It wouldn’t have been suffocation or even strangulation. On the body of Donato “Denis” Bergamini there are no signs that “point to a death by violent mechanical asphyxiation”. And the use of glycophorin it offers no guarantee in terms of the “scientific nature of the results”, especially if applied on thirty-year-old cadavers.
This, in short, is the thought expressed by Dr. Liliana Innamorato at the scene of the trial which aims to shed light on the death of the Cosenza footballer dated 18 November 1989. An affair for which she is accused at large, on charges of voluntary homicideBergamini’s ex-girlfriend, Isabella Internò, who was just nineteen at the time.
Innamorato was in the courtroom as a defense consultant. In his opinion, when the athlete ended up under the wheel of the truck driven by Raffaele Pisano he was certainly alive and not already dead as the prosecution claims. «This is demonstrated by the large quantity of blood present on the asphalt. A corpse cannot bleed so profusely.”
His objections then extended to the technique that the assassins allegedly used to kill him, the now famous “soft” choke, operated with a pillow or plastic bag. Impossible, according to her, because in that case Bergamini’s body would have reacted, highlighting signs that could not be hidden. Among others: petechiae under the eyes, cyanotic lips, small wounds in the mouth which, however, were completely absent.
Also on the possibility of a use of chloroform or other substances to narcotize the player, the consultant expressed strong doubts: “In that case, we would still have found bruises, redness or small burns on the nose or mouth.” And yet, it goes without saying, there is no trace of these signals either.
At the end, glycophorin, a substance with which other colleagues believe they have demonstrated the wounds sustained by Bergamini in the close encounter with the truck were “non-vital”, that is, he was already dead at the time of the collision. On this point, Innamorato produced copies of various scientific publications which attest to the still “experimental” nature of these methods linked to immunohistochemistry.
Nothing new, actually. To put in series the reliability of glycophorin is discussed, in fact, Francesco Maria Avato, the forensic doctor who carried out the first autopsy in January 1990 – and then Professor Pierantonio Ricci, in many ways in the dressed as a “repentant” given that, previously, he had been a consultant for part of the Bergamini family.
The novelty, if we want, lies in the reading of some passages of these reports, recited in the courtroom by the witness. Writings in which we invite you to handle “with caution” the theories on the vitality or otherwise of the lesions if transferred to the forensic and judicial field, to avoid “insinuations”. Among the authors, there are also the names of Vittorio Fineschi, Giorgio Bolino and Margherita Neri, but that’s it.
The prosecutor’s cross-examination Luca Primicerio it was quick if not quicker. Just a couple of questions, aimed at highlighting the lack of professional experience of Doctor Innamorato who still has no publications in international scientific journals. A gap that the interested party recognized without any embarrassment: «I let literature speak, I didn’t put anything of my own into it».
Moreover, she was still fresh from specializing in forensic medicine, in 2017, at the time of the exhumation of Denis’ body, when she received from Isabella Internò – or rather from her husband Luciano Conte – the task of representing the then under investigation Internò during the evidentiary incident.
At a certain point, however, Conte thinks of giving up his services, he entertains the idea of not appointing any consultant and relying on the judgment of the investigating judge’s experts. It emerges from different collections. During the investigations, in fact, Innamorato – as well as Internò’s lawyer, Angelo Pugliese – was intercepted several times in an “indirect” manner by the judicial police during the investigations. «Luciano, even after a long time, the body speaks», Innamorato says to Conte on 5 October 2017. And then again, with reference to the expert operations that were in full swing at the time, he fears findings that “raise suspicion”.
The cross-examination of the lawyer Fabio Anselmo, patron of the civil party, he focused on that dialogue to which, in recent years, he himself has given great media importance. For him, in fact, it is proof that even the defense consultant, at that moment, was aligned with the guilt theories.
None of this for the person directly concerned, who brought his way of expressing himself back to mere rhetoric. At the time, he had only seen the slides in which “the positivity to glycophorin was highlighted” and had deduced that his medical examiner colleagues, in particular those appointed by the investigating judge Teresa Reggio, intended “to give value” to that result. “Why then didn’t you immediately challenge the method chosen by your colleagues?” Anselmo asked her. «Because I have never used glycophorin”, was the answer, “and therefore I didn’t have the tools to contest them».
That conversation, however, also seems to refer to economic reasons, to an assignment in the balance and a fee under discussion. “I had not received any formal appointment” admitted Innamorato. In fact, from the interceptions it emerges how, in that period, Conte even thought of imitating Raffaele Pisano, who, as a suspect, had given up on bringing his own trusted consultant into the courtroom. To the fears that the doctor tries to instill in him over the phone, the policeman responds like this: “And if the body spoke, what should it say?”, “I’m very calm, we have a clear conscience.” He says he is convinced that the experts appointed by the judge “they will ascertain the facts as they are”, he deludes himself “there will be no trial.”
As already done for Avato and Ricci, The prosecutor’s office and the civil party then asked for a discussion between the defense consultant and those of the prosecution, Roberto Testi and Margherita Neri, both present in the courtroom. The President of the Court gave the green light, but with reference to only one technical aspect: the state of Denis’ lungs. The discussion is closed, however, regarding glycophorin. During the confrontation, just like with Ricci and Avato, everyone remained firm on their respective positions.
Previously, Innamorato also screened in the courtroom a homemade video, created by her, in which she ventures a possible dynamic of the investment that cost Bergamini his life. According to this reconstruction, purely hypothetical, the footballer could have gone down one or two seconds before the arrival of the truck which, while braking, would then have “pinched” him with its right wheel. All this, in his opinion, would be “compatible” with the version of the facts proposed by Isabella Internò.
For the rest, usual sparks in the courtroom between the lawyers: Angelo Pugliese and Pasquale Marzocchi on one side, Fabio Anselmo on the other. High decibels on several occasions, but still a chivalrous ending, with Pugliese giving the OK to move the next hearing (from 30th to 23rd May) so as not to hinder Anselmo’s electoral campaign. The latter, in fact, aspires to become mayor of the city of Ferrara. We return to the courtroom, therefore, in sixteen days for the so-called “507” phase, or the acquisition of new evidence and testimonies. Each of the parties involved will present their respective list. The first degree trial is now drawing to a close.
