Rome – "The bombing was Gomes Tavares' idea; I had given a blank cheque. And my friendship with Ranucci was a social redemption for me." These are some of the spontaneous statements Valter Lavitola made to the judges of the Rome Review Court this morning, via videoconference from Rebibbia prison.
The fixer accused of instigating the attack, which took place in Torvaianica, in the municipality of Pomezia, on October 16 of last year, complied with the advance warnings and made spontaneous statements during the hearing requesting his release from prison or house arrest.
Lavitola to the preliminary hearing: "I did all this to protect Ranucci. A blank for Gomes Tavares."
"I did all this to protect Ranucci from an attack I had heard about. It was so necessary to protect him that for two months after the October events, I called Ranucci to ask for increased security." His defense attorneys, Sergio and Arturo Cola, reported the content of the statements made at the hearing. According to their lawyers, "the political motive alleged by the Rome Prosecutor's Office is unfounded. Based on what Lavitola reiterated today, Ranucci never intended to run for office or enter politics. In fact, Ranucci often complained that Lavitola brought up the matter."
Regarding the details of the attack, Lavitola reiterated that he had given his handyman, Gomes Clesio Tavares, a blank warrant: "The bomb attack was Gomes Tavares' idea, for which I take full responsibility. Gomes advised me he would do it his way, without telling me it would be a bomb. I had given a blank warrant, specifying that he was not to harm anyone."
A relationship of great friendship that could have rehabilitated Lavitola's figure
During the closed-door hearing, which lasted about three hours, the Cefalù Bistro entrepreneur said that "I had a great friendship with Ranucci, and I hoped this relationship could also rehabilitate me and bring me social redemption."
His lawyer, Artuto Cola, reiterated to reporters as they left Piazzale Clodio that "the friendship between Ranucci and Lavitola remains very sincere, and the host knew nothing, nor did he ever suspect anything. A political motive is out of the question."
The defense: release from prison or house arrest in Basilicata, no risk of escape
Valter Lavitola's lawyers have requested that his prison detention be replaced with house arrest in a home in Noepoli, Basilicata, rented by his son. "After the interrogation on July 8th, Lavitola, through our firm, communicated all his movements to Colonel Ferrara, placing himself completely at the disposal of the investigators. It is false, as Lavitola himself has already claimed in his spontaneous statements, that he purchased a ticket to escape: that trip was related to a service conference that was never held in person," explain Arturo and Sergio Cola.
"We're not just requesting it because we believe the deadline has expired, but above all because the precautionary measures have ceased to apply: there's no longer any risk of escape or evidence tampering. The investigation is now solidified by the confessions, the calls from accomplices, and the other evidence gathered."
Furthermore, according to the lawyers: "The arrest of the perpetrators cannot have caused Lavitola any fear of arrest because, as emerged from the investigation documents and the interrogations of the co-defendants, the perpetrators had only had dealings with Clesio Tavares and did not know the identity of the instigator, whom, in fact, they will only speak about in prison after the publication of the news of the search suffered by the appellant."
Lawyers file brief: Lavitola attacked in prison
The defense has submitted a defense brief to the judges requesting his release or house arrest, citing the attack the suspect suffered in prison. "Based on his confession, Lavitola was attacked by inmates, and the Penitentiary Police at Rebibbia prison made a note regarding the attack, and co-defendant D'Avino also made statements during his last interrogation by the prosecutor," the document states.
Explosives detonated in Sperone, Avellino province; trial to be transferred to Naples
Another issue raised today by the defense is the territorial jurisdiction of the investigation and trial—not Rome, but Naples. "Territorial jurisdiction over the investigation falls to the Avellino Prosecutor's Office, not the Rome Prosecutor's Office, since the alleged crime allegedly began in Irpinia," reads the 72-page brief filed today. They also argue that the explosive used in the attack originated in the municipality of Sperone, in the province of Avellino. "Since this is a permanent crime like the illegal possession of weapons, jurisdiction would therefore fall by law to the Campania capital and, by district attraction, to the Naples Prosecutor's Office."
We have raised three legal issues: the ineffectiveness of the pre-trial detention order; territorial jurisdiction, as we believe the Rome prosecutor's office lacks jurisdiction; and finally, the contested aggravating circumstance of mafia methods. Our intention is to demonstrate that there are no precautionary requirements regarding the risk of escape and the tampering with evidence.
The decision of the Court of Review is expected by September 10th.
