Omicidio di Sonia Marra: Analisi di una breve intervista rilasciata da Umberto Bindella

Sonia Marra

Sonia Marra

Sonia Marra è scomparsa da Perugia il 16 novembre 2006, aveva 25 anni.

Umberto Bindella, il suo ragazzo dell’epoca, è attualmente imputato in un processo per l’omicidio e l’occultamento del cadavere della Marra, Bindella si è sempre proclamato estraneo ai fatti a lui contestati.

Umberto Bindella

Umberto Bindella

Nel 2009, l’allora indagato Bindella rilasciò a Chi l’ha visto la seguente intervista:

Umberto Bindella: Il mio stato eee… come ha detto, attualmente, è cambiato, ho ribadito le medesime cose delle altre volte che fui ascoltato dagli inquirenti e nuovi elementi non sono emersi se non qualche analogia del giaccone che hanno trovato in casa mia con quello presunto visto da testimoni.

Frequentemente gli indagati affermano di aver “ribadito le medesime cose” agli inquirenti, ripetere le stesse cose non ne fa delle verità, in sintesi, Bindella non ci sta dicendo di aver detto la verità a chi indaga ma semplicemente di non aver cambiato versione.

Umberto Bindella: Un semplicissimo giaccone nero che si trova, credo, in qualunque supermercato e negozio d’abbigliamento, tutto qua, è normale sentendo anche altri fatti di cronaca che una persona, un ragazzo che può aver avuto un contatto con Sonia sia la prima persona ad essere sentita, ad essere indiziata, comunque seguita, attenzionata, poi sembra che la strada quella più facile sia la prima, quindi sono tornati a me.

Invece di dirsi estraneo ai fatti e di lamentarsi di essere perseguitato dalla Giustizia, Bindella afferma che è normale che si indaghi su di lui.

Giornalista: Da quanto tempo conoscevi Sonia Marra?

Umberto Bindella: La conoscevo dal duemila e cinque… eee alloggiavamo, avevamo in alloggio una foresteria, una camera presso l’ex famoso, ex seminario, cosiddetto ex seminario di Montemorcino, alloggiando nella stessa struttura eravamo, tra virgolette, camerati dopodiché eee io mi iscrissi al corso di teologia tenuto sempre nella medesima struttura dove lei era segretaria, questo è il rapportooo principale per un anno circa, dopodiché è evolutooooo in un incontro più intimooo però nulla di quello che è semb… che è apparso sui giornali, non ero il fidanzato.

In questa risposta sono presenti due “dopodiché” che hanno funzione di ponte temporale, il primo rappresenta un anomalo collegamento tra l’alloggio ed il corso di teologia, entrambi i “dopodiché” celano informazioni. Il fatto che Bindella non si ritenesse “il fidanzato” della Marra non esclude che abbiano avuto rapporti sessuali.

Giornalista: Avevate una relazione sessuale…

Umberto Bindella: C’è stato un incontro doveee, se vogliamo definirlo… di profonda amicizia, si è sfiorato l’intimo ma non c’è stato nessun rapporto sessuale.

E’ quantomeno bizzarro che Bindella definisca l’intimo incontro con Sonia Marra, un incontro di “profonda amicizia”, il termine “profonda” non può che evocare un atto sessuale. Giorgio D’Ambrogio, assistente della polizia di stato e amico del Bindella all’epoca dei fatti, sentito durante un’udienza ha affermato che, circa un mese prima della scomparsa della Marra, Umberto gli disse: “C’è intimità tra di noi”.

Giornalista: Si è parlato di una presunta gravidanza e di Sonia e si è detto che tu avresti comprato per lei i test di gravidanza!?

Umberto Bindella: Eh confermo, come confess… come confermato sempre, tanto che credo che lo stesso giorno della scomparsa, quando venni contatto, il giorno successivo, già accennai della possibilità che c’er… cioè del fatto che c’erano due test e potevano aver creato… poteva essere un indizio, quindi era una cosa ov… conosciuta da tempo, però, per quello che è, non sono alcu.. assolutamente collegati alla scomparsa di Sonia perché l’esito era negativo.

Bindella stava per dire “confessato”, un lapsus significativo. Se l’esito del test di gravidanza fosse stato “ negativo” perché l’assassino avrebbe fatto sparire i due test eseguiti da Sonia? A Bindella sfugge: “(i test) potevano aver creato”… dei problemi?… che avevano condotto all’omicidio di Sonia?. In questa risposta Bindella per almeno tre volte si autocensura, evidentemente non riesce a organizzarsi verbalmente.

Giornalista: Che fine può aver fatto secondo te Sonia Marra?

Umberto Bindella: Se leggiamo gli atti del pubblico ministero èèè una fine brutta, la mia speranza di fondo che stia bene, sicuramente l’opinione che ho è che non è questa la strada migliore per ritrovarla, ritrovare Sonia sarebbe la fine di questa storia, credo il primo a giovarsene potrei essere io.

Bindella mostra di non avere un’idea, strano, generalmente, noi tutti abbiamo idee su tutto, in specie un amico così intimo della Marra, un’idea, in tre anni, dovrebbe essersela fatta. Umberto Bindella è vago e non dice di non essere coinvolto nella scomparsa di Sonia. 

Giornalista: Hai ucciso tu Sonia Marra?

Umberto Bindella: No, questa… cioè… no, ora, anch… se fosse non lo direi a lei.

Bindella non solo non nega in modo credibile ma lascia passare il messaggio che potrebbe averla uccisa lui. Gli innocenti negano con forza ogni qualvolta ne hanno l’occasione.

Nel 2007, nel corso di un’intervista, Paolo Stroppiana, riconosciuto in seguito colpevole dell’omicidio di Marina Di modica, disse una frase simile: “So bene quale domanda le passa per la testa. Ma se davvero avessi ammazzato Marina, non verrei certo a raccontarlo a lei, non crede?”, un soggetto innocente negherebbe con forza e non aprirebbe alla possibilità di essere l’autore dell’omicidio.

Giorgio D’Ambrosio, assistente della Polizia di Stato e amico del Bindella all’epoca dei fatti, ha riferito agli inquirenti il contenuto di una telefonata intercorsa tra lui e Umberto Bindella che suona come una confessione. D’Ambrosio, subito dopo la scomparsa della Marra, chiese al Bindella se sapesse che Sonia era scomparsa e lui rispose: “Lo so. Ho fatto un casino, una cosa più grande di me e di te, una cosa cattiva, cattiva”.

Annunci

Sherri Papini kidnap was a hoax

Sherri Papini was allegedly kidnapped and apparently hold in captivity for 22 days.

Sherri and Keith Papini

Sherri and Keith Papini

On november 2, 2016, Keith Papini reported his wife Sherri missing. On november 10, Keith Papini took a lie detector test. Around 4.30 am on november 24, Thanksgiving day, Sherri was rescued by a motorist at the intersection of I-5 and County Road 17, more than 150 miles away from her home.

3abba0e000000578-3969312-image-a-26_1480035448007

After his wife was found, Keith Papini released a statement to the US media and an interview to Matthew Gutman of America’s ABC 20/20.

Il giornalista Matt Gutman della ABC e Keith Papini

Matt Gutman and Keith Papini

Keith Papini, during the interview, shows deception and frames himself with his own words:

Keith Papini: I remember everything about that day: around 6.50 a.m., my wife was on her way t… um… go check on our daughter Violet and we met there at the door, I gave her a kiss, a hug and went right out the door.

Keith Papini: I pulled up, I… I saw her car there and I opened the door expecting my son comes a hundred miles an hour right on me and usually uh Violet right behind him, we do… we call, you know, our family snuggles.

Words as “doors” and “open doors”, when used unnecessarily, are associated with sexual abuse. We find it in the language of sexually abused victims as well as in the language of perpetrators. Usually, when people abuse or is abused at home, there are doors opened and closed and lights turned off.

Papini says: “I pulled up, I… I saw her car (…)”, the presence of a stuttering “I” discloses tension and anxiety.

Keith Papini: I looked in few different rooms and I couldn’t find anybody, I thought: Ah, ok, may be, may be they are outside, and I looked around outside but at the time I was, you know, huh, I’m sure they are all together I have no reason to believe otherwise.

Keith Papini: I did, you know, find my phone app and it showed where her phone was so I assumed that there she was and I assumed the kids were with her.

Keith Papini didn’t call his wife but, instead, he used an app to find her phone, an unusual and suspect behaviour.

Matthew Gutman: Where did the find my phone app show where Sherri was?

Keith Papini: On, near our mailbox which is a ways away, it’s better a mile away, actually.

Matthew Gutman: Are you worried?

Keith Papini: Not quite yet. So I got in her car and I immediately drove down to the end of my mail box and I was, you know, anticipating I would see her.

Papini says that he wasn’t “quite yet” worried but, after that, with the word “immediately”, he contradicts himself expressing a different feeling; this is a signal of deception.

Ketih Papini: Again, I wasn’t looking for a phone I was looking for Sherri, when I didn’t find Sherri I went to the other road, came right back and I parked and I got out and now I’m looking for phone because it’s saying: Its here, its here, and it did not take me long, it was right off the road.

Keith has the need to justify his behaviour, it’s quite suspect that he didn’t call her on the phone.

Papini, at first, speaks at the past tense, at the end of this answer he speaks at the present tense: “because it’s saying: Its here, its here”, a clue that he is not speaking from experiential memory; he is not re-living the event. Changing of tense shows inconsistency, it’s a signal that someone is not speaking from experiential memory, truthful people usually describe historical events in the past tense, deceptive people sometimes refer to past events as if the events were occurring in the present.

Keith Papini: I, then, called my mom and asked her if they spoke and she said she hadn’t.

Keith Papini: The first thing I said her (someone at his kid’s daycare center): What time did Sherri pick up the kids today? And when she said: The kids are here, that was like something is wrong, there is something wrong right now.

Keith Papini: If she would have lost her phone driving home one day and she had put it on the roof of the car and it felt off, okay, whatever, I can see that happening but the car was at home and the kids were um… at school, I knew something was wrong.

An illogic explanation, Papini is trying to justify his untimely concern.

Keith Papini: I want to make a clear message: This is real, really get here now. I don’t know, I mean, how many phone calls get on this particular thing, 90% of the time, you know, they went to the store or they are hiding under the bed or its not that, I knew she was taken.

Keith Papini took two pictures of Sherri’s phone after he found it on the grass close to the mail box, another unusual and suspect behaviour.

When Papini tells us that he called 911 for something “real” and that in 90% of the cases, 911 phone calls aren’t about something real, he is simply suggesting that he called for something “unreal”. 

Keith says: “I knew she was taken”, it was too early to conclude for an abduction; from the start of this story, Keith Papini is in a hurry to conclude. Papini says: “taken” not abducted or kidnapped. He use a vague, mild word. Statements made by guilty parties often include this kind of words rather than their harsher, more explicit synonyms. Truthful people tend to use words like: stolen, theft, fraud, raped, kidnapped, etc.; deceptive persons are more controlled and tend to use words like: missing, gone, taken, etc.

Keith, Sherri and their two children, Tyler and Violet

Keith, Sherri and their two children, Tyler and Violet

Keith Papini: I picked him up (sobbing) and I told him I had something important to tell and he… he jumped… he jumped up on the couch with me, he knew… he knew some was up and he said: Dad, you can tell me anything. For a little 4 year old to say that I wasn’t prepared for that.

To speak about his son is insane, he is exposing his children just to make people feel bad about them, simply to gain their simpathy and to appear more reliable. 

Papini is sobbing while he is speaking about his son, the placement of emotions in the right part of an account is an indication of having placed them there artificially, especially when someone is speaking about temporally closed events.

Keith Papini: And I just said: Son, you know, ah, mommy went running and she didn’t come home and we’re all looking for her right now. And we just held each other and… and I said, he said: Are you looking for her?, I said: Everybody in the world is looking for her, right now, and I said: We’re going to find her and we’re going to get her back.

Papini is speaking just to and about Tyler, his son, where is Violet in this picture perfect family?

This sentence: “Everybody in the world is looking for her, right now” is a sign of mythomania.

Keith Papini: He was just standing there (in front of one of Sherri’s poster) and he had his left hand on her face. He was just staring at her … and he was just sitting there, you know, tears in his eyes with his hands on her face.

He is using his child, again…

Keith Papini: I sat him down, and I was on my knees and he was standing up. And I said, ‘You know what, buddy? I found mom, and he, he got the biggest grin and he started like: Where is she?.

… and again. Keith is lying to his son, he didn’t find Sherri.

Matthew Gutman: That very early in the morning, Thanksgiving day, you get a phone call?

Keith Papini: It rang, I think, I was shaving at the time so I kinda looked over at and I didn’t, did not recognise the number. 

Matthew Gutman: You didn’t pick it up!?

Keith Papini: I didn’t hear it in time… I only got like the last two rings.  Immediately after that my home phone rang, I picked it up and it was avery mixed emotions it was my wife scr…screaming in the background, yelling my name that seemed somewhat confused at the moment, like, ‘What is going on?’… and a CHP (California High Patrol) officer said I need you to be calm, I need you to be calm… but I know, I know it’s her. I can tell it’s her voice.

Keith says: “It rung, I think”, showing that he is not sure of what he was doing when an officer called him to tell that they found his wife, that’s unbelievable. The weakness of “I think” is inappropriate here; again, he says that he didn’t recognise the number and then that he didn’t hear the phone in time, a contradiction, a signal of deception. Your wife is missing and you don’t answer the phone, especially so early in the morning?! 

Matthew Gutman: Are you panicked at first you heard her scream?

Keith Papini: I am panicked but I am happy because at this point, this is the first time I’ve heard her voice, I know she is alive.

We are not sure that Keith Papini was panicked because it’s something he doesn’t say on his own, he uses a parroted language. Why Keith feels the need to say: “this is the first time I’ve heard her voice”?,  just, because it wasn’t the first time he heard her voice since she disappeared. 

Matt Gutman: And you hear…

Keith Papini: And I hear screams so I get the phone and: Oh my god, honey (unintelligible) and of course she is screaming, its very emotional and I love you, I love you, I love you, oh my god, you are here, you back. Where are you? And then the phone gets like taken away from her. Like, super quick.

Keith Papini: She was am… bound, she had a metal… uh sorry, a chain around her waist, that is correct, she had a bag covered her head, that is correct, I think its the right or left arm chained to the chain and, and her left hand was into the vehicle chained to something and she was… yes, she was always… she was chained anytime she was in a vehicle, they opened the door… she doesn’t know because she had a bag over her head, they cut something to free her of her restraint that was holding her in the vehicle and then, kind of, push her out of the vehicle and drove away.

Too many technical details, too much involvement, Keith is speaking for himself, he is making a story for the public, he is not repeating what happened or what his wife told him. Was he there when Sherri was released? He says two times: “that is correct”, that’s unusual; is he referring to a story he built with his wife? In this sentence, Keith Papini is speaking at the past tense, not when he says: “she doesn’t know because she had a bag over her head”, another clue that he is building a story. Changing of tense it’s a signal that someone is not speaking from experiential memory. When Papini says: “she was always… she was chained anytime she was in a vehicle” he shows us to be in trouble to keep in track with his own ‘story’. 

Keith Papini: Sherri obviously has one free hand that still has some kind of, something like a hose clamp if you will, and then took obviously the bag off of her head and she has at this point has no idea where she is at and gets up and basically tries to find help, runs to a house that didn’t have any lights on, and didn’t look what she said was very inviting, looked scary, and obviously if you could imagine her state of mind at this point, to another building couldn’t get in that building and then run to the freeway. There was a junkyard or some kind of yard or something like that, that she tried to get into and a big dog started barking and scared her, and then she went and familiarized herself with where she was at by standing in the overpass and noticed I-5 symbols and she knew that I-5 North is where we live. Anything past our house, you’re up in Mount Shasta area. People were driving past her and not stopping, in her mind she is frighted, she scared, she screamed so much, she said she was coughing up, you know, blood from the screaming, trying to get somebody you know to stop. And again just another sign of how my wife is, she’s so wonderful.

Again, Keith is the main character of this story, he is, even, able to taste the blood in his mouth while saying that his wife “was coughing up, you know, blood from the screaming”.

Keith Papini: She is saying: Well maybe people aren’t stopping because I have a chain that looks like I broke out of prison, so she tried to tuck in her chain under her clothes I, I don’t know what reactioning by has to that but me I just like…

Keith Papini: She thought it was late that night, so when the paramedics finally were talking to her they were the first people to tell her: Happy Thanksgiving!, and then she is like: Oh, is thanksgiving night? And they said: No, its Thanksgiving morning.

Papini finds the strength to tell two ‘funny anecdotes’ about his wife, something unusual and suspect.

Keith Papini: The entire, like, hospital was on lockdown, eventually they opened the door.

Words as “open doors” and “doors”, are part of the language of sexual abuse. Its not the first time in this interview that Papini mentions “doors” without reason, any additional and unnecessary word has a story to tell. Keith Papini has the need to say that “The entire, like, hospital was on lockdown” and that they opened the door” for him, he is showing us how important he is. 

Keith Papini: One of the officer, kinda brace me, kinda put his arm around me and he said (sobbing): You know, prepare yourself, umm, she is alive, you just gotta be happy. They branded her.

Keith is speaking about himself not about Sherri, he is the main character of this story. Papini shows a need for emphasis, he creates ‘suspense’ in an attempt to guide the listeners to a specific emotional experience. He is sobbing while he is speaking;  placement of emotions in the right part of an account is an indication of having placed them there artificially, especially when someone is speaking about a temporally closed event.
During the interview Papini reveals that Sherri was “branded”, he is giving us this information against the will of the investigators that are working on the case. Keith has a deep desire to compromise the investigation to save himself; he is not interested in finding the captors because there are no captors. 

Papini has a huge problem, he thinks to be smarter than investigators or experts. Keith has released many details to the media about his wife kidnap and physical condition in order to compromise the investigation but, after all, he, instead, helped the investigators, showing exactly his role in the false abduction of his wife. 

Keith Papini: I just wanted to see her so I… I r…, just ran past everybody and I, you know, throw open the curtain and then she was there, you know, lying in a bed and her poor face and I just hugged her, I just held her, I felt like I hugged her for like twenty minutes, I was so happy that she was there and, you know,  just kissed all over and I got, like, nauseated just looking at her, its so hard for me to see her like that.

Papini says: “I just wanted to see her so I… I r…, just ran (…)”, a stattering “I” is suspect, it is a signal of incrising anxiety; when a person lies, this causes internal conflicts that creates emotional stress. Keith Papini says that he “felt” he hugged her for twenty minutes, he doesn’t say that he “hugged her for twenty minutes”, it’s quite different.

Keith is telling the world that he “got, like, nauseated just looking at” his wife, a bizarre feeling; not compassion, pain or anger but nausea. Love is lost.

Matthew Gutman: Keith, a couple of time, you said: Her face, her poor face, what did you see?

Keith Papini: The bruises were just intense, the bumps from, you know, being hit and kicked and whatever else, everyone gets a bruise once in awhile not these types, these are hard to look at, her nose so dark and yellow, her hair has always used very long blond hair, they chopped off.

Sherri was discharged from the hospital after few hours, she didn’t even spend the night there for observation. She wasn’t in bad condition, some bruises, some bumps and short hairs, that’s why Papini needed the suspense to make it appear worse.

Matthew Gutman: They didn’t brand her face, right?

Keith Papini: I will say that no, its not on, no, her face, no.

Papini doesn’t say: “No, they didn’t brand her face” but: “I will say that no, its not on, no, her face, no”, he is inaccurate in order to leave our imagination run, again.

Keith Papini: It made me sick… that there is… people out there that could do something like this.

When Papini says: “there is… people out there that could do something like this” is not telling us that someone did “something” to his wife but that “people out there could do…” that is quite different from: “there is… people out there that did something like this”. 

Keith Papini: I just want to hold her and we just had her o… we just embraced each other and cried together and I, I mean, I was so happy, I mean, how do you explain it? You’re upset and everything at what happened but you are happy, she is here.
The idea of Sherri’s abductors still on the loose is terrifying(…) Its terrifying, but, you know, my family is with me, now, I think we are different, now.

When Keith says: “my family is with me, now, I think we are different, now”, he tells us that something was broken before the abduction, there are no other reasons to say: “I think we are differentnow” and “my family is with me, now”,   Keith is comparing the present with the past, something changed between them after the abduction, they are closer than they were before, we can conclude that something wrong has happened between them before “Sherri was taken”. 

Keith Papini: Clearly, I want justice but right now I’m just happy that my wife is back. I don’t have to raise my kids without her.
Right now I am happy, my wife is back. You would expect that I want to get these people … and then your mind goes into a place that it shouldn’t and I think most people are doing that.

Keith is not looking for his wife captors because there are no captors.

Keith Papini: The things she told me that she did, talking to me each time, acting like she was tucking in our kids. She literally lived through hell, she told me she took a piece of cloth and rolled it up like it was Violet and she rocked it. She was so strong.

Keith Papini is fishing for simpathy… again.

Keith Papini: And they are ecstatic to have their mom home. When Tyler was reunited with Sherri, she started crying. Tyler then said to Sherri: You don’t cry when you’re happy, and my wife said: When you’re this happy, you cry.

Keith is using his child… again. 

Keith Papini: When lights are off, when doors shut, when she hears certain sounds, I mean it’s it’s something that I don’t know how to deal with and we’ll need somebody who can help her thru that from a professional standpoint. I’m sure I’m going to have to reach out for something for some of my feelings as well. It’s not just a long road, I mean it’s we’ll. It’s something we’re never going to forget.

Inexplicable references to “lights” and “doors” in a statement are often indicative of sexual activity. During this interview Keith Papini spoke many times and without reason about “doors” and “open doors”; words as “lights”; “lights off, doors, doors opening and closing” are possible linguistic indications of sexual activity including sexual abuse.

Keith Papini is right when he says: “we’ll need somebody who can help her” and “I’m sure I’m going to have to reach out for something for some of my feelings as well”. He and his wife need a psychiatrist to help them, they are affected by a shared psychotic disorder, the, so called, folie à deux.

Keith Papini: If a vehicle pulled up with two big dudes in it, would you approach that vehicle being a hundred pound woman? If two women pulled up and, let’s say, they ask for help, that make more sense to me.

Sheriff Bosenko, the chief investigato on this case, said that adult abductions are rare and those by two women are unique.  Keith Papini has a reason for everything, his needs to persuade rather than boldly assert is suspect. 

la-me-ln-sherri-papini-missing-california-20161108

Keith Papini: People would see me and start crying and give me hugs … total strangers.

Keith is proud to be famous; this could be a reason he staged his wife abduction.

Keith Papini: There was a moment where we were heading back, after we, you know, did a few mile search, and ahm, we look up and we start to see some birds circling and I started walking and I just went to my knees (sobbing) and uh, I thought am I really, am I really, hiking out here to look for my wife? And do I even wanna, I don’t want to find her right now, but I do want to find her. One of my good friends came over and just, you know, hugged me and let me cry on her shoulder for a little bit, and I, it was, it was, a very sad and a very emotional, and uh, angry moment for me and um, um, I’m very glad they were with me. To kind of pick me up and (sobbing) and it was a…that was a, that was a, tough one for me that day.

Papini is not explaining why he didn’t want to find Sherri, he is unable to assert something, he is just suggesting a reason giving us “the ingredients to bake a cake”, but a cake that is not his cake. He doesn’t assert that he didn’t want to find Sherri death, he is just telling us that he didn’t want to find her in that moment probably because it was too early according with his plan, the family wasn’t enough famous in the all world.

Keith Papini: I was very upset. I wanted more involvement with everybody… I wanted every law enforcement agency out there. Did I want more? Of course, I wanted the Marines, the Army, I wanted a swat team to break in every home in a ten miles radius. I’m gonna do everything I can to find my wife.
That’s such a great support from my family, my friends, the all comunity, the whole world reached out and I’m so grateful for that.

“(…) every law enforcement agency… the Marines, the Army… a swat team to break in every home in a ten miles radius”, mania of grandeur! 

“(…) the whole world reached out”, attention seeker!

Keith Papini: Rumors, assumptions, lies, and hate have been both exhausting and disgusting. Those people should be ashamed of their malicious, sub human behavior. We are not going to allow those people to take away our spirit, love, or rejoice in our girl found alive and home where she belongs. I understand people want the story, pictures, proof that this was not some sort of hoax, plan to gain money, or some fabricated race war. I do not see a purpose in addressing each preposterous lie. Instead, may I give you a glimpse of the mixture of horror and elation that was my experience of reuniting with the love of my life and mother of our children.

Papini speaks about the rumors and the suspects around his wife abduction but he is unable to deny the allegations; usually, innocent people offer a reliable denial before being asked, knowing the allegation is upon them. If Keith Papini is unwilling or incapable to deny the allegations, we are not permitted to say it for him.

He shows a lot of bad feeling for “rumors, assumptions, lies and hate”, no critics at all for the alleged captors of his wife. 

In this last answer, he gives us some additional reasons for their acts, they staged the false abduction “to gain money” and to “fabricated race war”.

Ursula Franco, MD and criminologist

Sherri Papini è stata davvero rapita?

Un caso di scomparsa ha tenuto l’America col fiato sospeso per 22 giorni, quello di una giovane madre californiana, Sherri Papini.

Sherri e keith Papini

Sherri e Keith Papini

Il 2 novembre 2016 Keith Papini ha denunciato al 911 la scomparsa di sua moglie Sherri. Il 10 novembre Keith Papini è stato sottoposto al test del poligrafo. Il 24 novembre Sherri ha fermato un automobilista a circa 150 miglia da casa sua. Dopo il ritrovamento di sua moglie, Keith Papini ha rilasciato una dichiarazione e una lunga intervista a Matthew Gutman del programma 20/20 della ABC. L’analisi linguistica delle dichiarazioni di Keith Papini permette di definire il caso per quello che è: una grossolana simulazione cui seguiranno accuse e arresti.

3abba0e000000578-3969312-image-a-26_1480035448007

Analisi di alcuni stralci dell’intervista rilasciata da Keith Papini alla ABC:

5841ff571800002c00e40a87

Il giornalista Matt Gutman della ABC e Keith Papini

I remember everything about that day: around 6.50 AM, my wife was on her way t… um… go check on our daughter Violet and we met there at the door I gave her a kiss, a hug and went right out the door.

I pulled up, I… I saw her car there and I opened the door expecting my son comes a hundred miles an hour right on me and usually uh Violet right behind him, we do… we call, you know, our family snuggles.

In questi primi due stralci Keith parla più volte di “porte”, in un caso di una “porta aperta”, i gratuiti riferimenti alle “porte” fanno parte del linguaggio delle vittime di abusi sessuali o degli abusatori. 

I looked in few different rooms and I couldn’t find anybody I thought: Ah, ok, may be, may be they are outside, and I looked around outside but at the time I was, you know, huh, I’m sure they are all together I have no reason to believe otherwise.

I did, you know, find my phone app and it showed where her phone was so I assumed that there she was and I assumed the kids were with her.

Keith racconta di non aver trovato la moglie ed i figli a casa e di aver pensato di localizzarli con una applicazione del telefono, strano che invece non abbia semplicemente chiamato sua moglie per farsi dire dove fossero. Questo è il primo punto debole del suo racconto.

Matthew Gutman: Where did the find my phone app show where Sherri was?

On, near our mailbox which is a ways away, it’s better a mile away, actually.

Matthew Gutman: Are you worried?

Not quite yet. So I got in her car and I immediately drove down to the end of my mail box and I was, you know, anticipating I would see her.

Again, I wasn’t looking for a phone I was looking for Sherri, when I didn’t find Sherri I went to the other road, came right back and I parked and I got out and now I’m looking for phone because it’s saying: Its here, its here, and it did not take me long, it was right off the road.

Keith sente la necessità di dover giustificare il fatto che cercasse il telefono invece di sua moglie. Papini afferma che solo dopo non aver trovato Sherri a casa si era messo a cercare il telefono, ciò non giustifica il fatto che non le abbia telefonato. Nella prima parte di questo ultimo stralcio Keith Papini parla al passato e sul finale al presente, lo fa perché non parla di fatti realmente accaduti, non pesca nel passato ma inventa il suo racconto al momento.

I, then, called my mom and asked her if they spoke and she said she hadn’t.

Keith Papini racconta di aver chiamato sua madre, di averle chiesto se avesse parlato con Sherri e di aver ricevuto una risposta negativa. 

The first thing I said her (someone at his kid’s daycare center): What time did Sherri pick up the kids today? And when she said: The kids are here, that was like something is wrong, there is something wrong right now.

Papini riferisce, poi, di aver chiamato l’asilo chiedendo a che ora fosse andata a prendere i bambini sua moglie e di aver capito, dal fatto che i bambini erano ancora lì, che qualcosa non andava. 

If she would have lost her phone driving home one day and she had put it on the roof of the car and it felt off, okay, whatever, I can see that happening but the car was at home and the kids were um… at school, I knew something was wrong.

Papini si arrampica sugli specchi, afferma che la moglie non poteva aver perso il telefono per averlo lasciato sul lettino dell’auto in quanto l’auto si trovava a casa ed i bambini a scuola. 

 I want to make a clear message: This is real, really get here now. I don’t know, I mean, how many phone calls get on this particular thing, 90% of the time, you know, they went to the store or they are hiding under the bed or its not that, I knew she was taken.

Subito dopo aver ritrovato il telefonino di sua moglie, vicino alla cassetta delle poste, a circa un miglio da casa, Papini lo ha fotografato e ha chiamato il 911 per denunciare la scomparsa di Sherri, Kieth ha riferito al giornalista di aver fotografato il telefono per provare a chi avrebbe investigato che c’era una “reale” urgenza e che i soccorsi dovevano “realmente” accorrere. Il fatto che Papini mostri il bisogno di usare per due volte il termine “reale” in una breve frase quale: “This is real, really get here now”, fa sospettare che non ci sia nulla di vero in questa scomparsa, anzi il contrario. Inoltre, dopo aver affermato che nel 90% dei casi le denunce di scomparsa sono false, Papini afferma di aver capito subito che sua moglie era stata rapita: “I knew she was taken”, Keith è giunto da subito ad una conclusione: “Sapevo che era stata presa”. E’ chiaro che in quei momenti iniziali nessuno poteva immaginare che Sherri fosse stata rapita.

Keith, Sherri e i loro due figli

Keith, Sherri e i loro due figli

Dopo la scomparsa di Sherri sono state rese pubbliche le foto dei protagonisti di questo caso giudiziario e sembrano tutte preparate per l’occasione, sono lontane anni luce da quelle che generalmente distribuiscono i parenti delle persone realmente scomparse.

I picked him up (crying) and I told him I had something important to tell and he… he jumped… he jumped up on the couch with me, he knew… he knew some was up and he said: Dad, you can tell me anything. For a little 4 year old to say that I wasn’t prepared for that.

Keith racconta, piangendo, gli aneddoti riguardanti il coinvolgimento emotivo di suo figlio Tyler. 

And I just said: Son, you know, ah, mommy went running and she didn’t come home and we’re all looking for her right now. And we just held each other and… and I said, he said: Are you looking for her?, I said: Everybody in the world is looking for her, right now, and I said: We’re going to find her and we’re going to get her back.

Keith parla ancora soltanto di suo figlio Tyler e non di Violet.

Papini trae godimento dall’affermare che il mondo intero sta cercando Sherri, è un mitomane.

He was just standing there (in front of one of Sherri’s poster) and he had his left hand on her face. He was just staring at her … and he was just sitting there, you know, tears in his eyes with his hands on her face.

I sat him down, and I was on my knees and he was standing up. And I said, ‘You know what, buddy? I found mom, and he got the biggest grin. I wanted to do it one by one.

E’ estremamente grave che Keith e Sherri abbiano sottoposto i propri figli di 2 e 4 anni a questo tipo di stress e che Keith continui ad usarli per muovere a compassione il paese e per apparire credibile. E’ chiaro che lo stato della California prenderà seri provvedimenti nei confronti dei due coniugi anche per quanto riguarda i due minori.

Matthew Gutman: That very early in the morning, Thanksgiving day, you get a phone call?

It rung, I think, I was shaving at the time so I kinda looked over at and I didn’t, didn’t recognise the number.

Matthew Gutman: You didn’t pick it up!? 

I didn’t hear it in time… I only got like the last two rings. Immediately after that my home phone rang, I picked it up and it was my wife scr…screaming in the background yelling my name that seemed somewhat confused at the moment, like, ‘What is going on?’… and CHP (California High Patrol) officer said I need to be calm I need to be calm… I already know it’s her. I can tell her voice.


Keith dice: “Ha suonato il telefono, penso che in quel momento mi stessi facendo la barba pertanto non ho potuto guardare e non ho riconosciuto il numero”, il fatto che dica:  “penso che in quel momento mi stessi facendo la barba”,  è sospetto, come fa a non ricordare con sicurezza che cosa stesse facendo quando lo chiamarono per avvisarlo del ritrovamento di Sherri? Inoltre, fornisce due spiegazioni diverse sul perché non rispose al telefono: “non l’ho sentito in tempo” “non ho riconosciuto il numero”, un segnale che sta mentendo.

Matthew Gutman: Are you panicked at first you heard her scream?

I am panicked but I am happy because at this point, this is the first time I heard her voice, I know she is alive.

Matt Gutman: And you hear…

And I hear screams so I get the phone and: Oh my god, honey (unintelligible) and of course she is screaming, its very emotional and I love you, I love you, I love you, oh my god, you are here, you back. Where are you? And then the phone gets taken away from her. Like, super quick.

In questo stralcio c’è una dichiarazione incriminante, Keith afferma di aver ricevuto, il giorno del ritrovamento di Sherri, una telefonata da parte di un poliziotto e di aver sentito la voce di sua moglie per la prima volta, un’affermazione che lascia pensare, perché Keith ha avuto la necessità di specificare che quella era la prima volta che sentiva la voce di Sherri? Keith ha rimarcato una circostanza che a tutti sarebbe apparsa scontata, così facendo ha lasciato intendere che quella non fosse la prima volta che parlava con Sherri in quei 22 giorni.

She was… em bound, she had a metal… uh sorry, a chain around her waist, that is correct, she had a bag covered her head, that is correct, I think its the right or left arm chained to the chain and, and her left hand was into the vehicle chained to something and she was… yes, she was always… she was chained anytime she was in a vehicle, they opened the door… she doesn’t know because she had a bag over her head, they cut something to free her of her restraint that was holding her in the vehicle and then, kind of, push her out of the vehicle and drove away.

Keith racconta al giornalista della ABC di come è avvenuto il rilascio di sua moglie, il suo coinvolgimento è tale che sembra lui la vittima, Papini fornisce una eccessiva quantità di particolari che fanno apparire le sue dichiarazioni sospette. Per due volte, mentre riepiloga dettagli di come sua moglie fosse stata incatenata, afferma “that is correct” lasciando intendere che stia riferendo fatti sui quali si è accordato con altri. Inoltre, in questo stralcio, nella prima parte parla al passato mentre nel finale al presente, lo fa perché non parla di fatti realmente accaduti, non pesca nel passato.

Sherri obviously has one free hand that still has some kind of, something like a hose clamp if you will, and then took obviously the bag off of her head and she has at this point has no idea where she is at and gets up and basically tries to find help, runs to a house that didn’t have any lights on, and didn’t look what she said was very inviting, looked scary, and obviously if you could imagine her state of mind at this point, to another building couldn’t get in that building and then run to the freeway. There was a junkyard or some kind of yard or something like that, that she tried to get into and a big dog started barking and scared her, and then she went and familiarized herself with where she was at by standing in the overpass and noticed I-5 symbols and she knew that I-5 North is where we live. Anything past our house, you’re up in Mount Shasta area. People were driving past her and not stopping, in her mind she is frighted, she scared, she screamed so much, she said she was coughing up, you know, blood from the screaming, trying to get somebody you know to stop. And again just another sign of how my wife is, she’s so wonderful. She is saying: Well maybe people aren’t stopping because I have a chain that looks like I broke out of prison, so she tried to tuck in her chain under her clothes I, I don’t know what reactioning by has to that but me I just like…

Ancora un racconto da protagonista, nonostante Keith non sia la vera vittima di questo presunto rapimento. Colpisce particolarmente che Papini racconti che sua moglie, a causa delle urla fatte per richiedere aiuto, abbia tossito sangue, Keith Papini si è immedesimato oltre ogni limite, non è credibile. 

She thought it was late that night, so when the paramedics finally were talking to her they were the first people to tell her: Happy Thanksgiving!, and then she is like: Oh, is thanksgiving night? And they said: No, its Thanksgiving morning.

The entire, like, hospital was on lockdown, eventually they opened the door.

Keith Papini parla ancora una volta senza motivo di una “porta aperta”, una terminologia che riporta ad abusi sessuali.

One of the officer, kinda brace me, kinda put his arm around me and he said (crying): You know, prepare yourself, umm, she is alive, you just gotta be happy. They branded her.

Papini racconta che, una volta giunto in ospedale per incontrare sua moglie, un poliziotto lo ha avvertito di prepararsi a ciò che avrebbe visto e che Sherri era stata marchiata. Keith gioca con la suspence e lascia spazio alla fantasia di chi lo ascolta. Contro il volere degli inquirenti, Keith Papini ha rivelato che Sherri, durante la prigionia, è stata marchiata. Keith ha sempre avuto fretta, l’ha avuta all’inizio di questo caso giudiziario quando, non trovando la moglie a casa ha attivato una app per localizzare il suo telefonino, l’ha avuta quando, non appena trovato il telefono di sua moglie vicino alla cassetta delle lettere, ha concluso per un rapimento, l’ha avuta nel rilasciare una dichiarazione ai media e questa intervista alla ABC fornendo dettagli secretati. C’è una semplice spiegazione per questo suo comportamento: Keith ha simulato il rapimento di Sherri non è mai stato interessato alle indagini, Papini non vuole che si trovino i rapitori di sua moglie perché non esistono e per questo motivo ha sempre intralciato il lavoro degli inquirenti. A tal riguardo, uno degli investigatori ha dichiarato: “I do think … some of the details that he has provided could affect the integrity of the investigation” e “There’s some unique information in there that was in his press release today that we were hoping to keep a tight rein on as far as what we were going to release to the public. It’s not the first hurdle in this investigation that we’ve had, we’ve overcome many of them, not just in this case, but there’s surprises in all investigations, so this is just.. wasn’t good timing”.

I just wanted to see her so I… I r…, just ran past everybody and I, you know, throw open the curtain and then she was there, you know , lying in a bed and her poor face and I just hugged her I just held her, I felt like I hugged her for like twenty minutes, I was so happy that she was there and, you know, just kissed all over and I got, like, nauseated just looking at her, its so hard for me to see her like that.

Dopo aver preparato il suo interlocutore ed il pubblico, attraverso la suspence, Keith racconta di aver aperto una tenda e di aver visto sua moglie, di averla abbracciata, baciata e di aver provato “nausea” vedendola. E’ quantomeno strano che Papini abbia provato nausea alla vista di sua moglie e non pena, compassione o rabbia; Keith Papini non ha provato “nausea” alla vista di sua moglie a causa del suo aspetto emaciato, l’ha provata perché non l’ama più e non desidera più condividere la sua vita con lei. Keith Papini ha rilasciato una dichiarazione prima di questa intervista alla ABC dove aveva già affermato di aver provato nausea e repulsione: “My reaction was one of extreme happiness and overwhelming nausea as my eyes and hands scanned her body. I was filled with so much relief and revulsion at once”.

My first sight was my wife in a hospital bed, her face covered in bruises ranging from yellow to black because of repeated beatings, the bridge of her nose broken. Her now emaciated body of 87 pounds was covered in multicolored bruises, severe burns, red rashes and chain markings. Her signature long blond hair had been chopped off. She has been branded, and I could feel the rise of her scabs under my fingers.

Questo stralcio proviene da una dichiarazione di Papini alla stampa che ha preceduto l’intervista a Gutman, il fatto che Papini descriva il colore degli ematomi e che spieghi che sono di colori diversi in quanto sono segni di percosse avvenute in tempi diversi, è estremamente sospetto.

Matthew Gutman: Keith, a couple of time, you said: Her face, her poor face, what did you see?

Keith, negli stralci precedenti, ha parlato della “povera faccia” di sua moglie, il giornalista gli chiede, pertanto, che cosa intenda dire con quell’espressione.

The bruises were just intense, the bumps from, you know, being hit and kicked and whatever else, everyone gets a bruise once in awhile not these types, these are hard to look at, her nose so dark and yellow, her hair has always used very long blond hair, they chopped off.

Papini risponde che le contusioni sul volto di sua moglie apparivano intense, difficili da guardare, che aveva protuberanze dovute alle botte, il naso scuro e giallo e che gli avevano tagliato i capelli, non un quadro particolarmente drammatico, per questo motivo ha avuto bisogno di lasciar fantasticare il pubblico.

Matthew Gutman: They didn’t brand her face right?

Il giornalista chiede se non le abbiano marchiato il volto.

I will say that no, its not on, no, her face, no.

Papini non dice in modo chiaro: “No, non le hanno marchiato il volto” ma: “Dirò che no, non è sul suo volto, no”, lasciando, ancora una volta, spazio all’immaginazione di chi ascolta.

They made me sick that there is… people out there that could do something like this.

Keith dice che lo far “star male il fatto che là fuori c’è gente che potrebbe fare una cosa come questa”, intendendo, non che l’abbiano fatta, evidentemente, altrimenti avrebbe detto: “gente che ha fatto una cosa come questa” ma “gente che potrebbe farla”. Keith e Sherri hanno organizzato un finto rapimento, pensando, sbagliandosi, che là fuori ci possa essere gente che avrebbe potuto organizzarlo così come l’hanno organizzato loro.

I just want to hold her and we just had her o… we just embraced each other and cried together and I, I mean, I was so happy, I mean, how do you explain it? You’re upset and everything at what happened but you are happy, she is here.

The idea of Sherri’s abductors still on the loose is terrifying(…) Its terrifying, but, you know, my family is with me, now, I think we are different, now.

Keith afferma che il fatto che i rapitori di Sherri siano ancora in libertà è “terrificante” ma ripete per due volte che, “ora”, la sua famiglia è con lui; lasciando intendere che avesse dei dissidi con loro prima del rapimento, che qualcosa avesse provocato una frattura o quantomeno un allontanamento tra loro.

Clearly, I want justice but right now I’m just happy that my wife is back. I don’t have to raise my kids without her.
Right now I am happy, my wife is back. You would expect that I want to get these people … and then your mind goes into a place that it shouldn’t and I think most people are doing that.

Keith non si mostra desideroso di aver giustizia perché nessuno ha rapito Sherri e se gli inquirenti scoprissero che sono stati i due coniugi ad organizzare il finto rapimento, tutto gli si ritorcerebbe contro. Questione di ore, le intercettazioni ambientali mi daranno ragione, i due coniugi verranno accusati di un crimine: Felony. 

The things she told me that she did, talking to me each time, acting like she was tucking in our kids. She literally lived through hell, she told me she took a piece of cloth and rolled it up like it was Violet and she rocked it. She was so strong.

Keith racconta di come Sherri, durante la prigionia, arrotolasse i suoi vestiti e li abbracciasse pensando a sua figlia Violet, lo fa per muovere a compassione il pubblico televisivo.

And they are ecstatic to have their mom home. When Tyler was reunited with Sherri, she started crying. Tyler then said to Sherri: You don’t cry when you’re happy, and my wife said: When you’re this happy, you cry.

Keith parla ancora di Tyler, il suo bambino di 4 anni, Papini cerca alleati e non ha remore nell’usare suo figlio.

When lights are off, when doors shut, when she hears certain sounds, I mean it’s it’s something that I don’t know how to deal with and we’ll need somebody who can help her thru that from a professional standpoint. I’m sure I’m going to have to reach out for something for some of my feelings as well. It’s not just a long road, I mean it’s we’ll. It’s something we’re never going to forget.

In questo stralcio, Keith parla di luci che si spengono e di porte che si chiudono, è, ancora una volta, la quarta volta, il linguaggio degli abusi sessuali. Inoltre, dice che sia lui che sua moglie avranno bisogno di un supporto psicologico, non sbaglia, sono affetti da un disturbo psicotico condiviso (shared Psychosis), la cosiddetta folie à deux, che li ha condotti ad organizzare il finto rapimento di Sherri. Dice anche che è qualcosa che non dimenticheranno e ha ragione, in specie ricorderanno il giorno in cui verranno incriminati e rimpiangeranno di essersi inventati il rapimento di Sherri.

 If a vehicle pulled up with two big dudes in it, would you approach that vehicle being a hundred pound woman? If two women pulled up and, let’s say, they ask for help, that make more sense to me.

Keith spiega al giornalista che una donna non si sarebbe mai avvicinata ad una macchina con due grossi uomini a bordo, ecco perché Keith e Sherri hanno pensato di addossare la colpa a due donne, il fatto che Papini abbia una spiegazione per tutto e non  aspetti quella degli inquirenti, è sospetto; in pratica Papini condivide i ragionamenti fatti con sua moglie mentre organizzavano il finto rapimento. In realtà, per due uomini sarebbe stato estremamente semplice rapire una ragazza come Sherri. Il racconto dei Papini non regge, un rapimento inusuale, di una donna di 34 anni, madre di famiglia, durante il giorno, ad opera di due donne ed in un’area dove nessuno era mai stato rapito prima.

la-me-ln-sherri-papini-missing-california-20161108

Che cosa ha indotto Sherri e Keith ad inventarsi un rapimento? Forse la noia della quotidianità, forse il sospetto di abusi sessuali, forse alcuni problemi tra di loro o con le famiglie di origine o, lo si evince da queste dichiarazioni di Keith, forse semplicemente  il desiderio di divenire famosi, il bisogno di attenzioni o la necessità di monetizzare.

People would see me and start crying and give me hugs … total strangers.

Keith racconta: “La gente mi vede, piange e mi abbraccia… totalmente estranei”. E’ orgoglioso di essere conosciuto da tutti.

I was very upset. I wanted more involvement with everybody… I wanted every law enforcement agency out there. Did I want more? Of course, I wanted the Marines, the Army, I wanted a squat team to break in every home in a ten miles radius. I’m gonna do everything I can to find my wife.
That’s such a great support from my family, my friends, the all comunity, the whole world reached out and I’m so grateful for that.

Manie di grandezza e una patologica ricerca di attenzioni!

Rumors, assumptions, lies, and hate have been both exhausting and disgusting. Those people should be ashamed of their malicious, sub human behavior. We are not going to allow those people to take away our spirit, love, or rejoice in our girl found alive and home where she belongs. I understand people want the story, pictures, proof that this was not some sort of hoax, plan to gain money, or some fabricated race war. I do not see a purpose in addressing each preposterous lie. Instead, may I give you a glimpse of the mixture of horror and elation that was my experience of reuniting with the love of my life and mother of our children.

Papini ha parole d’odio nei confronti di chi lo accusa di aver progettato il rapimento di sua moglie ma non è capace di negare in modo credibile un suo coinvolgimento, al contrario suggerisce due possibili motivi che possono nascondersi dietro a questa sorta di truffa dai risvolti mediatici: il desiderio di monetizzare e quello di incrementare l’odio razziale nei confronti degli ispanici.

Poiché il rapimento è stato progettato da due persone i motivi che hanno indotto Sherri a fingere il proprio rapimento possono essere diversi da quelli di Keith.

Il capo della polizia ha dichiarato: “Investigation is far from over, infact it’s only begin a new chapter (le indagini sono lontane da una chiusura, si è solo aperto un nuovo capitolo)”.

Omicidio di Gianna Del Gaudio: analisi di un’intervista rilasciata dal marito Antonio Tizzani (parte seconda)

Antonio Tizzani

Antonio Tizzani

La signora Gianna Del Gaudio, 63 anni, è stata uccisa nella notte tra il 26 ed il 27 agosto 2016 da un unico fendente sferratole alla gola. Il marito, Antonio Tizzani, è l’unico indagato per il suo omicidio.

Analisi di un’intervista rilasciata da Antonio Tizzani ad un giornalista di Mediaset:

Giornalista: Se quelli dicono che il DNA è il tuo sull’arma del delitto, è chiaro che…

Antonio Tizzani: (scuote la testa facendo segno di sì)

Giornalista: … i sospetti si concentrano su di te.

Antonio Tizzani: E io cosa ho detto, non m’hai capito?

Giornalista: Una contaminazione?!

Antonio Tizzani: Voluta, voluta… e allora io faccio Rambo… il giustiziere faccio, io mi devo soltanto armare però in quel mo… in quel modo là, io non so chi è e allora chiunque è stato a casa mia, chiunque è stato amico mio e di mia moglie… perché là… là io so’ convinto che è uno che conosce a tutti e due e all… e all…

Antonio Tizzani riferisce al giornalista di essere vittima di qualcuno e di essere deciso a farsi giustizia da solo uccidendo tutti gli amici che lui e sua moglie avevano in comune.

Giornalista: Ma perché ce la aveva con tua moglie?… O con te?

Antonio Tizzani: O con me, o con me…

Tizzani vuol far credere che la moglie sia stata uccisa per incastrare lui, un’ipotesi fantascientifica.

Giornalista: C’è stata un’azione per colpire te?!

Antonio Tizzani: Eh, uccidendo lei, a ‘sto punto.

Giornalista: Tu a chi hai fatto così male? Qualche torto nel lavoro?

Antonio Tizzani: Macchè… Eh, io ci sto pensando, ma pensando, pensando, io faccio pure il giustiziere là e io non so chi è, mi devo soltanto armare e poi a uno a uno ta, ta, ta, ta, ta, ta, ce la faccio fino a quando non mi arrestano, però m’hanno a trovà poi.

Tizzani nega di aver avuto contrasti con qualcuno, per la seconda volta afferma di voler fare una strage e poi riferisce di avere intenzione di nascondersi.

Giornalista: Quindi secondo te l’assassino è quello che ha lasciato il DNA sul guanto?

Antonio Tizzani: No e chi chi lo conosce?… No, no, chiunque…

Tizzani dice al giornalista che l’assassino non è colui che ha lasciato il DNA sul guanto, come può esserne certo se non perché è stato lui a sferrare la coltellata che ha ucciso sua moglie. Un innocente avrebbe quantomeno la speranza che il DNA del soggetto ignoto presente sui guanti trovati nella busta appartenesse all’assassino e giammai la certezza del contrario.

Giornalista: Lì ci sono due Dna, il tuo e quello di uno sconosciuto.

Antonio Tizzani: Non me ne frega un cazzo… Chiunque è stato a casa mia, conosce me e mia moglie e la casa com’è fatta.

Tizzani ripete di non essere interessato al DNA dello sconosciuto.

Antonio Tizzani: Io non ho fatto niente, se uno non fa niente perché deve andare in galera? Per quale motivo? Mi dici, Gianna non mi aiuta (incomprensibile), sta là, guarda (indica il cimitero in lontananza), io alla sera molto tardi, molto tardi, prima che chiudo, mi metto qua a fare le preghiere, non le faccio da solo, le faccio da qua, vedi e faccio le preghiere… non mi aiuta mai questa, non mi aiuta mai, anzi, per aiuto (piange) io e… io non ho fatto niente.

Antonio Tizzani, in questo stralcio, ripete per tre volte di non aver fatto niente, le sue non sono negazioni credibili, “Io non ho ucciso mia moglie Gianna” sarebbe stata una negazione credibile. Inoltre riferisce al giornalista che Gianna non lo aiuta a scoprire l’assassino, la signora Del Gaudio è morta, purtroppo non è nelle condizioni di fare alcunché, ci vuole una buona dose di sfrontatezza per affermare che la vittima di un omicidio non è d’aiuto alle indagini, dal punto di vista dell’analisi del linguaggio, il biasimare la vittima è uno degli indici statisticamente più significativi di colpevolezza. Infine, non solo Tizzani accusa la moglie, ormai morta, di non aiutarlo ma si riferisce a lei chiamandola “questa”, un modo per prenderne le distanze al limite del disprezzo.

Antonio Tizzani: Poi l’altro giorno, si sono portati in caserma a me a Mario e m’ha fatto vede’ fotografie che hanno fatto a Gianna quando… com’era, a me non m’hanno fatto vede’ ufficialmente, le hanno date a Mario però, giù, dentro quella sala non ci sei mai stato? Eh? E dove c’ero io e Mario, fa: La vedi mamma? Io da quelle fotografie ogni tanto chiudo gli occhi e la guardo, da quelle fotografie là, lei era stupita con gli occhi, hai capito? Quindi è qualcuno che conosce casa mia, conosce a me e lei e io li devo far fuori tutti quanti, ne son 30, 40 li faccio fuori tutti, faccio una strage o tra di loro si parlano, si vedono chi cazzo è stato e si salva quello che… ma quello là ha da morì, quello lì insieme a quegli altri perché non hanno parlato.

Tizzani, per la terza volta afferma di voler fare una strage. E’ particolarmente significativo che Antonio Tizzani dica che i suoi 30-40 amici dovrebbero incontrarsi per capire chi è stato in modo che si salvi “quello che…”, è logico che poiché l’omicidio è stato commesso da un solo individuo si sta riferendo all’assassino, e perché dovrebbe salvarsi se non perché è lui? Tizzani fa confusione, pretende che coloro che non hanno commesso l’omicidio parlino, che cosa potrebbero mai dire? Solo l’assassino, confessando, può aiutare gli investigatori, ma inspiegabilmente lui si dice deciso ad uccidere tutti.

Antonio Tizzani: Tu ti rendi conto, tu la vedi così fotografia a colori! Vuoi vedere come reagivo? Eeh, reagisco male, te l’ho detto: Ci sarà una strage! O me lo trovano tra di loro stessi, me lo trovano chi cazzo è stato o io faccio una strage, ricordatelo questo!
Per me è uno che conosce a me, a Gianna e casa mia.

Per la quarta volta Tizzani minaccia di fare una strage.

Giornalista: Doveva avere qualcosa contro, vera o presunto nella sua testa!?

Antonio Tizzani: Eh, nella sua testa di sicuro, nella sua testa di sicuro ce l’aveva.

Giornalista: E quindi bisogna capire…

Antonio Tizzani: Un pazzo, un pazzo, questo pazzo è stato mai chiamato in causa?! E’ stato maiii…

Giornalista: Non si trova.

Antonio Tizzani: Non si trova, mah, mah, mah, ciao, ciao, fammene andà perché non posso, non posso…

Questo finale sarebbe esilarante se non si parlasse di un omicidio, Tizzani, dopo aver rilasciato un’infinità di dichiarazioni incriminanti, dice al giornalista che deve andare perché non può parlare. 

In conclusione, non credo che Antonio Tizzani sia davvero deciso a fare una strage, a divenire uno spree killer, ma il fatto che minacci di farlo mentre si trova sotto i riflettori per essere l’unico indagato per l’omicidio di sua moglie, ce la dice lunga sul suo stato psichico, è venuto il momento che gli inquirenti prendano seri provvedimenti nei suoi confronti.

Antonio Tizzani, durante un’altra intervista, ha praticamente confessato: “Ma io, ma, ma quando dico che so’ innocente, non l’ho fatto una cosa simile, non potevo fare una cosa… non potevo fare male a mia moglie, perché u male… FACENDO QUEL MALE A MIA MOGLIE, L’HO FATTO A ME STESSO… quindi a chi facevo male? A me stesso? A me stesso facevo male?”.

Non solo Tizzani ha confessato ma non ha chiamato il reato col suo nome ovvero omicidio perché è stato lui a commetterlo.