In the bunker courtroom of the prison Santa Maria Capua Vetere, the maxi-trial involving 105 defendants, including prison police officers, Dap officials and ASL doctors, has brought to light new controversies regarding the management of video evidence relating to the prisoners' protest of 5 April 2020.
Video cuts: a defense weakness?
During the preliminary investigation phase, the consultant for the Prosecutor's Office made cuts to the videos of the protest, which took place in the Nilo section of the prison and arose from the news that an inmate had tested positive for Covid. According to the defendants' defense, these cuts would have deprived the lawyers of crucial details, such as the frames in which the inmates are seen transforming the legs of the tables into sticks.
Prosecution and defense: two contrasting versions
According to the prosecutors, the protest of April 5 was not a violent riot, but a normal demonstration with a barricade. The objects seized the following day, such as bars and sticks, would have been prepared by the agents themselves to justify the search and divert investigations into the violence.
The defense, on the other hand, claims that the inmates staged a full-blown riot, arming themselves with dangerous instruments. The full videos, which show the inmates brandishing table legs, would have been essential to their defense strategy, but they would not have been made available in time.
The consultant of the Prosecutor's Office: "Cuts on input from the Carabinieri due to the amount of material"
The consultant of the Prosecutor's Office, Pietro Izzo, confirmed in court that he had made the cuts to the videos at the request of the judicial police (Carabinieri), due to the enormous quantity of material to be viewed in a short time.
The issue of confiscated cell phones
Another issue concerns the defendants' cell phones, which were seized during the investigation. An expert appointed by the Court of Assizes is working to cleanse the devices of private chats and images, in order to protect the defendants' privacy.
The Prosecutor's Office had filed copies of the cell phones without deleting the personal material, forcing the Court to return the devices and appoint its own expert.
The case of Commissioner Costanzo's cell phone
Regarding Commissioner Anna Rita Costanzo's cell phone, it emerged that the consultants accessed it twice, not because of an alleged deletion of chats, but because the device was blocked, as demonstrated by her lawyer.
It's a complicated situation that of the trial, there are many things that don't add up, the cut videos don't seem to be fair to the defense. The prisoners deserve a fairer trial, but the evidence seems confusing.