Unfortunately JUDICIAL MISTAKES are not unlikely. Since 1992 in Italy over 26 thousand people suffered unjust detention in prison.
These mistakes often lead to a disruption of honest people private and professional lives as well as their families’, affecting also their heritage.
Only a DEFENSIVE SURVEY carried out by an AUTHORIZED PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR can bring to light judicial errors, demonstrating someone’s INNOCENCE.
This happens because the apparatus of Justice, often, simply seeks a PROCESSUAL TRUTH, without investigating in search of the only HISTORICAL TRUTH.
For this reason, the Legislator, since 1989, has granted a significant investigative power to the defense, so that investigations are carried out precisely through the AUTHORIZED PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR, in order to demonstrate the INNOCENCE of the suspect / defendant.
WHAT IS THE PROCESS TRUTH: this is the reconstruction of the facts ACCEPTABLE BY THE POINT OF VIEW, which has nothing to do with the actual reconstruction of the events. It is therefore a truth that is often created by false declarations, errors in interpretations and erroneous assessments, which lead the Judges to represent the facts differently from how they actually took place, thus leading to clamorous judicial errors.
To give a concrete example, let us reflect on what may be necessary for a Public Prosecutor, in a murder case, for the closure of the investigation:
- The victim: if it were an important / influential person, the investigations would move in a different way than if they were an ordinary or unknown person.
- The murder weapon: if it is found at the crime scene everything is clear, but if it is not found immediately, the investigation would go ahead for suppositions, which would hardly lead to finding it.
- Witnesses: they are not always sincere (maybe they have not witnessed what happened, but they have an interest in the game) or at least they are not always reliable (often they are afraid, they do not want to be involved, their emotions erase memories etc. .).
- Scientific analyzes: too often the truth of the proceedings is totally based on scientific investigations. The problem lies in the fact that the only scientific confirmation (which often concerns a single element, such as DNA collection) if not corroborated by a precise and irrefutable reconstruction of the facts, which is based on further tangible evidence, leads to a reconstruction also in this case based on presumptions or personal convictions, deviating from the reality of what actually happened. Moreover, as we know, what is true for science today, tomorrow could be an illusion.
When these 4 aspects have been taken into consideration and only some elements converge towards a person, a PROCESSUAL TRUTH is generated, as the information obtained in some way manages to create a THOUGHT of GUILTY, even if the tests can still give open to different interpretations. Contrary to what it should be, in fact, it is unlikely that a person is condemned because he is found guilty “beyond any reasonable doubt”. Often, unfortunately, doubts, far more than reasonable, there are many.
The intervention of the AUTHORIZED PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR is the only element capable of bringing the investigative findings back into balance (reversing and clarifying any anomalies of the accusatory reconstruction, documenting in depth every element that could allow the JUDGE to arrive at the HISTORICAL TRUTH).