00:46:36of having been

00:46:37for everything

00:46:37the period

00:46:38persecuted

00:46:39from the police

00:46:39for the phone

00:46:40under control

00:46:41and then

00:46:41he had to

00:46:42change

00:46:42two or three times

00:46:43version

00:46:44even tending

00:46:46instinctively

00:46:46to have

00:46:47a line

00:46:47defensive

00:46:48towards

00:46:48of Ciancabilla

00:46:49what I want to say

00:46:51me with this

00:46:51is that the testimony

00:46:53of Annagari

00:46:54it's absolutely not

00:46:55reliable

00:46:56as

00:46:57precisely because of the conditions

00:46:58confusing

00:46:59of the girl

00:47:00I want to add

00:47:01Also

00:47:02allowed this

00:47:03That

00:47:03in my opinion

00:47:04he wrote it

00:47:05on the mirror

00:47:06the rose left

00:47:07on the cushions

00:47:08above the victim

00:47:09the strange one

00:47:10tidy house

00:47:11the victim

00:47:12put there

00:47:12that is not known

00:47:13if she had been killed

00:47:14there or not

00:47:14these

00:47:15they appear

00:47:16clues

00:47:16diverters

00:47:17what they do

00:47:18so think

00:47:19they make me

00:47:19suspect

00:47:20that we can

00:47:21to be

00:47:21a murder

00:47:22premeditated

00:47:24and not

00:47:24an occasional

00:47:25taking into account

00:47:27this premise

00:47:27taking into account

00:47:41that between

00:47:42was inflicted

00:47:43from a person

00:47:43weak

00:47:44and then

00:47:44maybe underneath

00:47:45the effect

00:47:45of drugs

00:47:46precisely because of the fact

00:47:47that was not

00:47:48sunk

00:47:49completely

00:47:49the knife

00:47:50now I move forward

00:47:51the hypothesis

00:47:52that I can give you

00:47:53to have been

00:47:54is

00:47:55an involvement

00:47:57principal

00:47:59hero

00:47:59of the agaric

00:48:00or even

00:48:02a complicity

00:48:03between this

00:48:04and the ciancabilla

00:48:05Thank you

00:48:05I wanted to do

00:48:06my question

00:48:07was what investigations

00:48:08so they were

00:48:09made

00:48:09what I was

00:48:10to ask

00:48:10to the doctor

00:48:11Marine

00:48:12and to the doctor

00:48:13Lupacchini

00:48:13thank you very much

00:48:14doctor

00:48:15you heard it

00:48:17you are

00:48:17those who

00:48:18do you want to answer?

00:48:18to these questions

00:48:19you two

00:48:20own

00:48:20judge

00:48:21first degree

00:48:22and the

00:48:23on Anna Agari

00:48:24it was not advanced

00:48:25no suspicion

00:48:27it was heard

00:48:29in court

00:48:29it was heard

00:48:30in education

00:48:31the version

00:48:32who gave

00:48:32it was essentially

00:48:34always the same

00:48:35to the point

00:48:36it seems to me

00:48:37that it was opened

00:48:38a procedure

00:48:38criminal

00:48:39against her

00:48:40in order

00:48:42for having procured

00:48:43the heroine

00:48:44to Ciancabilla

00:48:45Therefore

00:48:46but suspicions

00:48:48in order

00:48:48to his participation

00:48:50to the crime

00:48:50there haven't been any

00:48:51as regards

00:48:53the rose

00:48:53it seems to me

00:48:54obligatory

00:48:55clarify

00:48:55which was

00:48:57a

00:48:57journalistic joke

00:48:59that of seeing

00:49:00the rose

00:49:00on the cushions

00:49:01because then

00:49:01at the trial

00:49:02it's the result

00:49:03that the rose

00:49:04he was located

00:49:04above the TV

00:49:05where it had always been

00:49:08this much

00:49:09the glasses

00:49:10they were from the rinovi

00:49:11the glasses

00:49:12they were

00:49:13the glasses

00:49:13by sight

00:49:14they were

00:49:15eyeglasses

00:49:15of the renewal

00:49:16anyway there was

00:49:16an investigation

00:49:17as regards

00:49:18the truth

00:49:19a little fast

00:49:20half an hour in the morning

00:49:21judge

00:49:22from the evening

00:49:23of six

00:49:23in the morning

00:49:24they found

00:49:24throughout Bologna

00:49:25an optician

00:49:26which he had sold

00:49:27many years before

00:49:28how optics does it

00:49:29to remember

00:49:29no no no

00:49:29Attention

00:49:30it hasn't been seen at all

00:49:31who had sold

00:49:32twenty years ago

00:49:33they were

00:49:34first of all, check them out

00:49:35if they weren't glasses

00:49:36by sight

00:49:37and this

00:49:38any optician

00:49:39he can do it

00:49:39it was done

00:49:41and they were glasses

00:49:42by sight

00:49:42and it coincided

00:49:43with the lack

00:49:44no no doctor

00:49:45Excuse me

00:49:46and it was also

00:49:46if they are in the documents

00:49:47Excuse me

00:49:48they are in the documents

00:49:48that they were old

00:49:494-5 years old

00:49:50why the degrees

00:49:52of short-sighted people

00:49:53they were different

00:49:54slightly different

00:49:55if they allow me

00:49:56let's keep putting

00:49:58the hands

00:49:58in the junk

00:49:59of judge

00:50:01of appeal

00:50:02actually

00:50:03the serious problem

00:50:04in my opinion

00:50:05it's another one

00:50:05causality

00:50:06of death

00:50:07it is twofold

00:50:08by

00:50:08of the same

00:50:09expert

00:50:09so or was

00:50:10a mistake

00:50:11coarse

00:50:11the first

00:50:12or it was

00:50:12a mistake

00:50:13coarse

00:50:13the second

00:50:14or is it

00:50:15inexplicable

00:50:15the reason

00:50:16for which

00:50:17to a hemorrhage

00:50:18it replaces itself

00:50:19Then

00:50:19a loss

00:50:21of senses

00:50:23of conscience

00:50:24and death

00:50:24because

00:50:25of suffocation

00:50:27due to the healthy

00:50:28it was not found

00:50:29the murder weapon

00:50:30and it is not known

00:50:31whatever it is

00:50:32hypotheses have been made

00:50:33from the knife

00:50:334-5 cm

00:50:35of blade

00:50:35in width

00:50:36without taking into account

00:50:38of the slackening

00:50:40of the wounds

00:50:40due to the phenomena

00:50:41potential factors

00:50:42of swelling

00:50:44of the corpse

00:50:45there are many things

00:50:47that leave you perplexed

00:50:48other things

00:50:48that leave you perplexed

00:50:50they are the adjustments

00:50:51of certain testimonies

00:50:53underline

00:50:53in the sentence

00:50:54first degree

00:50:55where the test

00:50:56he introduces himself

00:50:56spontaneously

00:50:57to make a statement

00:50:58then read the newspaper

00:50:59learns that

00:51:00the medical-legal report

00:51:01from one version

00:51:03partially different

00:51:04of that

00:51:05which had been foreseen

00:51:07at first

00:51:07he comes back and says

00:51:08I read the newspaper

00:51:09I realized

00:51:10than my testimony

00:51:11it is important

00:51:12for this reason

00:51:13I modify the previous version

00:51:15it wasn't at 8

00:51:16that I was calling

00:51:17but I called

00:51:17at 8.30

00:51:18or vice versa

00:51:19I can't now

00:51:20certainly to push back

00:51:21the hour of death

00:51:22at the time when

00:51:23the Giancabilla

00:51:23he takes the train

00:51:24I am obviously

00:51:26some oddities

00:51:27on which you can

00:51:27to pass over

00:51:29and they become clues

00:51:30but the fact

00:51:31that from 5

00:51:33at 7

00:51:34there was

00:51:34the Giancabilla

00:51:35but you remain as an alternative

00:51:36the possibility

00:51:37that the murder

00:51:38was committed

00:51:39between 7

00:51:40and 11

00:51:41and therefore remain

00:51:42another 4 hours

00:51:43can't carry

00:51:45to say

00:51:45because for those 2 hours

00:51:46we have the proof

00:51:47that Tizio was in the house

00:51:48Tizio must be

00:51:49necessarily

00:51:50and that's the reason

00:51:51for which you

00:51:51in the first degree

00:51:52you acquitted him

00:51:54for the sufficiency

00:51:54trial

00:51:55we acquitted him

00:51:55because of this

00:51:55and taking into account

00:51:57always in the light

00:51:57of the sentence

00:51:58to another element

00:51:59which is simply

00:52:01shocking

00:52:02but it gets back together

00:52:03to a certain trend

00:52:04ideological

00:52:05of a certain

00:52:06Italian doctrine

00:52:07which tends

00:52:09to smuggle

00:52:11the expertise

00:52:11psychiatric

00:52:12for criminological expertise

00:52:14in contempt

00:52:15what does it mean

00:52:16it means

00:52:18which is expected

00:52:20the expertise

00:52:21psychiatric

00:52:22to ascertain

00:52:23of diseases

00:52:24of the subject

00:52:27of pathological states

00:52:28of the subject

00:52:29but it is not allowed

00:52:31are not allowed

00:52:33introspections

00:52:34of the subject

00:52:35in order to ascertain it

00:52:37the habit

00:52:37the trend

00:52:39or professionalism

00:52:40in the crime

00:52:41in this case

00:52:42the glue

00:52:44of all the clues

00:52:45to bring them

00:52:46to univocity

00:52:47was

00:52:48a statement

00:52:49contained

00:52:49in the expertise

00:52:50psychiatric

00:52:51in force

00:52:51of which

00:52:52the subject

00:52:53it was compatible

00:52:54with the

00:52:56the character

00:52:56of the subject

00:52:57it was compatible

00:52:58with the crime

00:52:58and then

00:52:59for the principle

00:53:00what he wants

00:53:01the hypothesis

00:53:01always prevail

00:53:02on the facts

00:53:03and then

00:53:03make them adapt

00:53:04to the hypothesis

00:53:05and not vice versa

00:53:06it can be

00:53:07arrived

00:53:08to univocalize

00:53:09some clues

00:53:10that anyway

00:53:10logically

00:53:11they always leave

00:53:12open

00:53:12of the alternatives

00:53:13thank you doctor

00:53:14this was

00:53:14very clear

00:53:15Thank you

00:53:15ready

00:53:16Yes

00:53:17Good evening

00:53:18Good evening

00:53:19I am a

00:53:20watchmaker technician

00:53:21I would like to contest

00:53:23the thesis

00:53:24of the lord

00:53:24of the Rolex

00:53:25blacksmiths

00:53:26Yes

00:53:26Why

00:53:28any

00:53:29watchmaker technician

00:53:30you can tell him

00:53:30when a clock

00:53:32suffers a shock

00:53:32in 5 hours

00:53:34he can do it

00:53:34also 13

00:53:34afterwards

00:53:36at the overlap

00:53:37of the spiral spring

00:53:39I can answer

00:53:41any technician

00:53:42you can tell him

00:53:42Well

00:53:43I'll answer you now

00:53:44first of all

00:53:45the overlapping

00:53:46of the spiral

00:53:47what does she say?

00:53:47it can be overlapped

00:53:48but only

00:53:49for a few minutes

00:53:50when the spiral

00:53:51overlapping

00:53:52it's a short thing

00:53:53Listen

00:53:54let me talk

00:53:55Please

00:53:56when the spiral

00:53:58it overlaps

00:53:58in a manner

00:53:59so violent

00:54:00the operator is needed

00:54:01otherwise

00:54:02alone

00:54:02you don't get over it

00:54:03and in the expertise

00:54:04he says that

00:54:05the clock

00:54:06it was in perfect condition

00:54:07Yes

00:54:07but the spiral

00:54:08you can climb over

00:54:09taking in hand

00:54:10the clock

00:54:11and moving it a little

00:54:12the hour does not last

00:54:13for many hours

00:54:14otherwise

00:54:14it would only last

00:54:15for 5 minutes

00:54:16or 10 minutes

00:54:17could advance

00:54:17at most an hour

00:54:18until the clock

00:54:19he is not taken

00:54:20in hand

00:54:21from some person

00:54:21and that shakes him

00:54:22a little bit

00:54:23when it's a lot

00:54:24overlapping

00:54:25especially of that caliber

00:54:26maybe she

00:54:27he doesn't know much

00:54:27that Rolex caliber

00:54:28don't tell me

00:54:29yes I know him very well

00:54:30then she knows very well

00:54:31that an operator is needed

00:54:33otherwise

00:54:33it just overlaps

00:54:34for a few minutes

00:54:35and then he comes back

00:54:36to be like before

00:54:37No

00:54:37it can go back to how it was before

00:54:38ninth

00:54:39can come back

00:54:40it can go back to how it was before

00:54:41when the clock

00:54:42it is taken back into hand

00:54:44from a person

00:54:44and possibly

00:54:45but then it doesn't overlap

00:54:47it doesn't overlap

00:54:48in a way

00:54:48that can advance

00:54:4910 hours in 8 hours

00:54:50also because

00:54:51we saw

00:54:51that the clock

00:54:52it's not that I'm stopping her

00:54:53but it continued to stay in my pocket

00:54:55for which it should have been

00:54:56to climb over equally

00:54:57then taking it in hand

00:54:58but as in hand

00:54:59it's not that it shook him

00:55:00he just washed it

00:55:01so it wasn't a movement

00:55:02such as to be able to overtake

00:55:04the spiral

00:55:04taking it out of his pocket

00:55:06it can be shaken very well

00:55:07but wash it

00:55:08it doesn't mean shaking it

00:55:10and the spiral

00:55:11it climbs out by itself

00:55:12yes with a push

00:55:13the spiral is unraveled

00:55:14the questions

00:55:15of any technician

00:55:16well that's fine

00:55:17anyway let me talk

00:55:18with those other technicians

00:55:19and let's see

00:55:20in what conditions

00:55:21but the people he wants

00:55:21famous technicians

00:55:22of Longin

00:55:23of the Zenith

00:55:24of the Ebera

00:55:24if the spiral overlaps

00:55:26if it were to overlap

00:55:27let me talk

00:55:28please

00:55:29if the spiral overlaps

00:55:30and it overlaps in a way

00:55:32which is difficult

00:55:33that it returns to its place by itself

00:55:34it lasts for several hours

00:55:36It can even last 10 hours

00:55:37the overlapping

00:55:37but when then

00:55:38let you finish please

00:55:40when it then tends

00:55:42to slow down

00:55:43that is, when it is about to unload

00:55:45in particular

00:55:46when it's almost empty

00:55:47in that case

00:55:48the clock stops

00:55:50because only

00:55:51it's going to overlap

00:55:53and can still walk

00:55:54when it has greater strength

00:55:55when the force

00:55:56it's almost disappearing

00:55:58or to almost nothing

00:55:59as in the case

00:56:00which lasts only 4 hours

00:56:01the clock

00:56:02it stops

00:56:03why the spring

00:56:03he can't do it

00:56:04the spiral

00:56:05he can't do it

00:56:05to make it work

00:56:07the balance

00:56:08but later on

00:56:09to a collision

00:56:10that is, taking it in hand

00:56:11the spiral

00:56:12you climb over

00:56:14Excuse me

00:56:15Excuse me

00:56:16but now

00:56:16Thank you

00:56:17technicians

00:56:17I wanted to resume

00:56:18a consideration

00:56:18Excuse me

00:56:19Dr. Scopelli

00:56:19no I thank you

00:56:21Truly

00:56:21Why

00:56:22this brings us

00:56:23and here they are

00:56:24people of law

00:56:25who know it

00:56:26but we who are not

00:56:27by law

00:56:28we don't know

00:56:28it takes us to see

00:56:29as well as between two

00:56:31technicians

00:56:31equally

00:56:32I imagine experts

00:56:33there may be

00:56:35a conflict of opinions

00:56:36even radical

00:56:37which leads

00:56:38I didn't say it before

00:56:39and I didn't rule it out

00:56:41in fact I'm not wrong

00:56:42completely

00:56:43to my colleague

00:56:44I just tell her

00:56:45that since in certain conditions

00:56:47when the spiral

00:56:47it overlaps

00:56:48and takes a hit

00:56:49can move forward

00:56:50a few hours ago

00:56:51but it can move forward

00:56:52only

00:56:52at certain times

00:56:54in 5 hours

00:56:55can go on

00:56:56of 6

00:56:56but since

00:56:57that the condition

00:56:57but

00:56:58it's a condition

00:56:59of minimal strength

00:57:00so the clock

00:57:01would tend more

00:57:01to stop

00:57:02that not to anticipate

00:57:03Marozzi

00:57:04I say this

00:57:06that certainty

00:57:08it's just in the data

00:57:10but then from the data

00:57:11draw conclusions

00:57:12that is, us

00:57:13let's give some data

00:57:15we give them to the magistrates

00:57:17the magistrates

00:57:17they ask us for an opinion

00:57:18we give an opinion

00:57:20and we try to motivate him

00:57:21but

00:57:22beyond this

00:57:23reconstruct the facts

00:57:24it's a whole other story

00:57:27naturally

00:57:27the try

00:57:28the guilt

00:57:30that is, to arrive

00:57:31to the absolute test

00:57:31of guilt

00:57:32it's a speech

00:57:33of a certain type

00:57:34to get to exclude it

00:57:36or not to try it

00:57:37it's another type

00:57:38we are used to it

00:57:39to arrive

00:57:39or

00:57:40we always want

00:57:42we have

00:57:42with the old code

00:57:44we are arriving

00:57:45or to guilt

00:57:46or to exclusion

00:57:46while instead

00:57:48now we just have to

00:57:49prove guilt

00:57:50in this sense

00:57:51we technicians

00:57:52we can give

00:57:52some precise elements

00:57:54of the data

00:57:55but

00:57:55the conclusions

00:57:57for example

00:57:57in terms

00:57:58of interpretation

00:58:00of the data

00:58:00in a chronological sense

00:58:02we give some results

00:58:03that they have

00:58:0470%

00:58:05of probability

00:58:0580%

00:58:07but to arrive

00:58:07100%

00:58:08of probability

00:58:09the truth

00:58:10it doesn't exist

00:58:12I don't know if I can

00:58:13give her the floor

00:58:14Excuse me

00:58:14not for

00:58:15unless

00:58:15I have to give the floor

00:58:17to Franca Leosini

00:58:18Now

00:58:18and then practically

00:58:19why are you standing up again

00:58:20the fact

00:58:20of the clothes worn

00:58:23from the boy

00:58:25what did he mean?

00:58:26Then

00:58:27Franca Leosini

00:58:27maybe it's the final part

00:58:29what did he mean?

00:58:31no I meant to say

00:58:31That

00:58:33even in court

00:58:34it has been taken into consideration

00:58:35this fact

00:58:36and it was said

00:58:36and supported

00:58:37first of all

00:58:37there is no certainty

00:58:38that has not changed

00:58:39the boy's clothes

00:58:40before going

00:58:41there is no certainty

00:58:42it's debatable

00:58:43not only

00:58:44but then

00:58:45the manner of death

00:58:46ascertained by the expert

00:58:47they allow

00:58:48to perform

00:58:49that crime

00:58:49without

00:58:50without

00:58:51without getting stained

00:58:52without getting stained

00:58:55the shirt

00:58:55she tries to break

00:58:56with a fork

00:58:57a tomato

00:58:58tell me

00:58:58that she doesn't strain herself

00:58:58it is said of many

00:59:00that death

00:59:01from the

00:59:01of the girl

00:59:03it happened

00:59:04for a sort

00:59:04of drowning

00:59:05internal

00:59:07due

00:59:08due

00:59:09from the invasion

00:59:10of the lungs

00:59:11by the blood

00:59:12cast due to

00:59:13of the wound

00:59:14which he had drawn

00:59:14the epipharynx

00:59:16so there was a wound

00:59:17very large

00:59:18and the others of little importance

00:59:20the boy was wearing

00:59:21the shirt

00:59:22with short sleeves

00:59:22so it could be done

00:59:24I repeat to you

00:59:25Excuse me, ma'am

00:59:26I repeat to you

00:59:26I would be very happy

00:59:28that the boy

00:59:29he was innocent

00:59:30why the condemnation

00:59:31of an innocent

00:59:32it's the concern

00:59:33of all honest people

00:59:33but I want to say

00:59:35I say this

00:59:36and I'm convinced of it

00:59:37I want to say though

00:59:39that this is misery

00:59:40from the

00:59:41from the

00:59:41of human justice

00:59:43ours is a judgment

00:59:45ours is a judgment

00:59:47unfortunately failed

00:59:48two magistrates

00:59:49how it would have gone

00:59:50this process

00:59:50of the test

00:59:50of guilt

00:59:51at least until

00:59:52what is presumed

00:59:53it is innocence

00:59:54and then

00:59:55the fact of the clothes

00:59:57there was a testimony

00:59:59credible

01:00:00not credible

01:00:01a judge

01:00:02he believed in it

01:00:02another judge

01:00:04he didn't believe it

01:00:06clearly

01:00:06these are

01:00:07the damages

01:00:08of the free

01:00:09conviction

01:00:10on the other hand

01:00:11the legal evidence

01:00:12it is even more harmful

01:00:13so it's better

01:00:13to be satisfied

01:00:14and we are in the field

01:00:14of a judgment

01:00:15subjective

01:00:16it's better to be satisfied

01:00:17of whatever it is

01:00:17what however

01:00:19in my opinion

01:00:20it must be reiterated

01:00:21is that

01:00:21right in force

01:00:23of presumption

01:00:24of not guilty

01:00:25and precisely in strength

01:00:27of the fact

01:00:27that there are

01:00:28seven hours

01:00:29of time

01:00:30which can be

01:00:31moreover

01:00:32but certainly not

01:00:32Less

01:00:33between now and then

01:00:34in which

01:00:35between the two moments

01:00:37in which

01:00:37it is placed

01:00:38death

01:00:38at this point

01:00:40say

01:00:41so long as

01:00:42if for half

01:00:42of the time

01:00:43we covered it

01:00:44with Francesco

01:00:45Ciancabilla

01:00:46or with whoever it is

01:00:47it's enough for us

01:00:48to condemn

01:00:49and if it doesn't work out

01:00:50it is written

01:00:52the clues

01:00:55they appear

01:00:55compatible

01:00:56with nature

01:00:57that's why

01:00:58you don't stay standing

01:00:59the speech

01:00:59and they don't seem

01:01:00apodictic statements

01:01:01they appear

01:01:02compatible

01:01:03with nature

01:01:04and the peculiarity

01:01:05of the relationship

01:01:05that tied

01:01:06the victim

01:01:07to the defendant

01:01:08with personality

01:01:09of this one

01:01:10which have been

01:01:11rebuilt

01:01:12not only

01:01:12through

01:01:13the very numerous

01:01:14testimonies

01:01:15of their friends

01:01:16and acquaintances

01:01:17and here too

01:01:17there are testimonies

01:01:18in a sense

01:01:19and testimonies

01:01:20in another

01:01:20but mainly

01:01:23with the in-depth

01:01:25and sharp

01:01:25investigation

01:01:26and here's the point

01:01:27very serious

01:01:27psychological

01:01:29completed

01:01:30in the course

01:01:31of the expertise

01:01:31psychiatric

01:01:32and here's the glue

01:01:33cloudy

01:01:34with which

01:01:35he tied himself up

01:01:35logically

01:01:38we didn't come here

01:01:39to make us see

01:01:40us to be able to talk

01:01:42I wanted to say

01:01:42just one thing

01:01:43to Dr. Scopelliti

01:01:44speaking of blood

01:01:45the appellate judge

01:01:47he says that the modest

01:01:48matic effusion

01:01:49found by the expert

01:01:50it was not translated

01:01:51in fleets

01:01:51and in paws of blood

01:01:52of which there is no real trace

01:01:54not even on the floor

01:01:55in the place where

01:01:56there was the corpse

01:01:57this is a lie

01:01:57Instead

01:01:58because the blood

01:01:58it is vast

01:01:59what a mess

01:01:59so in the sentence

01:02:01of appeal

01:02:02he says things

01:02:03which are false

01:02:04he says that when

01:02:05it was found

01:02:06the corpse

01:02:06there was no doctor

01:02:08the judges

01:02:10and the policemen

01:02:11that they saw

01:02:12they couldn't

01:02:13decide

01:02:14if there was

01:02:15rigor mortis

01:02:17Instead

01:02:18Excuse me

01:02:19Instead

01:02:20during the process

01:02:21of appeal

01:02:22it has been ascertained

01:02:23it has been clarified

01:02:24it was brought

01:02:25a document

01:02:26of the police

01:02:27Where

01:02:28from which it results

01:02:29that upon discovery

01:02:31of the corpse

01:02:31he was called

01:02:32a certain doctor

01:02:33Susi Vacchi

01:02:34who did

01:02:35the investigations

01:02:36Therefore

01:02:36in the process

01:02:38in the sentence

01:02:39this doctor

01:02:39disappears

01:02:40is dead

01:02:41there is no more

01:02:41it seems to me

01:02:43that this is

01:02:43a typical case

01:02:44that maybe

01:02:45could be

01:02:46been solved

01:02:47with the new code

01:02:48Here you are

01:02:49Excuse me

01:02:50I'll stop you here

01:02:52because I have to close

01:02:53we have to close

01:02:54our time

01:02:55it's expired

01:02:55how do you say

01:02:56even if only

01:02:57this evening

01:02:57we didn't say

01:02:58still nothing

01:02:58Excuse me, sir

01:03:00I have to close

01:03:00the judge

01:03:01he can't have understood

01:03:02the mistake

01:03:03of the horological

01:03:04that is very important

01:03:05what did you say?

01:03:06but it's not the mistake

01:03:07that I want to present

01:03:09in Cassation

01:03:09and it's very serious

01:03:11because that's one thing

01:03:12that the police

01:03:13had to do

01:03:14of the evidence

01:03:15to see

01:03:16if they could be

01:03:175 o'clock

01:03:18or 5pm

01:03:19not tout court

01:03:20it's 5 o'clock

01:03:21why so Francesco

01:03:23because we don't know

01:03:24the watch expert

01:03:26he explained

01:03:26that not only

01:03:27it is impossible to know

01:03:28and it could be known

01:03:30if the police

01:03:31he made a small gesture

01:03:32so we pay

01:03:33not only that

01:03:35but the expert

01:03:36he says

01:03:37all 35 hours

01:03:39they can be good

01:03:41in those 35

01:03:42any time is good

01:03:43of that request

01:03:45why the clock

01:03:46you can load a lot

01:03:47you can load little

01:03:48it can never be loaded

01:03:49and then from what

01:03:50Excuse me, judge

01:03:52my son is sorry

01:03:53what do we base our decision on?

01:03:55which was loaded

01:03:56to the utmost

01:03:56absolutely top

01:03:58but that's one thing

01:03:58that was not asked

01:03:59to the expert

01:03:59and if that was it

01:04:00don't tell me

01:04:01that was not

01:04:02it was the only thing

01:04:03and why I feel

01:04:06if the toxicological police

01:04:07late

01:04:08and then it is said

01:04:09he didn't take the drugs

01:04:10him in the afternoon

01:04:11but it is said

01:04:11the night before

01:04:12yes because there is proof

01:04:13and then the professor

01:04:15he had said

01:04:15but from a dose

01:04:16more consistent

01:04:17must have passed

01:04:19minimum 24 hours

01:04:20this is something else

01:04:21It is true

01:04:22for metabolites

01:04:24no one went to see

01:04:25at what time

01:04:26he took it

01:04:27the day before

01:04:27the drug

01:04:28and no

01:04:29to condemn a boy

01:04:30we're going to see

01:04:31Mr. Judge

01:04:32he was out

01:04:33No

01:04:35he is innocent

01:04:36my son

01:04:36for drugs

01:04:37then the drug

01:04:38the writing is not good

01:04:38the perigia of the stains

01:04:39it's not good

01:04:40the writing is not good

01:04:41the coroner

01:04:42which unfortunately

01:04:43the coroner

01:04:44Professor Ricci

01:04:45he says in court

01:04:47during the first trial

01:04:48the date of death

01:04:50I place it

01:04:51between 8pm

01:04:52and 9pm

01:04:53that stretching

01:04:54until 11pm

01:04:56so if it was fully charged

01:04:58at 6:10

01:04:59it's not good

01:04:59this was the first

01:05:00response

01:05:01then he did it

01:05:01the third

01:05:03this was the last one

01:05:07and then it's a stretch

01:05:09of everything

01:05:09can't go on

01:05:10I believe

01:05:11in the right men

01:05:12I'm interrupting you

01:05:14I came here

01:05:14with absurd hope

01:05:16they tell me I'm crazy

01:05:17but I hope

01:05:18in the just judges

01:05:19in the right men

01:05:20that there are

01:05:20and that if they have

01:05:22the courage to say

01:05:23we made a mistake

01:05:24reopen

01:05:24but what can be done?

01:05:26Dr. Scopelli

01:05:27can I please?

01:05:28Excuse me

01:05:28remove the word

01:05:29we absolutely have to close

01:05:31it's 11pm

01:05:32and it's 11:10

01:05:33Madam, do you know why?

01:05:35I'm interrupting you

01:05:35because what she is saying

01:05:37analyzing

01:05:38clue by clue

01:05:40the doctor

01:05:41the magistrate

01:05:42of the first degree

01:05:43he already said it

01:05:44yes but the accommodation

01:05:45we said the mistake

01:05:46I understand

01:05:47his state of mind

01:05:49it's serious

01:05:49it's mathematical

01:05:50Lady

01:05:51be kind

01:05:52the doctor already said it

01:05:53he already said it

01:05:54clearly

01:05:55that all these clues

01:05:56they were kept together

01:05:58from a cloudy glue

01:05:59he called him

01:06:00it's a next image

01:06:01very effective

01:06:02which makes us understand

01:06:03how it was done

01:06:04how it was created

01:06:05the comic strip

01:06:05no I wouldn't call it that

01:06:07how did we get here?

01:06:08to a logic

01:06:09she passively accepted

01:06:11the love game

01:06:12when ever accepted

01:06:13the love game

01:06:13I would like

01:06:14that colleague Santini

01:06:15close

01:06:16this program

01:06:17continuing and concluding

01:06:18what he was saying

01:06:19Meaning what

01:06:20Today

01:06:21today with the new code

01:06:23there would have been

01:06:24a contextual check

01:06:27so a different way

01:06:28to collect evidence

01:06:30and then evaluate it

01:06:32we wouldn't find each other

01:06:33to discuss

01:06:34Today

01:06:35of topics

01:06:36which could have been

01:06:37debated

01:06:38in context

01:06:39of the facts

01:06:40Thank you

01:06:40this is the conclusion

01:06:42which I wanted to get to

01:06:43and I thank Santini

01:06:45to have said it for me

01:06:45Today

01:06:46we in this program

01:06:48here we are

01:06:49amateurishly

01:06:50among other things

01:06:51between the elements

01:06:51amateurish

01:06:52I have to say

01:06:52it also entered

01:06:53that phone call

01:06:54in the first part

01:06:55Agnetti

01:06:56which had no follow-up

01:06:58and that therefore

01:06:58we must consider

01:06:59the phone

01:07:00a joke

01:07:01in general

01:07:01the jokes

01:07:02they don't pass

01:07:02in this broadcast

01:07:03why they are filtered

01:07:04that

01:07:05a joke

01:07:06in very bad taste

01:07:06that's the past

01:07:07I was saying

01:07:08of which

01:07:09amateurishly

01:07:10how can we do it

01:07:11by journalists

01:07:11we discussed

01:07:13elements that would have

01:07:14with much more seriousness

01:07:15and evidentiary nature

01:07:17they should have

01:07:18to be discussed

01:07:19in court Rassise

01:07:20and in court he sat down

01:07:20of appeal

01:07:21there is the new code

01:07:23let's hope that things will work out

01:07:24they are doing better

01:07:24from now on

01:07:25Thank you for being with us

01:07:27Good night

01:07:46thank you all

01:08:17thank you all

01:08:45thank you all

01:09:19thank you all

01:09:43thank you all

01:10:19thank you all

01:10:38thank you all

01:10:40thank you all

Categoria

Trascrizione

Commenti

Consigliato