Hence the experts of the judge, a trio of engineering professors who should answer within a couple of months the question of the questions: what is the cause of the collapse of the Morandi bridge? On the other, the defense consultants of the 71 investigated for the disaster of 14 August 2018 between technicians, managers and executives of Autostrade per l’Italia (Aspi), Spea and the Ministry of Infrastructure. They have been meeting for fifteen months, making inspections, analyzing finds, discussing corrosion, stays, beams, seals.
–
The facts
It happens that on December 19, the discussion ignites, that a few big words from Aspi’s defense consultants begin to fly to the address of the investigators of the investigating judge, Angela Nutini. And that the latter, professors Giampaolo Rosati, Massimo Losa and Renzo Valentini, did not go right down. They thus informed the magistrate of the incident complaining constant pressure from their colleagues that would make the job uneventful, precisely in view of the conclusion of the second evidentiary accident that will define the causes of the collapse, a crucial element in deciding the responsibilities of the suspects. In short, the important appointment and the tension rises. Nutini did not think twice about this and sent the proceedings of the meeting to the public prosecutor’s office in Genoa, a report with the sentences considered offensive and a recording. The head of the investigators, Francesco Cozzi, has decided to evaluate whether there are offensive profiles of professional reputation. Things have been said by a consultant to the experts regarding a controversy over the performance of certain operations.
The file: outrage
The opening of a file on the matter seems obvious, with the possible accusation of insulting a public official.
All born from the discussion on a buffer beam of the deck, the structure on which the road of the bridge rested, against which the experts considered the investigations sufficient. Aspi’s consultants, on the other hand, wanted to do load tests to evaluate the resistance of the specimen and were also willing to pay the cost.
The complex case and during these meetings, on average one every fifteen twenty days, there are always discussions but in the game of the parties – Giuseppe Mancini, the coordinator of Aspi consultants threw water on the fire – everyone’s interest to gather as many elements as possible to understand what brought about the collapse. I would speak of contributing factors.
–
The implications
The corrosion of the stay, the weakness of the deck, the defects in construction, the super truck with the steel coil … The scepter of truth has none … Only the lightning is no longer spoken. The very delicate issue because each cause has its own leaders and they don’t help the size of the disaster, with its 43 victims.
The clash between experts is likely to explode today during a hearing scheduled for the evidentiary accident.
–
–
January 16, 2020 (change January 16, 2020 | 10:34 pm)
© RESERVED REPRODUCTION
–
