“The structure could offer its services in compliance with anti-Covid regulations”

Court – Prefect Bruno in trouble over a wedding – The defense of the entrepreneur Stefano Caporossi speaks – The preliminary hearing has been postponed again

by Silvana Cortignani

Viterbo – The prefect Giovanni Bruno Viterbo – Stefano Caporossi The lawyer Giovanni Bartoletti

Viterbo – Former prefect under investigation for forgery and abuse of office, the preliminary hearing scheduled for yesterday before the preliminary hearing judge Giacomo Autizi has once again been postponed.

This is the request for indictment resulting from two investigations by the prosecutor’s office relating to a “forbidden” wedding reception dating back to 24 April 2021 during the pandemic and the recount of the ballot papers from the elections for the mayor of Corchiano on 4 October 2021.

After the postponement from 7 March to 18 April, this time the date is 20 June, following an impediment of the accused, the former prefect of Viterbo, Giovanni Bruno. In addition to Bruno, defended by the lawyer Enrico Valentini, two entrepreneurs, Stefano and Lorella Caporossi, owners of the Parco dei Cimini agricultural company in Soriano nel Cimino, are also accused in the refreshment affair under Covid, defended by the lawyers Giovanni Bartoletti and Luigi Mancini .

Stefano Caporossi’s defender, lawyer Giovanni Bartoletti, in the meantime has prepared a brief in which he first of all reiterates that his client “did not participate in the organization of the event nor was he present at it”.

The story is the well-known one of the “forbidden wedding”, celebrated on 24 April 2021 by a married couple who, “to overcome the restrictions imposed by the health emergency” according to the accusation, asked a friend who had an entrepreneurial activity with VAT number to “forward a request to the structure, indicating availability for the holding of a company meeting as the reason and purpose of the request”.

Caporossi, as is known, is accused in conjunction with the former prefect. “There is not the slightest evidence in the documents that he could have agreed with the then prefect to carry out a wedding instead of the event that had been authorized – says the lawyer Bartoletti in this regard – the circumstance that between the two suspects there was a good friendship, in the absence of further evidence, certainly cannot constitute proof of a pactum sceleris”.

He then underlines: “The exact opposite emerges from the evidentiary framework. In fact, the telephone records revealed the absence of calls between the suspects in the period surrounding the facts referred to in the indictment”.

“If the prefect had really been aware of the real intentions of wanting to organize a wedding he would have reasonably recommended waiting until the following Saturday to carry out the event in full compliance with the law (…) moreover, if there had been an agreement between the investigated, it would be truly unreasonable for the prefect to transmit the provision to all the institutional bodies responsible by law for carrying out anti-covid checks. Sending the authorization to the police headquarters, provincial carabinieri command, provincial financial police command and local police command of Soriano nel Cimino would, with extreme probability, have led – as in fact it did – to verifying compliance with the protocols and regulations anti-Covid”.

Furthermore, according to the defence, “the hospitality activity could be carried out in compliance with the maintenance of interpersonal distancing, protocols and guidelines”.

“As far as the prefect was concerned – explains Bartoletti – it was a matter of authorizing a work activity (company meeting with photo shoot), not suspended at the time of the facts, with the administration of the meal exclusively for the guests of the accommodation facility (maximum 65 people ). The provision authorized an activity lasting several hours (from 11am to 8pm), therefore it could be deduced that it was not a simple lunch, but rather a real hospitality service consisting of organizing and carrying out a company meeting and a photographic service for the requesting company at an accommodation and agritourism facility, which could offer its services in compliance with anti-Covid regulations”.

“Moreover, the prefect, recommending in his provision ‘compliance with the requirements set out in the regulatory provisions containing the anti-Covid 19 measures in both cases’, considered in scrupulous detail both the hypothesis of ‘providing the requested service in the external spaces gardens and porticoes of approximately 3000 m2″, is the hypothesis in which ‘if it is not possible due to adverse climatic conditions to use the external spaces, the existing spaces of approximately 400 m2 equipped with sliding windows will be used’, having thus verified the possible realization of the measures provided for by the provisions in force”.

In conclusion: “The provision issued by the prefect did not authorize an exception to the law, but only acknowledged an activity that was already permitted by law (that of accommodation facilities and catering services for companies). Therefore, even if there had been no intervention from the prefecture, the corporate event could have been held.”

Silvana Cortignani

Articles: Former prefect of Viterbo investigated for forgery and abuse of office, preliminary hearing postponed – Prefect Giovanni Bruno investigated for forgery and abuse of office defends himself: “No violation of the law, I feel offended party” – Wedding during the pandemic and elections in Corchiano, the prefect Giovanni Bruno under investigation

Presumption of innocence

In the Italian criminal system the presumption of innocence applies until the final sentence. Presumption of innocence which is based on article 27 of the Italian constitution according to which a person “is not considered guilty until finally convicted”.

April 19, 2024