«In relation to the press release from the Giunta di Anm Trentino Alto Adige and the press articles relating to the affair of 9 August 2023, I was contacted on my personal telephone by a journalist from La Verità to whom I immediately told that I was not issuing any statement. In the face of his comment on the dangerousness of the suspect, I thought it appropriate to keep the conversation on a courtesy relationship, with the intention of explaining concepts of a legal nature inherent in the criteria of objectivity and fairness that underlie the judgment of social dangerousness of the subject . All in a conversational and informal way, using representative examples useful for making people understand what I wanted to express».
The recorded conversation
It is the note that the prosecutor of Rovereto, Viviana Del Tedesco, sent yesterday, 11 August, to the advocate general of the Trento Court of Appeal, Markus Mayr.
The intention is to appease the storm that exploded on Thursday, when some of his statements regarding the murder of Iris Setti and the man arrested for the crime were published in the pages of La Verità. Now the investigations conducted by Del Tedesco could have passed under the scrutiny of the Superior Council of the Judiciary, which could therefore decide to also examine the words of the prosecutor, who in the note speaks of never having imagined “that the conversation was recorded, even because – he writes again – there was an interlocution based on mutual reflections where there were neither questions nor answers. I reiterate that I did not leave any interviews with this journalist and that these are words stolen from him, who had no authorization to publish”. Finally, Del Tedesco considers herself «disappointed that the words of an interview deemed friendly and confidential were published as an extract in the press for which it was in no way intended».
The finished sentences under the magnifying glass
Among the reasons for the controversy, on which the Minister of Transport Matteo Salvini also expressed himself, were some statements that Del Tedesco would have released on Nweke’s physical appearance («He’s spectacular. That guy there had to do the Olympics»). What is missing, however, would be the considerations with which the prosecutor would have specified how the same element can be evaluated in a subjective or objective way: for example, the fact that Nweke went to the park to play sports with commitment transpired precisely from his muscles, which therefore it became an element demonstrating the care that the 37-year-old Nigerian reserved for himself. In short, according to Del Tedesco the man, showing himself in perfect physical shape, would not have corresponded to the stereotyped image of the homeless or the drifter. Another disputed point is that which concerns the obligations to sign: to La Verità the prosecutor would have explained how the violation that occurred on a specific occasion was not serious (“He had gone out to do the shopping”) and precisely to explain himself he had emphasized on Nweke’s punctuality (“He was always punctual, if today’s students were punctual at school we’d be on horseback”); Del Tedesco, here, would have liked to underline how undergoing regular checks is undoubtedly an element in favor of a subject on whom pending precautionary measures or court obligations, punctuality is then a characteristic rewarded right from the high school desks. As far as evasion is concerned, the prosecutor then attempted to explain how that definition includes both escapes from prison or house arrest – and yes, those are punished with an immediate increase in the sentence – and simple delays due to unforeseen events, such as the one to do the shopping, in fact; for the latter the evaluation is less immediate, more elastic, and takes into account the general attitude, which precisely in this case was characterized by punctuality.
The pm and the reference to art. 27 of the Constitution
Until before the murder, Nweke was a person considered under control by the judiciary, who in the past had also received a Map (Probation). In the words of the prosecutor reported in La Verità (“He did it because it is required by law and he committed minor crimes”), Del Tedesco intended to justify that the MAP provides for a prognosis also of a favorable type in the concept of “social danger”, which must be given for crimes within a certain damage threshold, otherwise it would not be granted. Threshold that today has increased with the Cartabia law, where recourse is had to “putting to the test” to reduce the chances of prison if the facts do not provide for it. The prosecutor then referred to article 27 of the Constitution, which underlines how personal freedom is supreme and that clear elements are needed before repressing it. For this reason, the judiciary cannot act like a sports fan, siding on one side or the other, but must instead act like a third party, weighing up the pros and cons. Therefore, read between the lines, that of the public prosecutor would be a reprimand for the journalist of La Verità: immediate judgments, such as those that flew after the horror of Nikolajewka park, cannot be those with which the judiciary expresses itself, which instead has the obligation of more in-depth evaluations.
Nweke’s family commentary
Finally, the article in La Verità also reads a comment relating to Nweke’s family members (“It is true, in 2022 he had an excess of anger when he went to visit his wife at home to see her children, now his shares are in the records. But where was the family? He was a person who didn’t see the children. He was probably desperate»). In this case, the prosecutor would have reiterated that she did not want to judge the sisters, who had not said anything to the prosecutor until the episode this July. According to Del Tedesco, no more requests for help arrived on her table. And none of the sisters would go to the police to explain what happened.
Finally, 15 days passed between 23 July, the date of the quarrel in his sister’s house, and 6 August, the day of the murder, too short a time for the judge to clarify the matter exactly. According to the prosecutor, no person can make judgments about another’s life, one can only evaluate the facts. And then, if it is true that Nweke will be tried for the murder in which he is the only accused, no one should have the right to comment on his existence before that fact.