Perché la vicenda GARLASCO mi fa ORRORE (e dovrebbe far orrore a tutti) | Avv. Giuseppe Di Palo

The Garlasco case has returned to the center of public debate following the latest news about Andrea Sempio and the proposed review of Alberto Stasi's conviction. But the real question, perhaps, isn't just: "Who took Chiara Poggi's life?" The most uncomfortable question is another: what does this story tell us about the way we conduct trials in Italy, report on trials, and transform criminal investigations into television entertainment? In this video, I attempt to analyze the Garlasco case on three levels. The first concerns Alberto Stasi's conviction and the issue of reasonable doubt: when a trial is based on evidence, the rule cannot be "he appears guilty," but "the liability is proven beyond reasonable doubt." The second concerns the investigation: because when, after almost twenty years, an investigative reconstruction seems to need rethinking, the problem isn't just procedural, but systemic. The third, perhaps the most serious, concerns the media trial. For years, Alberto Stasi has been transformed into a narrative culprit. Today, the risk is to do the same with Andrea Sempio, replacing one media-sponsored culprit with another. And this, in a constitutional state, cannot work. Because criminal law is not a TV series. And behind every media-sponsored case, there are real people, real lives, real families, and a real victim: Chiara Poggi. #GarlascoCase #AlbertoStasi #AndreaSempio