Nada Cella, because the judge acquitted the defendants: “On Anna Lucia Cecere only suspicions and not clues, but Marco Soracco was there when his secretary was killed”

There are “no clues, but suspicions” regarding Anna Lucia Cecere, accused of aggravated murder. While as regards Marco Soracco and his mother Marisa Bacchioni, who had to answer to the prosecutor for aiding and abetting and false information, “the attempt to mislead the investigations emerges clearly from the documents”. Moreover. The Prosecutor’s Office, which, 24 years after the murder of Nada Cella, is convinced that it has found the killer in the now 55-year-old teacher, “covered” in turn by the accountant and his mother, would in fact not have “noticed” of alternative hypotheses “attributable to a more solid motive than the ephemeral ones and in any case not sufficiently proven nor susceptible to further development which would have led the accused to kill Nada Cella”.

In short, citing the Cartabia reform and the need for a “reasonable sentence forecast” already in the preliminary hearing to be able to send someone to trial, the magistrate Maria Angela Nutini in 43 pages of a sentence of “no place to proceed” demolishes the impressive work of pm, police and civil party. It embraces the defense thesis of Cecere’s lawyers, Giovanni Roffo and Gabriella Martini, and places its hand on Soracco, Nada’s employer for years who was the main suspect: «According to the public prosecutor’s own reconstruction, Marco Soracco was certainly present at the time of the murder of Nada Cella. The timetables, reconstructed above, seem to confirm this presence, together, it would seem, with that of a woman with a “non-youthful” voice”.

It is already written that the story is not completely over. The chief prosecutor Nicola Piacente announced on March 1st that “we will appeal”. But the prosecutor in charge of the file, Gabriella Dotto, will have to go back to every single element and explain point by point why in her opinion the judge is wrong in not wanting to send Cecere to trial.

The button

First of all, one of the elements on which the prosecution focused most: the discovery of a button at the crime scene that was practically identical to those found during a search at Cecere’s house. For the judge «the new investigations made it possible to overcome the profile of the different size but not that of the different color – bronze that found at the crime scene and dark gold those found in the accused’s home – but above all they did not take into account what had already emerged at the time, i.e. the absolute diffusion of very similar buttons on the market, used for the most diverse types of clothing”.

And witness

In the sentence there are also some passages in which the judge refers to eventualities that have never been encountered at the moment. In particular, speaking of the beggar and her son who said they had seen Cecere with his hand stained with blood on the day of the murder, but also regarding the testimonies of other people such as Cecere’s neighbor, the investigating judge writes that «it is it is very possible, if not probable, that at the time the name of the suspect had already been released … and that the news reported with the memories and stories relating to the murder”. Still on the subject of witnesses, the judge refers to the “report” of Cecere seen fleeing on a scooter from Via Marsala, and explains that «although the accused was the owner of a blue scooter, it was examined and no biological trace was found ». It should be noted that these are inspections carried out only in 2022, because in ’96 the vehicle was not even looked at.”

The Soracco-Cecere relationship

For the Prosecutor’s Office between Marco Soracco and Anna Lucia Cecere the relationship went beyond a few casual encounters in the ballrooms. So much so that, according to the prosecutor, Cecere would have killed out of jealousy and professional resentment towards Nada, and Soracco would have covered for Cecere because by doing so he would have indirectly protected his firm from investigative investigations into working circumstances known to Nada.

The judge instead writes that “it is absolutely not proven in any other way that Anna Lucia Cecere had a serious relationship with Marco Soracco nor will they be able to raise new elements at the hearing, given the time that has passed and the number of witnesses already heard”. The phone call in which Cecere tells Soracco “I have never been in love with you” is also mentioned. But instead of seeing it with the same eyes as the prosecution and the civil party – the lawyer Sabrina Franzone assists Nada’s mother, Silvana Smaniotto – she analyzes the dialogue underlining «certainly the outburst of today’s accused, recipient of the house search, evidently convinced that his involvement in the affair could derive from Soracco’s conviction of her interest in him, which she took care to categorically deny, highlighting on the contrary a feeling of disgust towards the man”.

Longform

The prosecutor: “On the day of the crime, the fleeing murderer Anna Lucia Cecere was mistaken for the victim Nada Cella by a key witness, they were extraordinarily similar.” Thus, after 28 years, the errors become evidence

by Giuseppe Filetto, Marco Lignana, Marco Preve

January 15, 2024

Soracco present at the time of the murder

If the sentence describes Cecere as an “angry” woman, but struggling with a difficult life and crushed by an investigation against her which led her to leave Chiavari, the opinion towards Soracco and her mother is very different Bacchioni. Indeed, for the first time a judge, therefore a third and impartial party, «according to the public prosecutor’s own reconstruction, Marco Soracco was certainly present at the time of Nada Cella’s murder. The timetables, reconstructed above, seem to confirm this presence, together, it would seem, with that of a woman with a “non-youthful” voice.

“But he too must be acquitted”

It goes without saying that the accountant. defended by the lawyer Andrea Vernazza, he has always denied having anything to do with the crime, but that he found Nada dying in the office. The judge therefore explains why not even he, although reticent and the author of misdirections, cannot be sent to trial: «Marco Soracco was asked to answer the questions relating to aggravated murder, an imprescriptible crime for which he had already been investigated twice, he could not it is certain to foresee that the public prosecution, while placing him in the place at the time in which it was committed, would have resolutely excluded any involvement in the crime, even only in terms of moral involvement, and this legitimized him to remain silent. The same goes for her mother, at least with a view to protecting her son.”