Condemns Davigo, the reasons: “He lost institutional rigour. He could not receive and disseminate secret reports”

“The almost carbonate ways in which” Piero Amara’s Word-format reports on an alleged Hungarian Lodge came out “from Doctor Storari’s investigative perimeter”via a USB stick delivered to the then member of the Superior Council of the judiciary Piercamillo Davigo, in his “private home (…) and the precautions” by these “adopted on the occasion of the disclosure to the councilors – which took place in the courtyard of the CSM, prudentially leaving mobile phones in offices – appear symptomatic of the loss of an institutional posture”.

It is one of the key passages of the reasons with which the first criminal section of the Court of Brescia, chaired by Roberto Spanò, last June 20 sentenced the former councilor of Palazzo of the Marshals accused for disclosure of official secrecy. On the other hand, the same accusation for which the Milanese public prosecutor was definitively acquitted, who had given those sensitive papers to Davigo to protect himself, according to him, from the inertia of the top management of his office: a short circuit had been created between the two synergistic mutually misleading”, stated the judges, despite “in the trial it was not possible” to clarify “what really happened”: in particular, “whether that of the replacement was really a ‘self-made’ initiative or there was instead some inspiring mentor, as well as some passages left in the shade would suggest”.

Furthermore, according to the panel, which accuses Davigo of “disclosure incontinence”, the selection criteria he adopted “in choosing the custodians of the secret were very varied but, in no case, could they be linked to legal purposes”. So much so that “the trial investigation has shown how the circulation of news outside the official circuit has remained confined (or at least it should be) to the level of personal relationships and has had no external outlet at an institutional level” In moreover, the panel points out, “numerous indications – and not ‘an objectively paranoid reconstruction’ – suggest that Dr. Davigo may have been aware of the content of the statements by lawyer Amara even before the material delivery of the minutes by Dr. Storari, where it actually took place only in April 2020”.

This circumstance has led us to believe that “even the early days of the matter now under examination appear to be shrouded in opacity” since, it is noted, “it seems unlikely, for example, that” the prosecutor ” before delivering the minutes (…) has not consulted with some Milanese colleague (…) It is clear that the proof of any interference that occurred within the Milan Public Prosecutor’s Office – continues the deed – would end up opening up a significantly different scenario from what emerged in the process” which saw, among other things, “a veritable extermination of documents, evidence, chats, e-mails, telephones, pen drives and e-mail addresses which did not allow the events to be fully traced “.

As for the hypothesized motive, Davigo “used the theme of alleged Masonic membership to make scorched earth around Dr. Ardita”, his colleague and co-founder with him of Autonomia e dipendenza and whom he will have to compensate with 20 thousand euros. However, it did not come to the surface with “a sufficient degree of certainty that he instrumentally first obtained – and then disclosed – Amara’s minutes” with the intention of doing harm, “animated by a conscious will to make an accusation that he knew was false due to personalism or retaliatory intent due to disagreements that arose in the past with the ex-friend”. Now the appeal by the ex prosecutor of Mani Pulite and the second round of appeal are awaited.