In October 2007, an anonymous note on Chiara’s tomb accuses a certain “Marco”. Other interceptions and shadows on the Garlasco case
Some words arrive from the past like loose splinters, incapable of finding an order. Like those of October 2007, when, on the door of the chapel where Chiara Poggi rests, in the Garlasco cemetery, an anonymous piece of paper appears. A few lines, no signature. «It was written that Marco killed Chiara»says Rita Preda (Chiara’s mother) on the phone with the lawyer Gian Luigi Tizzoni, lawyer for the Poggi family. An interception filmed by Maria Conversano on her YouTube channel. That note, like many other ambiguous messages received by the family, could be the work of a mythomaniac seeking attention. Or not.
The name without surname
«Marco», therefore. Only the first name, no last name. Tizzoni, on the other end of the line (intercepted by the investigators), tries to understand: “Could it be Panzarasa?”. Marco Panzarasa, Alberto Stasi’s friend with whom the lawyer had had a meeting at the soccer field a few days earlier. Rita Preda replies dryly: «I don’t know, she doesn’t say her surname». The message remains suspended, like many other details of this story. It is impossible to establish whether behind those words there was really someone who knew, or just the morbid desire to fuel the pain of an already devastated family. Yet, that trace exists. And it exists at a time when the investigations were taking a very specific direction.
The mysterious conversation
Because something else also emerges in that phone call, perhaps more important than the ticket itself. There was already, in that October 18 years ago, a route mapped out. A direction towards which the investigators looked with ever greater insistence: Alberto Stasi. Rita Preda confirmed this to Tizzoni, saying that the boy really went to the cemetery in secret, as reported by a local newspaper. The lawyer invites her to keep her distance, not to be seen close to him. He explains the reason with disarming clarity: «At the beginning they had taken a bit of a path, now…But I’ll say again: if there are no footprints of strangers, whatever happens It’s really hard for Stasi to prove that it’s not himbecause, in the end it is true that one may have used gloves and many things, but in the meantime a few footprints like this… like the one in the bathroom, which means that he went to wash himself.”
The Garlasco crime seems to have always carried with it a sort of «cross of convictions». It was like this when the gaze was turned solely and exclusively towards Alberto Stasi, definitively condemned. It seems to be the same today, with Andrea Sempio under investigation but with many steps, many details, many facts that appear suspended in a limbo between what can be demonstrated and what remains a simple suggestion. All kinds of narratives have been built around this crime, media fortunes based on the “curiosity” (sometimes precious, but more often misleading) of those who continue to question themselves, to dig, to doubt. A rather perverse popular curiosity, where a disturbing case of crime news like that of Garlasco becomes a regular bar topicchat with friends. It would almost seem that, instead of a murder, we were talking about the last championship match of one’s favorite team.
