Wednesday February 23
Below is a rough translation of a summary that I got from the CDA web site (Comittee for the Defense of
Marini sums up his case against 53 anarchists for armed band and subversive assotiation. The defense will present its case the 4th to 7th of March. There a few phrases I left in Italian and other parts that are rough (Maybe one of you Italians could help?). The Italian version is at: www.ecn.org/26feb00/marini.html
The address by the prosecutor is finally over and with it we have the request for the sentences. Marini first concluded this address by talking about the Milano incident, then he spoke of the general activities of the organization, its political personality, of the danger of anarchist ideas (of these anarchists) then he gave the list of requested sentences.
The documentation found during the investigation, according to the accusations, was that it was the intention of the organization to commit the crimes, the shining example found in numerous copies of the “Manual of the explosiv(ist) anarchist” whose introduction states in bold letters that “destruction is the summit of anarchist thought”. To complete the picture of the destructive plot the falsification of the casa editrice and of the (really nonexistent) place of the press, the common element of subversive virulence in confiscated manifestos emerges (the manifestos against Marini all over Italy, those against Vigna, the dossier about the trial in Trento).
Also, remember the other material which Marini confiscated which describes-a demonstration of the progressive dangerousness of the anarchist thought of this band- the polemics and the attacks on the FAI, extracts of the deposition of Alfredo Bonanno (“We don’t want to change the state, we want to overthrow it.” as Marini sums up) The P.M. continues saying that “these people don’t talk chatter, we have found the use of the directions of the aforementioned manual in the crimes upon the barracks of Euroforce in Florence, claimed in letters written by normografo and sent to Radio Populare as had been done in Milano for the attacks on Marini Palace (he quotes the anarchist Patrizia Cadeddu who has been condemned to 5 years and convicted for having delivered the letter).
He remembers the courtroom declaration of Stasi and Garagin who announced that they belong to an armed anarchist organization and then launched into Pindaric flights ideologically connecting the ascribed to the other extremists that were tried (the trial of the 7th of April), they fanatically interpret the dreams of others, meanwhile they would kill (remember Giudo, Rossa, the Moro case). He laments the ideological garbage of “these anarchists” by (not) accepting the democratic method of dialogue, syndicalism, del sociale (the social order?), he remembers the season “that made us cry” of the 70s, evoked to recite a rhetorical hope so that you others won’t be ready to “receive these invitations of death.”
Then one enters into the heart of the trial: Marini explains how he had proceeded to elaborate the inquest by dividing the accused into 2 blocks, those who are engaged in apparently legal activity and those who are engaged in clandestine activity (naturally he immediately added that no one could guarantee that those who appeared in the first had never had any connection to clandestine activity, on the contrary). This is the heart of the inquest, of the trial, why the charge explains in evident terms what is understood as subversive association, how it is possible to be investigated for subversiveassociation.
Then he continued with a “mea culpa” for not having insisted on finding proof in investigation Silvano and Baleno (“maybe it wouldn’t have ended up that way now…”) No comment.
The theory: subversive association and armed band are permanent crimes, always existent. He laments the release of the arrested due to procedural errors, another element that in his view concurs with the continuing activity of the band, however he has declared that even in jail the charged have continued their subversive activities, they have shown the persistence of the associative link: proof that there must be a vast correspondence between them and the members that remain free (he reads excerpts from several letters, many of which are completely made up).
In this band there are no leaders, there is no need to demonstrate the existence of leaders only followers, this cannot block us from the legal formation of the penal code. The fact is, we find ourselves in front of a criminal progression: the group initially delineates itself around the idea of bringing down institutions (subversive association) thus it evolves following with violent acts perpetrated for subverting the constituted order (“also against you gentlemen popular jurors!”) so they arm themselves to finance themselves and finance other crimes (armed band).
“The group is composed with the tried method of compartmentalization into two levels: one open and apparently legal (revolt of propaganda, proselytism Social Centers as a recruiting place), the other hidden and illegal (“Without guarantee that the members of the first don’t si calassero as we have heard in this courtroom in the celebrated trials of the 70s, il passamontagna in facia and they also go to commit robberies.” Calling it simply an informal organization: doesn’t change anything. Calling it ORAI, we have here a threatening letter to the poor doctor of the Torino jail. Calling it AR, does
anything change? Nothing. Anarchist organization is enough. It is not the slogan that makes substance change; we don’t barricade ourselves behind misunderstandings. If the slogan doesn’t exist it doesn’t change. Independently from that which sustains the associative links. ”
Marini explains that this law, created in ’79, is based on the concept of anticipated punibility, the same type of crime as political conspiracy.” This Article of law-he claims-was born not form the fascist code Rocco, but from democratic legislature.
Here is the essence of this investigation, this trial:that which Marini himself said: THE INTENTION IS ENOUGH . Because as anarchists, still using his words, “you cannot keep actions from following ideas” and the State cannot stand looking while the declared violent attack or prepare themselves to make it into their very structures. This is the only thing that a democratic State can’t and should not tolerate; the presumption of danger is enough.
“That which Bonanno and the insurrectionary anarchists want is this, and it is not necessary that the violent acts manifest themselves, they don’t have to necessarily assume the worth of the crime: the political gesture is enough.”
This is how much clearer and more sincere the discussion in the courtroom of the tribunal has been: according to Marini it is not necessary for an individual to infringe upon the laws. It is enough to write things like those leaflets that he cited from, those manifestos, those pamphlets, because it’s clear that the authors plainly say in a radical manner-therefore inevitably destined to lead to a practical and violent act- their radical contrast with the constitutional and democratic method. It’s enough to adhere to a similar thesis. The crime of participation in a subversive association does not require a relation with all ‘members’ nor with every episode: expression is enough, even without taking part in or explaining a particular activity.
They are very clear and unequivicable words, not without their own logic: that of the Reason of the State. The State can permit anything except that which could overthrow it.
The request of the Public Minister Marini, is divided in three groups, those that belong to the armed band, those who would have promoted, constituted, organized and participated in the armed band, without division between leaders, directors, followers etc. The second, the charged with participation in subversive association. The third, those charged with marginal specific crimes (theft, receiving stolen goods, crimes that lay outside the political sphere).
Per motivi di tempo non compaiono, in the first group, the crimes they are accused of are singular episodes attributed to the activity of the band, thus robbery, murder, etc. Let’s note that the requests for prison are relative to the crime of destruction (though it may be nonexistent, that is the explosion of the Prenestino with the self bomb which killed the anarchist De Blasi who was preparing it). The members of the second group are only charged with the crime of association.
Charged with the crime of armed band:
ANDREOZZI 4,8 (4 years, and 8 months)
CAMPO penitentiary + 10 + 6 months of daytime
GARAGIN penitentiary + 30 + 1,6 months of daytime
LO FORTE 4,8
LO VECCHIO 30
PORCU F. penitentiary + 30 + 1,6 months of daytime
SCROCCO penitentiary + 30 + 1,6 months of daytime
SFORZA A. 18
SFORZA F. 3
SFORZA M. 3
for all of the above the increased charge of ‘purpose
of terrorism’ is added .
Participation in subversive association:
DE PASCALI 1,6
DI MARCA 1,6
PORCU P. 3
SFORZA R. 1,6
For all of the above have the increased charge of
‘purpose of terrorism’ is added.
Charged with specific crimes:
DI FAZIO 3
PIO 8 months
These are the requests. In the next hearing that precedes the decision of the court the defense will
intervene (the lawyer Calia will intervene), it will be from the 4th to 7th of March, also in the bunker of
the Foro Italico di Roma.