Rome, Italy – Andrea Sempio, 38, from Garlasco, accused of the 2007 murder of Chiara Poggi, is at the center of a new defensive strategy. His legal team, led by lawyers Liborio Cataliotti and Angela Taccia, has been working intensively in Rome to prepare a robust response to the Pavia Prosecutor’s Office, which considers Sempio the true killer.
Sempio Undergoes Extensive Psychological Evaluation
For a day and a half, Sempio underwent a rigorous psychological evaluation by psychologist and psychotherapist Valentina Marsella. The aim was to provide an alternative explanation for his personality, which the Racis Carabinieri described as having an “innate ability to lie.” Sempio was subjected to numerous questions about his life and impulses, with his responses meticulously recorded by two cameras. He also completed various questionnaires, including the well-known MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory), a widely used psychological test for assessing personality and mental health.
The defense seeks to counter the prosecution’s interpretation of Sempio’s famous car monologues, which prosecutors view as a form of confession. In these recordings, Sempio allegedly admitted to knowing details, such as an intimate video of Chiara, which he claims never to have seen. Lawyer Cataliotti argues that these audio recordings are not confessions but are consistent with Sempio’s personality. “He was commenting on a podcast,” Cataliotti explained, “and it’s his habit to repeat aloud conversations heard on TV or read in newspapers.”
Six Expert Reports to Dismantle the Accusation
This psychological assessment is just one of six expert reports the defense plans to submit within twenty days of the notice of conclusion of investigations. The defense team spent three days at the “Genomica” diagnostic center near Tiburtina station in Rome, meticulously preparing their case.
Key Expert Reports Include:
- Anthropometric Report: According to defense consultant Armando Palmegiani, Sempio wears a size 44 shoe, which is incompatible with the size 42 Frau shoe print found at the crime scene and attributed to the killer.
- IT Forensics Report: To address digital evidence.
- Medical-Legal Report: A response to the findings of forensic pathologist Cristina Cattaneo.
- Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (BPA): To analyze bloodstains at the scene.
- Dactyloscopic Report on Print 33: This is considered a crucial piece of evidence by the prosecution. The print, found on the staircase wall where Chiara’s body was discovered, is attributed to the killer and allegedly matches Sempio’s fingerprint. The defense contests this attribution, suggesting it could have been left by Sempio earlier, as he often visited the cellar with Chiara’s friend, Marco Poggi. The report will also examine whether the print has sufficient minutiae for attribution.
The defense’s strategy aims to either deny the print’s attribution to Sempio, challenge its evidentiary value, or argue that it was left before the crime occurred.
Intense Media Scrutiny and Future Steps
Sempio and his legal team returned from Rome on Wednesday evening, May 15, 2026, facing intense media attention from dozens of cameramen, photographers, and journalists. They even avoided leaving the diagnostic center for lunch breaks due to the constant scrutiny. “We are truly exhausted, especially Andrea,” commented lawyer Angela Taccia before boarding the train to Milan. “For a week, he has been with us or confined at home, as if already under house arrest.”
The lawyers have since declined all interview requests, stating their need to focus on reviewing the documents and preparing their expert reports. They also face the delicate decision of whether to allow Sempio to be interrogated before the Pavia Prosecutor’s Office requests a committal for trial. Sempio has previously avoided interrogation twice. Given the accusations against him, his legal team must carefully consider this move.
The Garlasco murder case continues to be a high-profile and complex legal battle, with Sempio’s defense now actively working to present its counter-arguments and challenge the prosecution’s narrative.
Source: milano.corriere.it
