Pamela case, Cassation: “From Oseghale coldness and foresight”

Innocent Oseghale’s conduct showed “coldness and foresight”. This was written by the judges of the first criminal section of the Cassation in the reasons for the sentence pronounced last February 23 with which they definitively confirmed the responsibility for the murder of Pamela Mastropietro, the 18-year-old Roman, who moved away from a recovery community and whose remains were found closed in two trolleys in Pollenza near Macerata on January 30, 2018. The judges had instead ordered a second trial before the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Perugia relating to the aggravating circumstance of sexual violence. The sentence for Oseghale, sentenced to life imprisonment in the first and second degree, will be decided after the second appeal and if the aggravating circumstance of sexual violence for the accused should fall, there could be a reduction in the sentence. “The considerations relating to the frailty of Mastropietro, who certainly had an experience studded with difficulties related to drug abuse, are completely abstract due to the content of the toxicological and histological tests, mentioned above, which logically excluded that the assumption of the substance may have determined the death of the woman – explain the judges – At that moment it is only Oseghale who knows the real determinism of death, and the gesture of concealing ‘those edges’ of the tissue placed in correspondence with ‘those’ wounds is highly indicative (and therefore indicative) of the will to hinder a technical assessment of the death “, underline the judges. Regarding the postponement for the aggravating circumstance of sexual violence, the supreme judges explain:” Even in a reconstructive context made extremely difficult by the scarcity of elements cognitive on the fact (since the version of the accused, belated and unlikely compared to lu ogo di consumazione) it should be noted that the “Appeal sentence” does not solve in an understandable way the knot relating to the absolute validity or otherwise of consent to the relationship and, conversely, does not strengthen the hypothesis of dissent from the unprotected relationship through, if necessary, an investigation supplement aimed at involving the subjects who had just before come into contact with Mastropietro ”.