The Milan prosecutor Maura Ripamonti, in asking for sentences for Gentile and for the other former Lebruto and Macello managers who had been acquitted at first instance, explained that the crimes of negligent train disaster and murder and multiple negligent injuries "were committed in violation of accident prevention and safety regulations". Marco Albanesi, former manager of the maintenance unit and the only one convicted in the first instance, asked for a plea agreement for the reduction of the sentence
The Milan prosecutor Maura Ripamonti's request for a sentence of 8 years and 4 months in prison against Maurizio Gentile, the former CEO of the Italian railway network considered guilty for the Pioltello railway disaster of 25 January 2018. The Milan prosecutor, together with the deputy prosecutor Olimpia Bossi, asked the Court of Appeal to also sentence the former managers Umberto Lebruto (again to 8 years and 4 months) and Vincenzo Macello (at 7 years and 10 months). All the defendants in the case of the derailment of the Cremona-Milan regional train which caused three deaths and over one hundred injuries had been acquitted at first instance. Finally, RFI has been asked to be sentenced to a fine of 900 thousand euros on appeal.
The reasons for the request
At the end of her speech, the prosecutor proposed the same conviction and sentence requests made in first instance for the four defendants who had instead been acquitted. In her speech, prosecutor Ripamonti explained that the "disputed crimes", negligent train disaster and homicide and multiple negligent injuries, "were committed in violation of accident prevention and safety regulations". According to the prosecutor, Gentile "was the only person who had decision-making and spending power, all the others did not, they only had limited management powers. Lebruto and Macello were managers, they had limited spending powers". However, Lebruto and Macello are also to blame for "not ensuring the maintenance of the infrastructure". This lack of maintenance of the infrastructure combined with the fact that Gentile did not "create a corporate organization that had the structures to guarantee maintenance", have "facilitated Albanesi's failure to fulfill obligations" in replacing the damaged joint, which caused the train derailment.
Albanesi asks for a plea deal
Marco Albanesi, the former manager of the maintenance unit cited by prosecutor Maura Ripamonti, was the only one to have already been sentenced in first instance to 5 years and 3 months. Now, in the appeal process, he has agreed with the prosecutor and prosecutor on a sentence of 3 years and 4 months, on which the Court of Appeal will always have to decide. Albanesi therefore chose the path of plea bargaining which, as announced by the lawyer Giuseppe Alamia at the beginning of the second degree hearing before the fifth criminal appeal section, would lower the prison period to just over three years. The next steps of the trial will see the word given on 15 October to the lawyers of the civil party and those of RFI, the civil party responsible and the accused. Then, on November 12th, all the defenses spoke and finally the last hearing set for December 15th.
Legal defendants: "Theorems and persistence from prosecutors"
After the requests for conviction made by the prosecutor, the comment arrived from the lawyer Ambra Giovene, lawyer for two former accused managers. There is "a sort of obstinacy in the vision of a top figure who is believed to have responsibilities only because he plays the role of CEO" and, according to the lawyer, the Milan prosecutor's office is "following a theorem" in managing the case. Giovene underlined that prosecutor Ripamonti's indictment was "totally disinterested in the very reasoned and very reasonable first degree acquittal sentence. Evidently - he added - the prosecutors are unable to accept a first degree acquittal and are trying to overturn this sentence on the basis of assumptions that do not take the trial into account in the slightest". This, the lawyer for the former RFI executives reiterated, is "a theorem that draws strength only from itself and this is unfortunate, because it doesn't even give us the possibility of a comparison, because there is no criticism of the sentence. Only the same arguments are repeated".
