Lawyers representing the defendants in the mass trial for the abuses in the Santa Maria Capua Vetere prison are appealing to the Constitutional Court to challenge the change in the president of the Assize Court, a decision made as the trial was nearing its final stages.
The replacement of magistrate Roberto Donatiello with the new president, Claudia Picciotti, is in the crosshairs, a measure the defense considers detrimental to the guarantees of a fair trial.
The issue of the change of president
The proceedings concern the violence against inmates that occurred on April 6, 2020, in the Santa Maria Capua Vetere prison. 105 penitentiary police officers, Department of Penitentiary Administration officials, and health workers are charged with the crime. The trial began in November 2022 and, after nearly three years of hearings, was entering its final phase, with the examination of the defendants now underway.
A few weeks ago, the Naples Court of Appeals ordered a change of presidency, replacing Donatiello – who had transferred to Naples – with Judge Claudia Picciotti.
It might interest you
Garlasco Murder: Andrea Sempio Speaks Out: "This Is Where I Was on August 13th"
Drug holding in Barra, "soft" sentences for the Ferrante Imparato street gang
Tragedy in Vomero: Compensation Arrives After 12 Years
Camorra, the "little twin" in the regency: how Paolo Abbatiello took over the Masseria Cardone
The hearing and the new defensive offensive
At the latest hearing, held after the November 24th adjournment due to the lawyers' walkout in protest against Donatiello's transfer, the new president immediately found herself faced with a flurry of motions. The lawyers submitted new requests for evidence, which could further extend the proceedings of an already complex and burdensome trial.
During the same hearing, attorney Giuseppe Stellato, representing former prison police commander Gaetano Manganelli, a prominent figure among the defendants, raised a formal question of constitutionality. At the heart of the question was the compatibility of the change of presiding judge at this late stage of the trial with the principles of due process and equality of the parties.
The road to the Constitutional Court
The issue, if deemed relevant and not manifestly unfounded by the panel, could be referred to the Constitutional Court for a decision on the rules governing the rotation of judges in such lengthy trials. For the defense, a change of presiding judge mid-trial impacts the continuity of the evaluation of evidence and the defendants' rights.
At the same time, the lawyers have filed a request with the Naples Court of Appeal for access to the order that ordered Donatiello's transfer and the resulting change of presidency. The request must be heard by the end of the year, while the maxi-trial remains suspended, balancing the delicate balance between the organizational needs of justice and the protection of defense rights.
Comments (2)
I don't understand why the judge needs to be changed now, after so much time. It's important that all the details are taken into consideration so as not to ruin the work done so far.
It's strange that the president has changed so late in the process; this could impact the final outcome and how all the material is evaluated. Justice must be clear.