Involuntary Witness
Page 6
Witness replied: The house of the missing boy’s grandparents is situated at about 300 yards south with respect to my bar. If I am not mistaken, it stands almost opposite Duna Beach.
Witness replied: I am unable to indicate with any precision the hour at which I saw the non-European citizen pass. It might be between 18.00 and 18.30 hours or perhaps even 19.00 hours.
Witness replied: I did not observe the non-European citizen pass on his way back in the opposite direction. That day I did not see him again at all.
Witness replied: If I remember rightly, I learned of the disappearance of the child the day subsequent to the fact. Before being summoned by you carabinieri I had not been aware of being in possession of information relevant to the inquiries, and that is to say it had not occurred to me to connect the passing of Thiam that afternoon with the disappearance of the child. If it had occurred to me, I would have presented myself of my own accord to collaborate with the law.
I have nothing more to add and in witness thereof I append my signature.
Cognizance is taken of the fact that the present statement, due to the unavailability of recording equipment, has been drawn up only in summary form.
Read, confirmed and undersigned.
The evidence given to Cervellati was complete, in the sense that it was recorded and stenotyped. Here the person in possession of the facts did not use improbable expressions such as “the aforesaid commercial premises” or “purchase and consume a coffee”. But the upshot was the same.
On 13 August 1999 at 11.00 hours, in the offices of the Public Prosecutor, and before the Prosecutor Dr Giovanni Cervellati, assisted in the drafting of the present document by legal clerk Biancofiore Giuseppe, there appeared Antonio Renna, whose particulars are already documented.
It is here noted that the present statement will be documented in full by means of shorthand typing.
Question: Well then, Signor Renna, some days ago you made a statement to the carabinieri. The first thing I want to ask you is whether you confirm it. You remember what you said, don’t you?
Answer: Yes, yes, sir.
Question: So you confirm it?
Answer: Yes, I confirm it.
Question: Let us, however, recapitulate what you said. In the first place, I take it you already knew the non-European citizen Abdou Thiam?
Answer: Yes, sir. Not by name, though. The name I learned from the carabinieri. I recognized him from the photograph they showed me.
Question: You know him because he often passed in front of your bar and on some occasions had something to drink. Is that so?
Answer: Yes, sir.
Question: Would you care to tell me about the day the child disappeared? That day, that afternoon or evening, you saw Thiam, didn’t you?
Answer: Yes, sir. He passed my bar between half-past six and seven.
Question: Did he have his bag of goods?
Answer: No, he didn’t have the bag and he was rushing along.
Question: Do you mean that he was running or that he was in a hurry?
Answer: No, he was hurrying. It wasn’t that he was exactly running, but he was walking quickly.
Question: In which direction was he going?
Answer: Towards the beaches, which is more or less the direction to take to the child’s grandparents’ house—
Question: All right, towards the beaches. That means from north to south, if I have understood correctly.
Answer: Yes, from Monopoli towards the beaches. Question: Did you see him pass on the way back?
Answer: No.
Question: You told the carabinieri that you knew the boy, and his family also, particularly the grandparents. Do you confirm this?
Answer: Yes, I confirm it. The grandparents have a villa 300 or 400 yards past my bar, more or less in the direction the young Moroccan was going.
Question: Moroccan?
Answer: Non-European citizen then. We use the word Moroccan for all these young niggers.
Question: Ah, I see. Do you recall any other detail, any other fact relevant to the inquiries?
Answer: No, sir, but in my opinion it absolutely must have been that Moroccan because—
Question: No, Signor Renna, you must not express personal opinions. If some other fact comes to mind well and good, if not we can bring this statement to an end. Does any other specific fact come to mind?
Answer: No.
Abdou’s interrogation by the public prosecutor was little less than catastrophic.
It had taken place at night, in the carabinieri station in Bari, with a defence lawyer appointed by the court.
The report was a summary, without recording or stenotyped record.
On 11 August 1999, at 01.30 hours, in the offices of the Operations Unit of the Carabinieri of Bari, before the Public Prosecutor Dr Giovanni Cervellati, assisted in the drafting of the present statement by Sergeant Sciancalepore Pasquale, attached to the Carabinieri of Monopoli, there appeared Abdou Thiam, born 4 March 1968 in Dakar, Senegal, and domiciled in Bari, Via Ettore Fieramosca 162.
Note is made of the presence of Avvocato Giovanni Colella, appointed for this occasion by the court to defend the said Thiam, the latter not having chosen to appoint a lawyer of his own.
The Public Prosecutor charges the said Abdou Thiam with the offences of unlawful restraint and murder of Francesco Rubino and gives him a summary of the evidence against him.
He informs him that he has the right not to answer questions, but that the inquiries will continue even if he does not answer.
The suspect states: I intend to answer and expressly renounce any time for defence.
Counsel for defence has no observation to make.
In answer to questioning, the suspect replies: I deny the charges. I am not acquainted with any Francesco Rubino. This name means nothing to me.
Suspect replies: On the afternoon of August 5th I believe I went to Naples in my car. I went to visit some fellow countrymen of mine whose names I am, however, unable to indicate. We met, as on other occasions, in the neighbourhood of the Central Station. I am unable to provide useful indications for the identification of these fellow countrymen of mine and I am unable to indicate anyone in a position to confirm that I was in Naples that day.
Suspect replies: I refuse to admit that I went to Monopoli that day. When I returned from Naples, I remained in Bari.
Suspect replies: I take cognizance of the fact that Your Excellency points out to me that the version I have provided appears totally unworthy of credit. I can only confirm that I went to Naples that day and never went at all to Monopoli or adjacent areas.
Suspect replies: I take cognizance of the fact that there is a witness who saw me in the vicinity of Capitolo on the very afternoon of August 5th. I take cognizance of Your Excellency’s advice that I should make a confession. I take cognizance of the fact that by confessing I might mitigate my situation. I must, however, confirm that I did not commit the murder of which I am accused and do not understand how anyone says that they saw me on August 5th in the vicinity of Capitolo.
At this point it is placed on record that the suspect is shown a photograph found in his lodgings in the course of the search there carried out.
Having viewed the aforesaid photograph, Thiam states:
I know the boy portrayed in the photo but I learn only now that his name is Francesco Rubino. I knew him by the name of Ciccio.
When questioned, the suspect replies: It was the little boy who gave me the photograph. It wasn’t me who took the snap. I don’t even own a camera.
At 02.30 hours the taking of the record is suspended to enable the suspect to consult with his defence counsel.
At 03.20 hours the record is resumed.
When questioned, the suspect replies: Even after talking to the lawyer – who advised me to tell the truth – I have nothing to add to the statements I have already made.
The defence had no observations to make.
Read, confirmed and signed.
Since then he had not been further interrogated.
I re-read the order for precautionary detention. I read the decision of the regional appeals court by which – rightly, in view of the evidence – Abdou’s appeal was rejected.
I read and re-read every single document.
The statements of the habitués of that beach who said they had often seen Abdou stop and talk to the child. The statements of the Senegalese who spoke about the car-washing and the other Senegalese who had said that he had not seen Abdou at the usual beach the day after the child’s disappearance.
The scene-of-the-crime report about the finding of the boy’s body. The report of the search of Abdou’s home and the list of books confiscated.
The report of the police doctor, which I leafed through swiftly, avoiding the photographs.
The upsetting, useless statements of the boy’s parents and grandparents.
On the Sunday evening my eyes were smarting and I left the flat. The mistral was blowing and it was cold.
That pitiless cold peculiar to March, which makes spring seem a long way off.
I had thought of taking a stroll, but I changed my mind, fetched the car and headed north along the old State Road No. 16.
Bruce Springsteen was booming from the loudspeakers and in my head as I drove through the coastal towns, all deserted and swept by the north-west wind.
I stopped in front of the cathedral in Trani, facing the sea. I lit a cigarette. The harmonica screeched in my ears and in my soul.
The terrible words were written especially for my desperate solitude.
But I remember us riding in my brother’s car
Her body tan and wet down at the reservoir
At night on them banks I’d lie awake
And pull her close just to feel each breath she’d take
Now those memories come back to haunt me
They haunt me like a curse.
At dawn I woke up shivering with cold, the taste of tobacco smoke in my mouth. My hand was still clutching the mobile, which I’d stared at interminably before falling asleep, thinking of calling Sara.
12
The code of criminal procedure requires that at least twenty days elapse between the announcement that inquiries have been concluded and the application for committal for trial. The public prosecutors nearly always take much longer. Months, sometimes.
Cervellati filed the request for committal on the twenty-first day. Obsessive punctuality was typical of him. You could accuse him of practically everything, but not of letting documents stack up on his desk.
The preliminary hearing was fixed for early May. The judge was Ms Carenza, and all in all it could have been worse.
Among us defence lawyers La Carenza was considered one of the good ones. The shortened procedure became an increasingly interesting possibility. Abdou really did have a chance of getting off with twenty years.
In about 2010, with good conduct, he would be out on parole.
While I was having these thoughts, still holding the note with the date of the hearing, I had an uneasy feeling. A feeling that stayed with me all day long, without my being able to find a reason for it.
The same uneasy feeling took hold of me when, a week later, I had to visit Abdou in prison to explain to him why it was to his advantage to accept the shortened procedure, take twenty years or so instead of life, and begin chalking up the days on the wall of his cell.
Abdou was, or seemed, thinner than last time. He didn’t want to tell me how he had come by the enormous bruise on his right cheekbone. As he listened to what I had to say, he looked at the grainy lines in the wooden table, without making a single gesture suggesting that he’d understood or wondered what I was talking about. Not so much as a nod. Nothing.
When I had finished explaining what was the best solution for his case, Abdou remained silent for several minutes. I offered him a Marlboro but he didn’t take it. Instead he pulled out a packet of Diana Red and lit one of those.
He spoke only when he had finished the cigarette and the silence was becoming unbearable.
“If we choose the shortened procedure, have I any chance of being acquitted?”
He was just too intelligent. With the shortened procedure he would be found guilty for sure. I had not told him that but he knew implicitly.
I felt awkward as I replied.
“Technically, yes. Theoretically, yes.”
“What does that mean?”
“It means that in theory the judge could acquit you, but on the basis of what is in the documents produced by the public prosecutor, which is what the judge will base her decision on if we opt for the shortened procedure, it is extremely unlikely.”
I paused, and came to the conclusion that I didn’t feel like beating about the bush.
“Let’s say that it’s practically impossible. On the other hand, with the shortened procedure you’d avoid—”
“Yes, I’ve understood that. I’d avoid a life sentence. In other words, if we choose the shortened procedure I am certain to be convicted but they’ll give me a discount. Isn’t that it?”
My embarrassment grew. I felt the blood rising to my face.
“Yes, that’s it.”
“And if we don’t choose this shortened procedure, what happens then?”
“You will be committed for trial before the Court of Assizes. This means you will be tried in public before two judges, and six jurors, who are ordinary citizens. If you are found guilty by the Court of Assizes, you are in danger of life imprisonment.”
“But I do have a chance of being acquitted?”
“A slender one.”
“But more than with the shortened procedure?”
I didn’t answer at once. I took a deep breath. I passed a hand across my face.
“More. Not much more, but more. Bear in mind the fact that with the shortened procedure you are practically certain of being found guilty, whereas before the Court of Assizes something can always happen. All the witnesses have to be questioned by the public prosecutor and then we can cross-examine them. That means that I, as your counsel, can cross-examine them. One of them might not confirm his evidence, one of them might contradict himself, some new factor might arise. But it is a very grave risk.”
“What are my chances?”
“Hard to give a figure. A 5 or 10 per cent chance at the best.”
“Why do you want to choose the shortened way?”
“What do you mean, why? Because it’s the thing that suits the case best. With this judge you get off with the lightest possible sentence, and in—”
“I didn’t do what they say I did.”
I took another deep breath, got out a cigarette. I didn’t know what to say, so naturally I said the wrong thing.
“Listen, Abdou. I don’t know what you’ve done. But for a lawyer it can be better not to know what his client has done. This helps him to be more lucid, to make better decisions without allowing himself to be influenced by emotion. Do you see what I’m getting at?”
Abdou gave an imperceptible nod. His eyes seemed to have sunk into their black orbits. Averting my gaze, I continued.
“If we don’t opt for the shortened procedure, if we go before the Assize Court, it’s as if we were playing cards with your life, with very few chances of winning. And then, to play it that way takes money, lots of money. A trial before the Assize Court takes a long time and costs a great deal.”
I realized I had said something stupid even as the words were coming out of my mouth. And at the same time I realized why I was uneasy in my mind.
“You mean that because I can’t pay enough money it’s better to opt for the shortened procedure. Is that it?”
“I didn’t say that.” My tone of voice went up a notch.
“How much money does it take to have a trial befor
e the Court of Assizes?”
“The money is not the problem. The problem is that if we go before the Assize Court you’ll get a life sentence and your life is finished.”
“My life is finished anyway if they convict me for killing a child. How much money?”
I suddenly felt dead tired. An enormous, irresistible weariness came over me. I let my shoulders slump and realized then how tense they had been until that moment.
“Not less than forty or fifty million. If we wanted to make investigations for the defence – and in this case we would probably need them – a good deal more.”
Abdou seemed stunned. He swallowed, with some difficulty, and gave the impression of wanting to say something but failing. Then he began to follow a train of thought from which I was excluded. He looked up, shook his head, then moved his lips in the recitation of some soundless, mysterious litany.
In the end he covered his face with his hands, rubbed them up and down two or three times, then lowered them and looked me in the face again. He said nothing.
I had an unbearable buzzing in my ears and spoke chiefly to drown it.
We didn’t have to decide that very morning. There was still a month left before the preliminary hearing, when we might or might not opt for the shortened procedure. And then we had to talk to Abajaje. The question of money was the least of our problems. I would give the documents another reading, look for other rays of hope. Right now I had to be off, but we’d meet again soon. If he needed anything he could let me know, even by telegram.
Abdou said not a word. When I touched his shoulder in greeting I felt a body totally inert.
I escaped, pursued by his phantoms. And my own.
13
When I left home the next morning I realized there was a removal in progress. New tenants were moving in to our building. I registered the fact in my mind and uttered a quick prayer that we were not getting a family with Pomeranian dogs and rowdy children. Then my thoughts turned to other matters.