Question and answer between Gian Carlo Caselli and Francesco Damato

Question and answer between Gian Carlo Caselli and Francesco Damato

Gian Carlo Caselli's letter to Start Magazine

Dear manager,

I am writing with reference to Francesco Damato's “Graffio” that Start magazine published on April 3rd.

I thank Damato, without rhetorical pretenses, for the esteem he declares to me, apart from the disappointment that causes him "the insistence" with which "as many as you want (I) claimed the guilt" of Andreotti for collusion with Cosa Nostra until 1980. Unfortunately I have to disappoint him once again, because this is not (if anything, there are others …) a case for which I could think of "a bit of remorse".

Without hesitation, I repeat in fact that the incontrovertible procedural truth is this: the Supreme Court (28.12.04) definitively and irreversibly confirmed the sentence of the Court of Appeal (2.5.03). You can make up as much as you like, but what makes the text is the disposition of the sentences. And now "it is cassation" (as it was once said to indicate something that can no longer be doubted) what is written in the device of the appeal sentence, then confirmed – in fact – by the device of the Cassation. And that is that until the spring of 1980 the accused had "committed" (sic) the crime of conspiracy with Cosa Nostra. Crime prescribed due to the time elapsed by its commission but still “committed: as shown by the concrete and safe evidence listed in the motivation (it can be found on the internet). Only after 1980 does one speak of acquittal (albeit in the form of a doubtful fact), but not even a bit before this date. So to argue that a defendant was "acquitted for committing the crime" is not only a legal error: it is also an oxymoron contrary to logic and common sense. And then the stubborn "irreducible" like me would go at least … understood.

Especially since there is no defendant in nature who appeals in cassation against the sentence that declares him not guilty. Andreotti instead appealed and the cassation rejected him and sentenced him to pay the costs. Moreover, apart from the device, the cassation writes verbatim: "At the conclusion of the above discussion, it is hardly necessary to add that, in relation to the facts dealt with [up to 1980], the Court of Appeal applied the prescription with the non-secondary consequence that, here, its ruling could be annulled only if the proof of the accused's innocence was evident, a situation that the above, in any case, does not allow to affirm ". Legal aside, it means that until 1980 the accused was guilty.

Thanks for your attention

Cordial greetings

Gian Carlo Caselli



“Frankly, I did not expect a different response from Giancarlo Caselli, even if desired. Each remains of his own opinion, in the hope on my part, as a good Christian, that divine justice is better than earthly justice ”. ( fd )

This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL on Thu, 08 Apr 2021 05:05:08 +0000.