The prosecutor: “Environmental wiretapping proves queen”. The lawyer: “It’s not enough, the children hugged her”
One year and 6 months, with the granting of generic extenuating circumstances prevailing over aggravating circumstances. This is the sentence requested by the prosecutor Ilaria Iozzi for the teacher Valeria D’Alfonso, 58, resident in Gradisca, in relation to the mistreatment in a class of the elementary school of Farra.
The facts refer to the period from September 2016 to January 15, 2017. The investigations were launched after the mothers of two children were reported. The class had been subjected to environmental wiretapping. The prosecutor had asked the investigating judge for a precautionary measure for the teacher and the judge had ordered 6 months of suspension of the activity, subsequently canceled by the Review.
The accusation hypothesis had been that of continued ill-treatment, aggravated by having acted in violation of the duties inherent in the function of teacher and towards and to the detriment of minors. Representing the defendant, the lawyer Dario Obizzi, his colleague Elisabetta Brazzale supports the two families, who have become civil parties. The Ministry of Education, through the State Attorney’s Office, is called as civilian responsible.
The day before yesterday in front of the single judge Francesca De Mitri, the hearing was dedicated to the final discussion. The sentence is expected on April 1st. The prosecutor focused on environmental interceptions, “the main, genuine, unequivocal proof”, for the purposes of evaluating the judgment.
The cancellation of the Review, he noted, was based on the evaluation of other elements of the investigation, without the vision of environmental interceptions. And the investigating judge had considered his request for an evidentiary incident by listening to the children “superfluous”, considering those wiretapping “sufficient”.
“In my opinion, the conduct must be included in article 572 of the Criminal Code”, he stressed. He spoke of “violence” and “an intimidating context” in the classroom. “Certainly D’Alfonso is an excellent administrator and organizer, but this is not evidence,” he said referring to testimony given in the courtroom. And “irrelevant” is what happened later, like the letter of solidarity to the teacher signed by the other families. In the same vein, the lawyer Brazzale reiterated: «There was no complaint, nor complaint by the two mothers.
After the suspension of the teacher they were treated unfairly. Their intent is only to get to the truth. I think the evidential framework is clear, environmental interceptions integrate the existence of the crime ». The lawyer of the State Attorney, requesting the acquittal, spoke of “lack of proof of damage”, therefore believing that the State is not required to compensate.
Absolution with full formula requested the defender, who invited a “reflection on the merits” and an “objective evaluation”. The interceptions “had certainly been authorized by the investigating judge, but it was not enough”. While the Review canceled the suspension “since it did not consider the crime profile to exist”. About the video recordings, he said: «Out of a total of 180 hours, only 6 were transcribed.
What and what we saw was not clear ». He listed doubts, noting that the teachers in the hourly co-presence in the classroom had never encountered behaviors even only passable to communication to the school management. Is it “possible that in so many years of teaching no critical issues or reports have ever emerged?”.
The lawyer Obizzi continued: «The teacher wanted the pupil to be autonomous, not for homework to be done in his place. In addition, problematic children were identified and the teacher talked about them with the psychologist ». In short, “it must have been abrupt, but the pupils were fond of it. Did they hug her, would they do it if they were mistreated? ‘
© breaking latest news