SISTER – On January 31st of this year they arrested her for aggravated theft, that is, stealing methane gas for an estimated value between 7 thousand and 10 thousand euros, and electricity (value not estimated), forcing the seals closed in 2014 and 2018. But the judge acquitted her, because “there is no element to be able to affirm the defendant’s responsibility”, a 33-year-old mother, Romanian by nationality, who lives in that house with her partner, her three children and her in-laws. The facts. At 10.20 in the morning of January 31st, the carabinieri intervened at the house where the technicians of Aspm – Servizi Soresina srl, the company that manages the electricity and gas supply in the town, were observing the theft of electricity and gas from the network for the benefit of the defendant’s family home.
In particular, as regards electricity, the meter had been inactive since 14 May 2014 “and was overcome by a cable that connected directly to the network”. Regarding gas, the meter was sealed on 3 September 2018, “but was then forced”. That morning, “at the time the workers entered”, the woman was at home with her three children, the lights were on, the heaters were running, and the gas meter measured current consumption. But “no further investigative activity appears from the file sent by the prosecutor”, writes the judge in the reasons for the acquittal sentence at the defendant’s trial.
The lawyer Simona Bracchi
The woman ended up in handcuffs. After the arrest, defended by the lawyer Simona Bracchi, had explained that he knew nothing about the theft of electricity and gas. «My tasks at home include paying water bills, internet bills and taking care of my three children. For the rest I don’t know anything». Acquitted, because, the judge notes in the justification for the sentence, “the electricity meter was deactivated in 2014 and it is not known who, on that date, was living in the house and in what capacity”. Because “it is not known who and when operated the bypass of the electricity meter using a special cable”. Because “it has not even been ascertained who the owner of the utilities in question is to date.” And finally because “there are two other adults living in the property who, like the accused, could have had an interest in not paying the costs for electricity and gas”.
«In other words – continues the judge – the responsibility of the accused cannot be automatically deduced from the completely contingent circumstance that she was inside her home at the time of the intervention of the Aspm technicians and the carabinierihaving, on the other hand, to ascertain who actually carried out or, in any case, arranged the tampering that led to the subtraction of the resources, which did not happen in the case in question”.
And “lastly, irrelevant is the possible awareness on the part of the accused – in any case not demonstrated given that it was not clarified in which place the meters were located and whether they were visible to all residents – of the alteration which had taken place that complicity in the crime cannot be confused with mere connivance or ex post approval of the illicit conduct of others or with indirectly profiting from it”. Hence, the accused’s acquittal from the charge of aggravated theft of gas and electricity for not having committed it.
