Another serious acquittal – besides that of the Carabinieri del Ros despite “the sudden initiative” for the good of the State “- concerns the former senator of Forza Italia Marcello Dell’Utri who, like the carabinieri Mario Mori and Antonio Subranni, had been sentenced to 12 years. The “certainty of proof” is missing the accused “despite his heavy involvement in the pre-electoral and even post-electoral phase (with actions such as to abstractly assume relevance for a different type of crime, however covered by the intangible acquittal of which it was said intervened for the facts referred to in articles 110 and 416 bis of the criminal code subsequent to 1992) did not participate in the threat to the political body of the state. In other words, there is no proof that this accused, despite its ramified implications in the backgroundhas completed that blackmail / threatening project of which he too had full knowledge at the behest of the exponents of the Cosa Nostra and following his repeated interlocutions, which took place up to December 1994, in particular with Vittorio Mangano “.
Furthermore, “starting from the position of Marcello Dell’Utri – write the judges – it was possible to observe that there is no certain proof that he acted as an intermediary for communicate the renewed mafia / massacre threat up to Berlusconi when he was President of the Council of Ministers so going through what, due to simplification, can be identified continues the Court of Assizes of Appeal – as “The last mile” traveled which the crime would have been brought to fruition“.
THE ATTEMPT TO THREATEN THE STATE – Instead, the court upheld the convictions for the leaders Leoluca Bagarella And Antonino Cinà. “Even in the absence of proof of the spreading of the threat to the detriment of President Berlusconi, it is evident that the crime has stopped at the level of the attempt with a conduct that is attributed in these terms to the defendants Leoluca Bagarella and Giovanni Brusca … There is no doubt, in fact, that the blackmail project resumed in March 1994 by these subjects, after the arrests before Riina and later by the Graviano brothers (who had their own communication channel with Dell’Utri), was not completed, contrary to the will of Bagarella and Brusca themselves, only because – they write the judgments in the motivations – Dell’Utri did not convey (rectius: there is no evidence that he did) the threat to the Government “. On the other hand, that the conduct of the military has been there – including the omissions concerning the failure to search the Riina hideout and the unwillingness to arrest Provenzano – is also demonstrated by the confirmation of Cinà’s conviction. Riina’s doctor is accused of having been a postman to the papello, that is the sheet of paper with the requests made by the chief of the leaders to stop the massacres. That piece of paper was meant for Massimo Ciancimino, who would pass it on to his father Vito and by the latter it would then be handed over to the carabinieri. That of Cinà is the only sentence confirmed in full by the Court of Assizes of Appeal: it means that in this case for the judges the crime of violence or threat to a body of the state has consumed in a total way.
The judges – also accepting the results of the trials with a final sentence – believe that the contacts between Vittorio Mangano and Dell’Utri have been proven. But not that the message reached Berlusconi. Brusca, the judges recall, clarified that he had expressly instructed Mangano to suggest to the former senator that if he had not “made himself available”, the continuation of the direct and frontal attack on the state: “And to tell him if he is not available we will continue with the massacre line …“. But for the magistrates the following passage is not proven: “A problem, that of Berlusconi’s knowledge or not of the massacre threats aired by the Cosa Nostra, which goes through these periods and which is proposed again, although with decidedly different legal consequences, is in reference to the phase prior to May 1994 (when Berlusconi did not have government posts and therefore the threat to the political body of the State could not be integrated in this way) both after May 1994 (when the threat, if delivered to Prime Minister Berlusconi or to the detriment of other members of that government, could well have led to the crime in question being consummated) “.
BRUSCA’S TESTIMONY – The magistrates report Brusca’s statements in this regard: “He had to meet (Mangano / Dell’Utri, ed)) … the message was directed to Silvio Berlusconi, then on that occasion he didn’t tell me … but he only met Marcello Dell’Utri, then the next, if the message also reached Berlusconi, I have not had the opportunity to elaborate on this. The goal was Marcello Dell’Utri but the final point was Silvio Berlusconi “) but who, however, Dell’Utri undertook to take action in the direction requested of him (“That a little later he would be alerted for what their possibilities were. At that moment I ask … what do you say? I immediately ask for the activation for 41 bis, if they could do anything, but the main reason was to engage another political channel “). For the judges, therefore, also the fact that Brusca himself did not know if the message had been delivered is one of the elements of the lack of proof of the “last mile”.
Listens Mattanza, the massacres of ’92 as they have never told you. A podcast by Giuseppe Pipitone produced from Everyday occurrence.