An unshakable trust has dominated the ranks of Andrea Sempio’s defense since the investigations into the Garlasco crime were reopened just over a year ago. Although the Pavia Prosecutor’s Office appears convinced of their client’s guilt, the 38-year-old’s lawyers are counting onactual absence of probative evidenceof the presence of simple – and in their opinion, refutable – circumstantial evidence. And they are working hard to dismantle the entire prosecution system, piece by piece, which sees Sempio as a murderer following “a rejected sexual approach”.
The imprecise transcription of Sempio’s soliloquy
But what, then, would be this circumstantial evidence mentioned far and wide in recent months? Well, for starters the famous soliloquies in the car, including the alleged murder confession. Not very clean audio, where the words do not come out clear but confusedlike during a phone call in the tunnel. Hence, a possible imprecise transcription of the prosecutors, so much so that, according to a technical consultancy regarding the exact sentences pronounced by Sempio, brought to light in Fourth For example, Grado would not have said “bitch”, in reference to the victim, but “bullshit”. Which would significantly change the cards on the table and their semantic interpretation.
The main evidence on Sempio
And then the “queen piece of evidence” among the “circumstantial evidence”: footprint 33, the one left on the wall of the stairs leading to the basement where the body was discovered, and attributed to the 38-year-old. But the defense also intends to dismantle this fundamental piece of the prosecution system: according to the lawyer Liborio Cataliotti “perhaps that fingerprint is not even Sempio’s, we are working on it. You will soon know”. At that point, the only relevant thing against him would be the DNA under Chiara’s nails, which would belong to the suspect’s family lineage. However, it is not the only trace of genetic material on the victim’s hands: there are also other traces of “unknowns”. This is why the structure on which the accusation is based, according to Sempio’s defence, is a house of cards – the prosecutor’s papers – destined to collapse. Now, the word to the investigators. Then, possibly, to the judges.
