Yara Gambirasio: the child’s death without neither purpose nor consolation

There was conducted another judicial (or rather extra-judicial) experiment, in the interest of Massimo Bossetti and on behalf of his wife Marita Comi – a team of experts conducted by Carlo Infanti and Arles Calabrò on November 26th, 2019 left in the open air a piece of clothing contaminated with traces of DNA, intending to analyze it on February 26th, 2020, in order see how the weather might have modified it. However, after such a long period from the homicide, the traces resulted illegible and on June 3rd, 2021, all the claims of the lawyers were rejected by the court.

Apart from the fact that personally, if the lawyers had turned to my Italian Private Detective Agency, I would not have conducted the experiment in the open air, but in a laboratory, in order to make sure (having access to all the historical meteorological data) to reconstruct, day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute, exactly the same temperatures and humidity which were observed in the period of three months in which the DNA is supposed to have remained frozen. Nevertheless, a similar experiment is belated and useless – it would not let for any appeal or revision; also, because there lacks the only necessary prerequisite, that is the certainty that the little body of the girl remained outside all this time.

In order to exonerate the accused, supposing that he was innocent, a lawyer, a criminologist, an Italian Investigation Agency or a geneticist would have to find a proof which changes completely the foundations of charges, clearly showing the extraneousness to the fact of the condemned or of another convict, or demonstrating enormous in procedendo or in iudicando errors.

For 30 years of career as the owner of the Italian Private Detective Agency licensed to defend in criminal investigations, I have been able to notice that unfortunately in Italy there is an unwritten rule according to which the more lies or simply the more inconsistencies you say to the investigators, the more probably it is that you are going to be found guilty (regardless of the motivations that pushed you to lying or to being confused).

Unfortunately, this rule applies only to the lies and the omissions of the accused. When the Public Prosecutor’s Office makes a mess, like it happened with the video of the Bossetti’s truck or with the remains of DNA of “Unknown 1” & “Unknown 2”, nobody had the power or will to use it in order to censor such approximation. Then (almost as wanting to make it up to him) the judge Giovanni Petillo permitted to the lawyers of Massimo Bossetti, Claudio Salvagni and Paolo Camporini, to take a look (only a look) on the clothes that Yara was wearing the evening of her murder; but it seems to me a ridiculous consolation prize. Let’s be clear – I truly admire how the Advocate Claudio Salvagni was fighting for his client regardless of the disequilibrium prosecution-defense and I wish he had found something.

In 2015, when the process against Bossetti was just beginning, one of my friends from the Police told me during a supper that he had been designated by high places to follow the hearings and to refer them. Knowing my friend and his professional qualities since I opened by first Italian Investigation Agency, I told him that the task they had assigned him seemed to me as they were not convinced of having caught the right person. My friend avoided responding, asking me how I found the vegan restaurant chosen especially for me, but this change of topic confirmed my suspicion.

Recently, after the condemnation of Massimo Bossetti, I asked my friend once more if he was convinced of his guilt and this time he confirmed it, giving me also extensive explanations. I really trust in the judgement of my friend, but the case still surely has many uncovered areas.