Fatal wiretaps for the suspects of “Sbarre”, the investigation by the Prosecutor’s Office and the Carabinieri which discovered and dismantled two networks of drug dealers who operated in the southern urban belt of the city. The first, the largest and most organised, among the ruined buildings of the historic Guarna and Caridi districts; the second to roam along Viale Calabria, between the side streets that lead to Botteghelle and Loreto. “Sbarre” trial concluded in second instance with 17 convictions and one acquittal.
Overwhelming evidence also emerged from the reasons behind the Court of Appeal’s ruling. Among the themes of the accusation, the investigative work in response to telephone and environmental interceptions stands out: «The genuineness of the dialogues is strengthened not only by the absence of reasons to lie, but also in consideration of the type of relationship existing between the participants in the conversation in a bond of sure trust».
Betrayed and framed by the wiretaps even though the suspects feared being discovered and arrested, trying to protect themselves with conventional terminologies so as not to fall into a trap. The Carabinieri investigators immediately deciphered those terms – «the conversationalists repeatedly used words such as “meat”, “bread”, “candy” to refer to the narcotic substance» – only apparently innocent. More than sweets or various sweets: for the investigators it was the way to indicate the narcotic to be pulled out of the deposits and hiding places. Dozens of chats were recorded: «You have to get me three packs of sweets, one of the small blue ones. Those from Emenens, the other one always inside the blue envelope.”
The judges of Piazza Castello reiterate in several passages how the results of the telephone and environmental interceptions, alongside the images extrapolated from the surveillance cameras installed in the investigative perimeter between the Caridi-Guarna district «have allowed us to arrive not only at the identification of the subjects involved but also at the reconstruction of the organizational structure and the related modus operandi. In the present case, the interpretation of the collections, punctuated by the use now of a terminology of everyday use not otherwise justifiable in the context of the conversation, is aimed at concealing the true object of dialogues and now by the use of clear expressions referring to current prices and quantities of drugs”.
From a legal point of view, concerning the issue of the “credibility” of the intercepted statements and, therefore, of their probative value, the Court of Appeal distinguishes three types of interception: totally self-accusing, partially self-accusing, totally hetero-accusatory. Underlining how “as regards totally self-accusing wiretaps, these are wiretaps relating to conversations during which it is the conversant himself who, explicitly or implicitly, accuses himself of having committed a given crime”. Adding: «It follows on a strictly legal level that the content of such conversations alone can represent a suitable and unique element of proof regarding the criminally relevant events that can be deduced from the dialogues captured and their traceability to the subjects involved in the conversations or to third parties, as there is no need for further and specific confirmatory elements».