Ranucci Attack, the Review: Lavitola's Three Big Lies About the Attack

Rome – Omissions regarding the motive, unlikely statements about the ambush's details, and its political motive: the judges of the Court of Review have slammed Valter Lavitola's version of events regarding the attack on Sigfrido Ranucci that took place on October 16 of last year in Pomezia.

The judges censured Lavitola's statements in the 31-page reasoning with which the Rome Review Court denied the release of the fixer held in prison on charges of instigating the attack.

The discrepancy in the facts—according to the judges—is evident in at least three circumstances where Lavitola's version is not credible given the investigative findings: the inspection that took place on October 15, 2025, in front of Ranucci's house, the account of the ambush coordinated with his factotum, Gomes Clesio Tavares, and the alleged omissions regarding the motive, which—according to the magistrates—remains possibly politically motivated. Therefore, according to the judges, the hypothesis of mafia-related aggravation also holds up.

Lavitola's three lies: the investigation, the motive, and the method of the attack.

The first lie is said to have concerned the infamous September 15th inspection of Ranucci's home in Pomezia. Lavitola, accompanied by Gomes Clesio Tavares, wanted to ensure that the planned bombing would be successful. Lavitola, however, has always denied this, claiming he had "other commitments that day." However, cell phone records confirmed that in the early afternoon of that day, Lavitola and Gomes were outside Ranucci's home. Therefore, it was impossible for Lavitola to have met Ranucci, given that the journalist's cell phone had access to cells in other locations. Therefore, the judges concluded that the trip "was not intended to meet Ranucci," but to show Gomes where the bombing was to be carried out.

Gomes' loyalty excludes the hypothesis that he 'did things his own way' and chose the bomb

Another lie is that the first instruction given to Gomes was not to plant a bomb (a specific crime) but to "fire three or four gunshots." The judges, starting from the established fact of Gomes's absolute loyalty, deduce that this element was fundamental to his slavishly following Lavitola's instructions. It is "unbelievable," the panel explains, that Clesio Tavares would have changed the orders. And, besides, if the intent was truly simple gunshots, why even conduct an inspection?

The political motive to increase the journalist's popularity: the judges endorse the Prosecutor's hypothesis

Finally, there are the omissions regarding the motive, the reason why the ambush was planned. The judges seem to support—but definitive confirmation is lacking—the "political" lead, the one that seems to most convince Rome prosecutor Edoardo De Santis, investigating judge Iole Moricca, and the Carabinieri Investigative Unit.

According to the preliminary hearing judges, the bombing of Ranucci represented an extremely positive and favorable outcome for Lavitola's ambitious project. This was because, from Lavitola's perspective, the criminal act was intended to secure the journalist significant media exposure, protecting him from attempts to exclude him from hosting the Report program, and simultaneously guaranteeing visibility that could easily translate into broad electoral consensus.