It's a fiery post, that of Antonio Vassallo, son of the mayor killed on September 5, 2015 in Pollica.
The stages of the trial, and the decision by the judges of the Court of Cassation to censure the Salerno Review Court due to the serious evidence of Colonel Fabio Cagnazzo's guilt, prompted Antonio Vassallo – as he had done in recent days – to write a long post on his Facebook profile.
The Supreme Court of Cassation annuls and remands: "A new assessment of the serious evidence"
No comment except in contrast to the concluding part of the reasons given by the Supreme Court of Cassation, which asked the Review Court to rule again, and the evidence that emerged during the investigations and in the records of the trial against Colonel Fabio Cagnazzo and the other defendants.
A black-and-white account of Cagnazzo, highlighted by the victim's son and intended to broaden public awareness of the trial. A way of saying, "You be the judge," so everyone can form their own opinion on what's happening in the proceedings for the death of Angelo Vassallo, killed by a 9mm caliber gun on the evening of the 5th, also 10 years ago.
And so in the post Antonio Vassallo: “I am writing to you the concluding part of the reasons for the cassation for which the case is referred to the re-examination for a new evaluation.
The post without comments: only documents, minutes and reasons
The contested order is therefore annulled, and the case is remitted to the Salerno Review Court for a new assessment. The referring judge, composed of a different panel, will have to rule again on the existence of serious evidence of guilt, free to analyze the case under res judicata, with the sole limitation of adhering to the interpretation given to the legal questions and not repeating the flaws already challenged in the Supreme Court proceedings.
And here I attach just something regarding the investigations carried out in recent years.
Regarding the evening of the murder, CAGNAZZO was unable to provide an alternative reconstruction of the reasons for his departure from the centre of Acciaroli, having hypothesized, without any certainty, that he had gone to say goodbye to his daughter or other acquaintances:
“Question: Are you able to reconstruct what you did between 21:00 PM and entering Claudio VASSALLO's restaurant, which occurred around 21:30/21:35 PM, given that the documents show that you temporarily separated from the group starting from 21:15 PM and until approximately 21:38 PM?
The night of the murder and the 23 minutes without explanation
Answer: I'm unable to reconstruct my movements in the circumstances of time and place mentioned above. I can't rule out the possibility that I went to greet my daughter or other local acquaintances. I don't even remember whether that evening I "used the scooter, which, in any case, wasn't mine, a MOLARO one."
This reconstruction, however, was denied by the suspect's ex-wife, BASILE Roberta, who reported that she was not in Acciaroli on the evening of Mayor VASSALLO's murder, having left with her daughter on the same day or the day before.
Cagnazzo's version and his ex-wife's denial
“QUESTION: Where were you on September 5, 2010, the day Angelo VASSALLO, Mayor of Pollica, was killed?
ANSWER: Regarding the Mayor's death and the date of his killing, I can tell you that I was definitely not in Acciaroli. I say this because I remember learning about the Mayor's killing from the public media. I'm not sure, but I have the feeling that, in any case, I left Acciaroli on the same day as Angelo Vassallo's murder, or perhaps the day before.” (see Roberta BASILE report, 25/3/2024).
In essence, therefore, at a time compatible with the execution of the crime, Col.
CAGNAZZO left the diners, who he himself had significantly gathered that evening at Claudio VASSALLO's restaurant located in the centre of Acciaroli, where the victim had also been until a few minutes earlier, for approximately 23 minutes, a period of time for which he was unable to provide a reconstruction of his movements.
This was followed by an intense and meticulous diversionary activity, the dynamics of which revealed numerous elements that supported the prior agreement.
The officer, in fact, arrived at the crime scene shortly after the discovery of the body (which occurred at 1:47 am on 6 September 2010), engaging in conduct likely to cause a serious alteration, such as the removal of some evidence (shell casings), as described, in a convergent sense, by Claudio VASSALLO, who reported that the officer, to demonstrate that the murder weapon was "a 9mm caliber pistol", picked up a shell casing with a twig, showed it to him and put it back on the ground and by Marshal Cosimo PISPERO at the time on duty at the Pollica Carabinieri Station, who stated that as soon as he arrived at the crime scene, he noticed CAGNAZZO lift a shell casing from the ground, and then plausibly put it back on the ground in the same spot.
Furthermore, in the same context, Col. Cagnazzo was observed collecting cigarette butts around the car in which the body of the vassal mayor was found and placing them in a bag or a cigarette packet (see LA GRECA Angelo report 1/10/2019)
In this regard, moreover, Lt. Col. CAGNAZZO himself, interviewed on January 15, 2024, did not rule out having lifted some shell casings to show them to Claudio VASSALLO or to the journalists he himself contacted (“Question: Do you remember having searched for any shell casings and, if so, what preliminary activities did you carry out on them? Did you possibly collect them from the scene? For what reason did you contact the journalists? Answer: It is likely, because it was my usual practice to search for shell casings.
I also likely circled the location of the shell casings themselves. However, I exclude, as is reportedly stated by those present, that I picked something up from the ground and placed it in a bundle. Conversely, I do not rule out that I lifted some shell casings to show them to Claudio VASSALLO. I called the journalists because this was my usual practice.), thus confirming the sources.
The alleged cover-up and the "Brazilian" trail
In any case, a decisive element in decoding the officer's position was represented by the immediate channeling of the investigations to Bruno Humberto DAMIANI, known as "the Brazilian".
In this regard, Capt. DI SARIO Gianfranco, at the time Section Commander of the Salerno Investigative Unit, stated that, as soon as he arrived at the crime scene, he received clear investigative input from Col. CAGNAZZO, leading him towards the "Brazilian" ("I remember that as soon as I arrived, Col. CAGNAZZO accompanied me, who, accompanying me up the few meters to the car, gave me an initial overview of the situation, suggesting that I immediately go and check on a person he referred to as "the Brazilian" who he identified as a local drug dealer" see minutes 5/10/2021).
The report was, moreover, immediately collected by Captain DI SARIO who constantly informed Colonel CAGNAZZO of the developments of the investigation, as can be seen from the incoming messages on the morning of 6 September 2010".
The crux of the matter: fraud or good faith?
The issue highlighted by Antonio Vassallo in his lengthy social media post is also one analyzed first by the Court of Appeal and then by the Supreme Court of Cassation. That is, whether the alleged cover-up of Colonel Fabio Cagnazzo's actions before and after the murder of Angelo Vassallo was in any way deliberate. That is, whether his actions were merely vulgar errors of judgment and superficiality, or whether it was a "scientific" approach to divert investigators from the true culprits of the murder. In short, a way to "protect" the killers by tampering with the evidence.
Is this precisely one of the points highlighted by the Supreme Court: did Cagnazzo act maliciously or merely in good faith to assist his colleagues in the investigation? A question the Supreme Court, obviously, cannot answer. And while awaiting trial, if the preliminary hearing judge decides to commit the case to trial, no one else can answer.
Source EDITORIAL TEAM
Comments (1)
Antonio Vassallo's post prompts reflection on what happened that night of the crime. The investigation appears complex, and Cagnazzo's position is controversial. I hope the truth can be found in this sensitive case.