Split Thread The Sarah Scazzi murder case

The trail is on-going and we have been following the once a week hearings at IIP. The prosecution is trying to build a motive of jealousy with the first few witnesses and now has moved to opportunity with witnesses changing testimony to better fit a changing TOD.

Franks latest post at the shock on 26 February talks about this and the similarities with some other case.
 
New Perugia Shock entry

Frank Sfarzo compares the murder of Sarah Scazzi with the murder of Meredith Kercher. "Sabrina and Cosima will be convicted, as everyone is always convicted in the first degree trial. It will take years to clear the charges: in the appeal trial, in the Supreme Court revision or, after that, in a new trial, held in another venue, on that faraway day, when real judges will not care about the opinion of the lynching crowd, and will be fair.
Then yes, all the press will follow…." I hope he is wrong, but I suspect that he is right.
 
halides1 said:
Frank Sfarzo compares the murder of Sarah Scazzi with the murder of Meredith Kercher. "Sabrina and Cosima will be convicted, as everyone is always convicted in the first degree trial. It will take years to clear the charges: in the appeal trial, in the Supreme Court revision or, after that, in a new trial, held in another venue, on that faraway day, when real judges will not care about the opinion of the lynching crowd, and will be fair.
Then yes, all the press will follow…." I hope he is wrong, but I suspect that he is right.
Click to expand...

Such a powerful article Crhis. I like this part:

The trial became the opposite of a trial: the protagonist continuously accuses himself and the prosecution tries to prove him innocent. An absurdity, the most unbelievable trial in the world.
Click to expand...

I have been following this trial and the prosecutions slow once a week or even every other week hearing with a parade of witnesses that said absolutely nothing to show guilt, and now Michele confesses, for about the 112th time, and the court defends him yet again and the experts change their testimony, and anybody that disagrees is charged with just about anything. What a terrible, horrible case this is and what an injustice.
 
halides1 said:
Frank Sfarzo compares the murder of Sarah Scazzi with the murder of Meredith Kercher. "Sabrina and Cosima will be convicted, as everyone is always convicted in the first degree trial. It will take years to clear the charges: in the appeal trial, in the Supreme Court revision or, after that, in a new trial, held in another venue, on that faraway day, when real judges will not care about the opinion of the lynching crowd, and will be fair.
Then yes, all the press will follow…." I hope he is wrong, but I suspect that he is right.
Click to expand...

RoseMontague said:
Such a powerful article Crhis. I like this part:



I have been following this trial and the prosecutions slow once a week or even every other week hearing with a parade of witnesses that said absolutely nothing to show guilt, and now Michele confesses, for about the 112th time, and the court defends him yet again and the experts change their testimony, and anybody that disagrees is charged with just about anything. What a terrible, horrible case this is and what an injustice.
Click to expand...

Geez, I was just wondering about this one the other day too. Thanks for the update, I hope Frank is wrong.
 
Well, I don't think either that Michele killed Sarah regardless of his latest confession.
And I'm not an Italian first degree court. :-)
 
Here is what the prosecution asked for yesterday:

For murder:
Sabrina Misseri Life
Cosima Serrano Life

For hiding the body, etc.
Michele Misseri 9 years
Carmine Misseri (Michele's brother) 8 years
Cosimo Cosma (Michele's nephew) 8 years

For obstructing justice, etc.
Vito Russo (Sabrina's ex-lawyer) 3 years 6 months

The florist's entourage for perjury, etc.:
Cosima Prudenzano (florist's mother-in-law) 3 years
Antonio Colazzo (florist's brother-in-law) 3 years
Giuseppe Nigro (florist's friend) 3 years

And they requested investigation of some others, among them Ivano Russo, for perjury, obstructing justice, etc.
 
Last edited:
I had been waiting for Michele's lawyer's closing argument which was yesterday.
I was curious how he would argue for a self confessed murderer and at the same time spare Sabrina.

Well, his argument is that Michele was confused when he accused himself, as he is basically a good man who should be released free.

So not only the prosecution, even his own lawyer does not buy his confession.
 
Last edited:
bolint said:
I had been waiting for Michele's lawyer's closing argument which was yesterday.
I was curious how he would argue for a self confessed murderer and at the same time spare Sabrina.

Well, his argument is that Michele was confused when he accused himself, as he is basically a good man who should be released free.

So not only the prosecution, even his own lawyer does not buy his confession.
Click to expand...

Isn't his lawyer's job to convince people that his client's confession wasn't true? Why would Michele's Lawyer put the blame on his own client and take it off someone else, that seems sort of like the exact opposite of what a defence lawyer is being paid to do...
 
PhantomWolf said:
Isn't his lawyer's job to convince people that his client's confession wasn't true? Why would Michele's Lawyer put the blame on his own client and take it off someone else, that seems sort of like the exact opposite of what a defence lawyer is being paid to do...
Click to expand...

Sure, it is a lawyer's job, but he can't do it without hurting the other two.

And Michele maintains his confession and clearly wants to save the two women.
Can a lawyer go against his client's wish?
 
Just signing in to get this insane case on my list of subscribed threads and to take my hat off to the dedicated team of folks who are prepared to follow a case in another language aided only by google translate. Like following a trial that's being held at the bottom of a well.
 
bolint said:
Sure, it is a lawyer's job, but he can't do it without hurting the other two.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that he could have, but why would he? The best way to remove blame from your client is to dump it onto someone else, why would you pick a total unknown rather then the perfect targets provided?

And Michele maintains his confession and clearly wants to save the two women.
Can a lawyer go against his client's wish?
Click to expand...

imnal, but I'd suggest yes, if it is in the best interests of the client.
 
It's a dense week.

While the events of the Perugia murder case dominate the news, the Misseri trial is also achieving its climax. Today is Sabrina's closing argument day, then probably next week the prosecutors' replies and then the sentencing.

There was a smaller turmoil. Last week a TV microphone recorded the conversation of the two judges and it sounded that they had already made up their mind on guilt.
Of course the lawyers protested vehemently and the two judges recused themselves from the trial but then the chief judge of the court decided that they should proceed, there will be no new judges.
 
Does anyone know of any further news in the Sarah Scazzi case?
 
You know it is too bad Frank has gone all quiet. He was great for this kind news. Darn shame really. Ahhh why just the two crazy Italian cases? What about the Italians arresting the scientists for not predicting an earthquake? Or the Italians considering reopening the case against the Narducci family...another Mignini "work of art"? I wonder if there are any sane Italian judicial cases? That seems to be an oxymoron.
 
Today also spoke the lawyer of the civil party, ie. the victim's family.
It was none other than Nicodemo Gentile of the ubiquitous duo Biscotti-Gentile, defenders of Rudy Guede.
They appeared also in another high profile case, the Melania Rea murder case.
Their client was Melania's husband accused of the murder. Unlike Rudy, he received life in the first degree trial.

At the Scazzi trial today Gentile disposed of Michele's self-accusation saying Michele is an invertebrate man, one without spine, who is afraid of the women in his house.
 
bolint said:
Well, the verdict was expected yesterday evening but the court is still deliberating.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your updates, Bolint. How do you think the verdict will go, and what do you think of the case?
 
Kaosium said:
How do you think the verdict will go, and what do you think of the case?
Click to expand...

It is the fourth day they are deliberating yet they could not reach a verdict so far.
How could I guess seriously? :-)

Unseriously I'm leaning to think that the women will be convicted.
But it is a close call. Especially vague is Cosima's role.
But I don't believe Michele's confession and thus to me it is impossible that Cosima was out of it.
Those accused of having helped Michele in disposing of the body may get away.
The florist's entourage probably will be acquitted or get some mild penalty.

As for Michele, he will definitely be sentenced to long years, just to make sure.
I think he (or somebody else) did rape the body, but at the time of the confession he did not know that the autopsy would not find usable evidence in that regard. When he learned that there was no proof, he recanted.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom