Overview
- The defence submitted multiple technical reports between May 24 and May 26 that question the prosecution’s key traces, including the bloody sole impression known as “impronta 33,” bloodstain pattern analysis and a partial Y‑STR profile from under the victim’s fingernails.
- Defence experts say the footprint evidence is not attributable to Andrea Sempio because his foot is substantially wider than the shoe imprint and the wall print (impronta 33) lacks the minimum matching detail needed for identification.
- A genetic report filed by the defence argues the Y‑chromosome material under Chiara Poggi’s nails is mixed, partial and non‑individualizing and therefore cannot by itself prove a direct aggressive contact, citing alternative explanations such as secondary transfer or contamination.
- Prosecutors count some recorded monologues by Sempio as probative while the defence has filed a memory with audio excerpts to show those remarks repeat public commentary and lack any new, confessionary content; Sempio declined to be interrogated by the procedural deadline on May 26.
- Related judicial threads continue to unfold: a separate Brescia file examines alleged corruption involving Sempio’s father and a former deputy prosecutor, and Massimo Lovati, Sempio’s former lawyer, has been ordered to stand trial for alleged diffamation in Milan.