Nineteen years after the murder of Chiara Poggi, the Garlasco case continues to move along an increasingly clear line: it is not so much the discovery of new finds that divides the prosecution and defense, but rather the meaning to be attributed to those that already exist. And in this phase the most delicate terrain returns to be that which, since the reopening of the investigation into Andrea Sempio, has concentrated a decisive part of the investigative attention: the genetic material recovered under the nails of the young woman killed on 13 August 2007 in the house in via Pascoli.
The defense of the thirty-eight year old, investigated by the Pavia Prosecutor’s Office for Chiara’s murder, is in fact insisting on the hypothesis that the presence of material compatible with the male genetic line of the Sempio family does not demonstrate a contact that occurred during the attack, but can be explained through phenomena of secondary transfer or contamination. An apparently technical distinction, but destined to have enormous weight if the investigation were to transform into a new trial, because the prosecution and defense are building two almost opposite readings of the same element on the DNA.
The DNA under Chiara Poggi’s nails
Geneticist Marina Baldi, Sempio’s defense consultant, explored the topic of DNA transfer, recalling scientific studies on the possibility that biological material can pass from one person to another even indirectly, through objects, surfaces and normal daily contacts. The consultant does not dispute that the legible markers may be compatible with the suspect’s paternal lineage, but underlines another aspect: the one available would be a profile scarce, incomplete and mixedcharacteristics which, according to the defense interpretation, would prevent us from establishing with certainty not only who left that trace, but above all how and when it arrived on the victim’s nails.
And this is precisely where the conflict is concentrated. In fact, compatibility with the Y chromosome of the Sempio male line does not in itself equate to an individual identification of Andrea Sempio: a profile of this type can be shared by men belonging to the same patrilineal line and the quality of the material recovered, degraded and limited, has long been at the center of disputes by specialists.
However, the Pavia Prosecutor’s Office attributes a completely different meaning to the trace when it includes it in the set of elements collected during the new investigation. In the accusatory reconstruction, Chiara would have reacted forcefully to the attack and the material left under her nails would be compatible with a scenario of direct contact with the murderer. The DNA, therefore, is not read in isolation but together with the palm print 33, the checks on the footwear, the statements made over the years by Sempio and the other elements that the magistrates have included in the file.
Two interpretations that start from the same data and arrive at opposite conclusions: for the prosecution that trace takes on value within a broader circumstantial mosaic, while for the defense its scientific weakness would prevent it from being transformed into evidence of a contact that occurred during the murder.
The issue of September 28th
The looming date for the investigation is now September 28, 2026deadline indicated by the Pavia Prosecutor’s Office itself for the expiry of preliminary investigations. The notice of conclusion of the investigation had already been notified to Sempio on May 7, but the filing by the defense of various technical consultancies led the magistrates to order further investigations, precisely to verify the scientific solidity of the objections raised by the suspect’s experts.
Among the investigations ordered by the Prosecutor’s Office there is also the consultancy entrusted to the forensic psychiatrist Roberto Catanesi to evaluate, on the basis of the available documentation, any relevant conditions with respect to the capacity of understanding and will at the time of the facts and the personality of the suspect. Sempio subsequently decided not to directly undergo the examination of the specialist appointed by the prosecutors, while the consultant can proceed on the basis of the writings, documents and other materials acquired.
It is therefore improper to speak of a certain process already today. At the conclusion of the further investigations, it will be up to the Prosecutor’s Office to determine the next step, while a possible request for indictment would open a new phase in which a judge would evaluate whether the elements collected are sufficient to arrive before a Court.
And it is precisely on this passage that the defense is preparing, trying to dismantle the elements contained in the accusation one by one rather than simply proposing an alternative reconstruction of the murder.
Alessandro Biasibetti returns to the Pavia area, but there is no new investigation
In the climate of permanent attention that now surrounds anyone who has had a relationship with Chiara Poggi, Marco Poggi or Andrea Sempio, the return to Pavia of Alessandro Biasibettimember at the time of the same company of friends as Chiara’s brother and Sempio.
Now a religious man and deacon, Biasibetti was seen first in the church of Garlasco and then in Tromello, where he assisted the priests during the celebrations. A presence that immediately fueled hypotheses about his possible return to the area just as the investigation enters a delicate phase, but which is not linked to new investigative acts: according to what was reported by ANSA, Biasibetti was in the Pavia area following invitations received as part of his religious activity and his pastoral assignment in the diocese of Vigevano and Lomellina is not expected.
However, his name remains linked to the investigations because in March 2025 he was interviewed as a person informed of the facts. He had reported being in the mountains with Marco Poggi on the day of the murder and his genetic profile had been acquired, together with those of other people not investigated, to carry out the necessary comparisons in the context of genetic tests.
The distinction is fundamental: his presence in Garlasco and the surrounding area constitutes an element of the news, not a new investigative lead.
Andrea Sempio loses his job at the end of August
Outside the courtroom, meanwhile, the investigation continues to have consequences on the life of the only suspect. From August 31st Sempio will no longer work in the telephone shop where he was employedbut the dismissal is not a consequence of the criminal proceedings: it is linked to a change in management of the business and also concerns three other employees.
A re-hiring by the new manager remains possible, even if there are no certainties at the moment. Sempio had returned to work after a period of holidays and leaves and in recent months he had already left the rented apartment in Voghera, returning to live with his parents.
It is an element foreign to the judicial evidence, but significant for understanding how much the new investigation has transformed a criminal case into a media phenomenon capable of affecting every aspect of the lives of the people involved.
And Alberto Stasi prepares the revision
It inevitably remains at the bottom Alberto Stasidefinitively sentenced to sixteen years for the murder of Chiara Poggi and since last June out of Bollate prison on probation with social services after more than ten years of detention. His sentence, however, remains fully valid: the opening of the investigation into Sempio did not cancel or suspend the final sentence pronounced against him.
Stasi’s defenders are working on the request for review, while the developments of the Pavia investigation inevitably represent the material on which to build a possible new attempt to call the verdict into question. The same Public Prosecutor’s Office of Pavia has also sent documentation to the General Prosecutor’s Office of Milan so that it can be evaluated from an audit perspective.
This is perhaps the most difficult judicial paradox to ignore: for the same murder there is a definitive conviction against Alberto Stasi and, at the same time, another Prosecutor’s Office has constructed an accusatory hypothesis which identifies Andrea Sempio as the perpetrator of the crime. Until one of the two constructions is modified through the instruments provided by law, both will continue to coexist on different legal levels.
The Garlasco case enters its decisive phase
Behind the impression of a case in which a new element seems to emerge every day, the game being played is therefore much more precise. The investigation has now produced a definitive accusatory reconstruction, the defense has responded with consultancy aimed above all at contesting the scientific aspects and the magistrates are verifying those objections before making their next decisions.
The DNA under Chiara Poggi’s nails has become its symbol because it perfectly shows the distance between the two positions: genetic compatibility is a given, the meaning to be attributed to it is the question still open.
And it is on this difference, much more than on the umpteenth suggestion raised around Garlasco, that the next chapter of a crime for which, nineteen years later, already exists a definitive judicial truth while a new investigation continues to question its reconstruction.
