Bologna - 9 e 31 ottobre 2021 - Prima parte
Indagini
40,414 views
The story of the deaths of Giulia Tateo and Isabella Linsalata and the trial of Giampaolo Amato, convicted in the first and second degree for aggravated murder, is complex and still controversial today. It is an investigative and procedural affair based essentially on scientific analyses of the two women's bodies, particularly toxicological analyses. Giulia Tateo, 87, and her daughter Isabella Linsalata, 62, were found dead in their beds in October 2021, twenty-two days apart. The autopsy found the presence of two substances used in hospitals in Isabella Linsalata's body: sevoflurane and midazolam, drugs used for anesthesia. Another drug, a benzodiazepine, was also found, which can also be found in pharmacies. Months later, Giulia Tateo's body was exhumed, and during examinations of the remains, traces of the same substances were found.
The Bologna prosecutor's office assumed that the two women had been murdered. Isabella Linsalata's husband, Giampaolo Amato, a well-known ophthalmologist in the city, was accused and arrested. Two opposing theories confronted each other during the trial. The prosecution alleged that Amato administered the drugs to the two women. The motive was his desire to live with another woman with whom he was having an affair without having to go through a legal separation that would have permanently separated him from his children. A financial motive was also alleged. The defense argued that Isabella Linsalata took the drugs herself because she was addicted to drugs. Giulia Tateo, however, had traces of the drugs left after a surgery she had undergone a few months earlier. The courtroom debate was primarily between the two sides' technical experts, who offered opposing interpretations of the data found, but also regarding the methods of taking the substances, their actual effects, and the timing of administration. The defense requested an appeal to reopen the trial with an expert opinion ordered by the court, but the judges rejected the request. This is a unique case: there are no precedents in the scientific interpretation of investigations and
homicide trials involving the use of those specific substances. This has made everything even more complex due to the lack of reference data. Above all, it is a case that highlights how scientific analyses often yield results open to opposing interpretations. It is then up to the judges to decide which interpretation to accept in order to reach a verdict "beyond reasonable doubt."
Giampaolo Amato was convicted in the first and second instance. The Supreme Court of Cassation has yet to issue a ruling.
You can subscribe here - https://abbonati.ilpost.it/?utm_sourc...
20 Comments
Mi piacerebbe sentire la storia di Silvia Caramazza. Sempre a Bologna -2013
Sono tutti medici, - compresa la seconda vittima - e nessuno si domanda come mai si addormenta sul piatto? E non si và a fondo? La futura vittima ha dei dubbi ma continua a bere le tisane preparate dal marito?
La madre potrebbe essere morta naturalmente, i fatto di aver trovato tracce dei farmaci potrebbe essere che la madre avesse chiesto alla figlia di aver qualcosa che la aiutasse per qualche problema, la figlia da alla madre le benzodiazepine, la madre muore per cause naturali.
La morte successiva della Signora, può essere frutto di un banale " incidente"
La Signora assumeva benzodiazepine e probabilmente ne abusava, per quanto riguarda il sevoflurano, liquido volatile, potrebbe essere stato in disposizione della signora che quella sera lo ha versato sul cuscino e si è addormentata appoggiandoci la testa sopra. Poi le interazioni tra essi hanno portato bad decesso.
Del resto i flaconi di liquido che erano nella stanza non sono mai stati analizzati.
Bologna - 9 e 31 ottobre 2021 - Prima parte
Indagini
40,414 views
The story of the deaths of Giulia Tateo and Isabella Linsalata and the trial of Giampaolo Amato, convicted in the first and second degree for aggravated murder, is complex and still controversial today. It is an investigative and procedural affair based essentially on scientific analyses of the two women's bodies, particularly toxicological analyses. Giulia Tateo, 87, and her daughter Isabella Linsalata, 62, were found dead in their beds in October 2021, twenty-two days apart. The autopsy found the presence of two substances used in hospitals in Isabella Linsalata's body: sevoflurane and midazolam, drugs used for anesthesia. Another drug, a benzodiazepine, was also found, which can also be found in pharmacies. Months later, Giulia Tateo's body was exhumed, and during examinations of the remains, traces of the same substances were found.
The Bologna prosecutor's office assumed that the two women had been murdered. Isabella Linsalata's husband, Giampaolo Amato, a well-known ophthalmologist in the city, was accused and arrested. Two opposing theories confronted each other during the trial. The prosecution alleged that Amato administered the drugs to the two women. The motive was his desire to live with another woman with whom he was having an affair without having to go through a legal separation that would have permanently separated him from his children. A financial motive was also alleged. The defense argued that Isabella Linsalata took the drugs herself because she was addicted to drugs. Giulia Tateo, however, had traces of the drugs left after a surgery she had undergone a few months earlier. The courtroom debate was primarily between the two sides' technical experts, who offered opposing interpretations of the data found, but also regarding the methods of taking the substances, their actual effects, and the timing of administration. The defense requested an appeal to reopen the trial with an expert opinion ordered by the court, but the judges rejected the request. This is a unique case: there are no precedents in the scientific interpretation of investigations and
homicide trials involving the use of those specific substances. This has made everything even more complex due to the lack of reference data. Above all, it is a case that highlights how scientific analyses often yield results open to opposing interpretations. It is then up to the judges to decide which interpretation to accept in order to reach a verdict "beyond reasonable doubt."
Giampaolo Amato was convicted in the first and second instance. The Supreme Court of Cassation has yet to issue a ruling.
You can subscribe here - https://abbonati.ilpost.it/?utm_sourc...