The appeal presented by Umberto Pietrolungo’s lawyers will be discussed at the Review on Friday 28 June 2024. The man, 58 years old, originally from Cetraro, in the province of Cosenza, is considered by the Vicenza public prosecutor’s office to be the alleged killer of Pierangelo Fioretto and Mafalda Begnozzi. According to the accusations, he was one of the two hitmen who, in 1991, killed the couple near their home in Vicenza
The lawyers of the Calabrian, believed to be close to the ‘Ndrangheta clan “Muto” of Cetraro, believe that the circumstantial framework is non-existent and contest the precautionary measure in prison issued by the investigating judge of Vicenza.
Years later, we remember the recent developments of the investigation, based on the progress of forensic science on the subject of assessment of DNA profilesled to linking the code found on some findings from the Vicenza case to those that emerged during some judicial police investigations carried out by the police in Calabria and Liguria, the region where Pietrolungo resided for a long time.
“We believe Pietrolungo to be the material perpetrator of the double murder“ the chief prosecutor of Vicenza had said, Lino Giorgio Brunoduring a press conference flanked by the deputy prosecutor of Vicenza, Hans Roderich Blattnerthe director of the Mobile team of the Vicenza Police, Lorenzo Ortensi, Pamela Franconieri of the Central Operational Service and member of the Unsolved Crimes Unit (Udi), e Daniela Scimmi of the Scientific Police.
“As in any murder case – he added – it is necessary to distinguish between the material author and the principals, where the two qualifications do not coincide in the same person. We believe we have identified one of the material authors. In particular – he precised –the author of the shots fired against the person of Fioretto and his wife.
Cas investigators we would like to exclude the possibility that this is a person with a personal interest of his own, of a specific reason with respect to the murder. There is a second perpetrator and the task is to identify him.
The investigative hypothesis is that the two were not the bearers of this interest and therefore different, additional interests stand out on the scene, for which however, unless there are current contributions, we must refer to what were the investigative acquisitions at the time and with high probability to the professional interests of Foil, especially the most important ones.
Attention, let’s not make the mistake of believing that the Muto clan was the instigator. I didn’t say it and it’s not written anywhere. At the moment we have no elements to affirm that the Muto clan could directly or indirectly constitute a causal reference”.
The Vicenza lawyer Pierangelo Fioretto, 59 years old at the time, was a very well-known professional in the city. He had in fact followed important events on the subject corporate and bankruptcy and was a consultant for important companies operating in the Vicenza area.
