Appeal / II court hearing – Milan

The court initially summoned all lawyers and the public prosecutor to inform them of the attested threats and pressures suffered by one of the translators designated in 2018 by the 1st grade public prosecution. The threatened translator will be the aggrieved party in a separate case.

The defendant asked for the complete re-translation of all 1st grade documents provided by the victim of the threats; the request was refused by the court, with the only exception of the text of one wiretapped conversation as asked by public prosecutor Ms Cieravolo.
The new translation job postpones the III and IV session, scheduled on October 15th and 23rd.

The court also puts to the record a rather “non ritual” communication: on the evening preceding the II appeal hearing, the Ukrainian minister of justice sent an email directly to the president of the appeal court, Justice Ichino.


Appeal / 1st court hearing, September 30th – Milan

Due to the containment measures of covid-19, the court decided to hold the trial behind closed doors -just lawyers, civil parts and accredited members of the press are to be let in.
Mr Markiv, currently convicted, and the Ukrainian State appealed the verdict issued by the Pavia court of justice in July 2019: the notice of appeal consists of a list of presumed judicial errors committed by the 1st grade court and several requests. What follows has been first summed up by the court, secondly discussed by Milan public prosecutor Annunziata Cieravolo, by all plaintiffs -lawyers Ballerini and Tambuscio representing Rocchelli-Ferrari family, lawyer Pisapia for the Italian Press Federation and lawyer Tizzoni for Cesuralab- and then explained by the defendants -lawyers Della Valle and Rapetti for Mr. Markiv, lawyer Bertolini Clerici for the Ukrainian state.

Alleged judicial errors marked by the appellants:
The crime was committed outside the Italian jurisdiction: Markiv detains both Ukrainian and Italian passports; the defense infers the Ukrainian citizenship is the one that counts in this case.
The public prosecutor and the plaintiffs replied that citizenship is no “one way use optional”, it rather implies legal rights and duties for the bearer, always.
The ukrainian state has been wrongfully condemned: the prosecution described the clear hierarchical link between Mr. Markiv -back then a soldier in the Ukrainian National Guard- and his army, thus putting in evidence the responsibility of the Ukrainian state in the double murder;
Misinterpretation of the evidences and documents: those have been once again explained by all parts.
Andrea Rocchelli was killed by splinters derived by mortar fires and not directly by a mortar shell: hence there’d be no connection between the victim and the National Guard that fired those mortars. No comment.
France did not follow up the case filed by Mr William Roguelon, who got badly injured within the same attack. False: in July 2019 the Bordeaux court of justice confirmed Roguelon status of victim and entitled him to a reimbursement for the suffered damages.

Requests brought up by the appellants:
Site visit on the crime scene. The prosecution replies that a site visit six years after the murded would make little sense. Also a thorough satellite survey was used during the 1st grade of the trial.
Ballistic analysis to demonstrate how Markiv’s kalashnikov, a common AK74, couldn’t have possibly reached Andrea Rocchelli and Andrey Mironov from the soldier’s position. Therefore, their deaths would be unrelated. Markiv was however charged for his contribution to the double murder by providing the gps coordinates of the victims to those soldiers who maneuvered the mortars. He wasn’t judged guilty of directly causing Andrea’s and Andrey’s deaths.
New audio and video evaluation of several documents to take into consideration the “cross fire” option.
Hearing of new witnesses: Petruviac (driver who rescued Roguelon approx 1 hr after the attack, about 200 m away from the scene), Fusinaz (cartography expert), Scollo (ex-soldier) and Tiepolo (police training expert).
Use of the documentary “The Wrong Place” as judicial evidence. The prosecution and all plaintiffs replied that a movie can’t legally constitute a judicial evidence because it is filmed by third parties and it’s impossible to control its metadata. A documentary doesn’t therefore ensure an impartial view on what happened.

The next session is scheduled for Thursday, October 1st.


Andy: the appeal process

The appeal trial for the murderer of Andy Rocchelli will take place in Milan on the 29th and 30th September and 1st October.
In addition to the death of two journalists and the injuring of a third one, on the 24th May 2014, our freedom of information was strongly undermined. The three of them were unarmed, far from the conflict and they have been intentionally targeted.
After many years of research and a long trial, in 2019 Vitaly Markiv has been convicted to 24 years in prison for his active role in the ambush. He is Italo-Ukrainian and served in the Ukrainian militia on the Karachun hill, from where the mortar shots had been fired.
The cover up silence of the Ukrainian army and politics on the fact has been replaced by the Pavia Court, thanks to an historical sentence underlining the intentional nature of the shooting against Andy Rocchelli and his colleagues.
The Milan Court is now expected to judge such sentence. The family, the  the association of journalists and anyone involved in the trial will have to face again the events of 2014.
We, as Volpi Scapigliate, believe that independently from the outcome, it is necessary to confirm once again our support to the Rocchelli family and most of all to all the journalists that daily risk their lives for keeping us informed on what happens around the world.
The photos exhibited in some bars and other places in Pavia, illustrate the reality with the objectivity and emotional strength that Andy always put in his work. For us, this is an homage to his work and his memory.