The Court of Appeal of Milan reduces the sentence of Fares Bouzidi, the driver in the escape in which Ramy Elgaml died: a decision that reopens the case on the relationship between justice, law enforcement and responsibility.
The news went almost unnoticed, but the Milan Court of Appeal reduced the sentence to which Fares Bouzidi had been sentenced at first instance: 18 months instead of 32, one thousand euros in compensation for the civil parties instead of two thousand. Perhaps the name of this boy of Tunisian origin will not mean much to you, but he is the 24-year-old who, in Milan, two years ago escaped from a police checkpoint, becoming the protagonist of a crazy race through the streets of the centre. The escape ended against a traffic light pole and the friend who was traveling with him, Ramy Elgaml, lost his life in the accident. The Prosecutor’s Office had requested a conviction for resisting a public official and the judge for the preliminary investigations, having applied a reduction of one third for the defendant’s choice to be tried under the abbreviated procedure, had sentenced him to two years and 8 months, adding compensation of two thousand euros each to each of the carabinieri who, at the risk of their own safety and in fulfillment of an institutional duty, had been forced to chase him.
An ultimately light sentence, taking into account not only that Bouzidi had some precedents but, above all, because of his dead friend. Considering that vehicular homicide is punishable by a sentence of between two and 18 years, the Tunisian had ultimately gone well. But the young man’s lawyers, who at first instance had argued that the pursuit by the police was arbitrary and disproportionate, were not happy and appealed. And the judges, in part, agreed with them. The lawyers contested the application of the repeat offense, due to the fact that Bouzidi had two previous convictions for receiving stolen goods. According to them, since the crime for which the Tunisian was being tried was a different one, it should not have influenced the proceedings. The Court of Appeal, however, held that for the sentence to be aggravated it was not necessary for the crime for which he was on trial to be of the same nature. Nonetheless, he granted him a discount due to his young age and because he would have decided to change his living conditions by moving to another city. According to the judges, Bouzidi would have fled before the police stopped, endangering the lives of his friend, the soldiers and passers-by, due to an “emotional fragility” which would have led him to assume an “irrational and uncontrolled reaction, not determined by the desire to hide other crimes”.
The Court of Appeal itself recognized the seriousness of the damage and danger caused. «The escape», it is written in the second degree sentence, «took place at very high speed through the streets of Milan and the viewing of the videos in the documents demonstrates that in only one case did the accused not cause major damage to himself or others».
But, in the end, everything is paid off with a light sentence. It doesn’t matter that for months the carabinieri, for having done their duty, were accused of the death of Ramy Elgaml. Nor does it matter that, as a result of the accusations made against the members of the Army patrols involved in the pursuit, it will cost the soldiers more to pay their lawyers than they will receive in compensation from Fares Bouzidi. Thus it is irrelevant that a few months ago, i.e. in February, the young Tunisian was arrested for the theft of a motorbike, since having compensated the owner, a no-proceeding sentence was issued against him. I don’t know if Bouzidi has really changed his life, as the judges say; However, I wonder whether justice is the one that is understanding towards those who commit a crime, while being inflexible when it has to evaluate those who are called upon to repress it. The carabinieri who chased the twenty-four year old and his friend that night are accused of fraud and misdirection, because they did not fully report the facts. Two crimes for which the code provides for sentences ranging from three to eight years. In practice, the Carabinieri are at greater risk than those who, with “insane” behavior – so say the judges – caused Elgaml’s death as a direct, even if unwanted, consequence.
And I also ask myself: why must a representative of the police force risk his life, as did the traffic policeman who was killed in Milan, if justice is harsher on agents and carabinieri than on those who violate the law? The message that emerges from this is only one: dear policemen and soldiers, next time, when you see a criminal, turn the other way. You will risk less.
