Garlasco murder: Sempio's defence challenges DNA, footprint, and print 33 with five expert reports

The new suspect's counter-offensive

Andrea Sempio, a 38-year-old shop assistant, is under investigation for the murder of Chiara Poggi in Garlasco on 13 August 2007. After the Pavia Public Prosecutor's Office closed its investigation on 7 May, his defence team deposited five expert reports on 25 May 2026, challenging every pillar of the new case. The lawyers, Liborio Cataliotti and Angela Taccia, have stated that Sempio will not answer questions from prosecutors before a preliminary hearing, arguing that the technical data speaks for itself.

How can Sempio's foot, which is 12 centimetres wide, fit into a shoe that is 9.5 centimetres wide at most?

The shoe print that doesn't fit

The prosecution maintains that the killer wore a Frau shoe with a Margom sole, size 42, a fact established with certainty in the trials that convicted Alberto Stasi. The defence does not dispute the shoe model but argues that Sempio's foot is physically incompatible with it. 3D scans taken on 24 October 2025 show his foot is between 11.5 and 12 centimetres wide under load. The consultants calculated that the internal space of the Frau/Margom size 42 is at most 9.2 centimetres, making it impossible for Sempio to have left the bloody footprints.

DNA under the fingernails: 'fragile and partial'

Geneticist Marina Baldi's report attacks the DNA evidence found under Chiara Poggi's fingernails. She describes the Y-chromosome haplotype attributed to Sempio as technically weak, consisting of mixed, incomplete, and not fully consolidated profiles. Baldi notes that the data has no individualising value comparable to a complete autosomal profile and must be interpreted with extreme caution given the presence of multiple contributors.

The finding of Y-haplotype components allegedly compatible with Andrea Sempio under two fingernails of the victim cannot, at present, be considered proof of direct aggressive contact.

The report also highlights the presence of an additional unidentified male Y profile on another finger, arguing that the subungual material is not genetically unique and that it is not possible to select only the component allegedly compatible with the suspect while ignoring other male contributions. Alternative explanations such as background DNA, secondary transfer, contamination, or manipulation of the exhibits remain open.

The disputed print 33

Another key piece of evidence is print 33, a trace of a right hand found on the wall of the internal staircase where the body was discovered. The prosecution attributes this print to Sempio, placing him at the crime scene. The defence consultant, Armando Palmegiani, argues that the print lacks sufficient identifying details and cannot be used for identification purposes. He questions why the prosecution's experts invoked Anglo-Saxon technical standards to justify the attribution if they truly believed the number of matching minutiae points was sufficient.

The elements present in the print under analysis allow us to exclude its usability for identification purposes.

Soliloquies and virtual dialogues

The defence also addressed the car recordings in which Sempio talks to himself. The lawyers argue that these are virtual dialogues where he systematically uses direct speech and the present indicative, imagining hypothetical interrogations and formulating answers to potential accusations. They cite a soliloquy from 12 May 2025, claiming it does not refer to his involvement in the crime but rather to a hypothetical interrogation of Alberto Stasi.

What comes next

The investigation is now in its closing phase. The defence has made clear that Sempio will not submit to questioning by prosecutors Stefano Civardi, Valentina De Stefano, and Giuliana Rizza, preferring to present his case before a preliminary hearing judge. Cataliotti told Open that the technical reports are overwhelming, particularly the one on the shoes, and that Sempio has nothing to explain because he was never at the crime scene.