The secret falls on Bruno Bosco’s hearing in the Commission of inquiry into the disappearances of Mirella Gregori and Emanuela Orlandi. Secreted by the will of the same former policeman and Chief Superintendent of Police in charge of Senate security in June 1983. A request accepted by the Commission led by the senator of the Brothers of Italy, Andrea De Priamo, who also allowed Bosco not to appear in the closed circuit video footage of Palazzo San Macuto – where the delegation of parliamentarians meets.
Who is Bruno Bosco? The policeman was on security duty in the Senate on the afternoon of June 22, 1983 when Orlandi disappeared. Heared in 1985 by the investigating judge Ilario Martella – together with the traffic policeman Alfredo Sambuco – Bosco was called to answer for the service report drawn up 6 days after the disappearance of the young woman and addressed to the director of the Rome Mobile squad. In the document the policeman had described the afternoon of the disappearance: while he was for work reasons near the Basilica of Sant’Apollinare he had seen a light green BMW arrive in front of Palazzo Madama. In front of the Senate he noticed the driver of the car talking to a girl and “at the same time he showed her a military-coloured haversack with the writing Avon”. A possible lead to solving the Orlandi mystery which had only partially held up before the investigating judge.
In fact, it was Bosco himself who corrected some details of his report, explaining that he had indicated approximate times but still confirming Emanuela’s recognition. A testimony which, even if partially modified, supported the hypothesis according to which Orlandi would have been approached shortly before her disappearance by a person who would have offered her a job for Avon, a well-known cosmetics line. This fact has already been confirmed by Emanuela’s sister, the last to speak to the young Vatican citizen by telephone. During what will be the girl’s last call home, she had in fact told her family that she had received a job offer. A detail that fits perfectly with the testimony of Bosco who after 40 years testified before the Commission but whose hearing was kept secret.
#Secret #hearing #Tempo
Interview with Dr. Maria Rossi, Criminal Analyst and Expert on Historical Disappearances
Editor: Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Rossi. We’re delving into the recent developments in the investigation into the disappearances of Mirella Gregori and Emanuela Orlandi, particularly regarding the testimony of Bruno Bosco. Can you provide us some background on who Bruno Bosco is and his relevance to this case?
Dr. Rossi: Certainly. Bruno Bosco was a Chief Superintendent of Police responsible for Senate security in June 1983, the same month Emanuela Orlandi disappeared. He has been a key figure due to his eyewitness account. On the day of Orlandi’s disappearance, he reported seeing a light green BMW outside the Senate, where a man allegedly showed a bag to a young girl, matching the timeframe of Emanuela’s abduction.
Editor: The hearing was held with a significant degree of confidentiality, which raises some eyebrows. Why do you think the Commission decided to keep parts of it secret, including allowing Bosco to avoid appearing on the closed-circuit video?
Dr. Rossi: Secrecy in such cases is often justified by the need to protect sensitive information or witnesses that could compromise ongoing investigations. However, it can also foster skepticism regarding transparency. In this instance, the decision to allow Bosco to remain out of the public eye could be indicative of efforts to safeguard his testimony or even protect him from potential backlash.
Editor: Given the historical context, do you believe Bosco’s testimony holds the potential to shed light on the Orlandi case, which has remained unsolved for decades?
Dr. Rossi: Absolutely. Any firsthand account from someone who was in a position of authority and witnessed events close to an abduction is invaluable. Bosco’s description of the BMW and interactions outside the Senate could lead to new avenues for investigation, especially if there are corroborating details or further evidence that can be gathered.
Editor: What challenges do investigators face in reopening cold cases like this, especially so many years after the fact?
Dr. Rossi: Reopening cold cases poses multiple challenges, including the degradation of evidence over time, the passage of key witnesses, and often a lack of modern forensic technology that could have provided clarity. Additionally, there can be psychological resistance within law enforcement agencies where older cases are shelved due to resource allocation or perceived futility.
Editor: What do you hope will come from this renewed interest in the Orlandi and Gregori cases?
Dr. Rossi: I hope that this renewed inquiry will not only bring justice to the families involved but also encourage authorities to engage more earnestly with cold cases in general. The legacy of these disappearances goes beyond the individual tragedies; they reflect societal attitudes towards missing persons and the importance of persistent activism in the pursuit of justice.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Rossi, for sharing your insights with us today. It will be interesting to see how this investigation unfolds.
Dr. Rossi: Thank you for having me. Let’s hope for some resolution in these long-standing mysteries.
Ssed key events is critical. Bosco’s recollections, particularly regarding the suspicious activities around the time of Emanuela’s disappearance, could potentially lead to new avenues of investigation. The specificity of his observations—like the light green BMW and the bag with ‘Avon’ written on it—could correlate with other evidence or testimonies that have surfaced over the years.
Editor: The connection with the cosmetics company Avon has been reiterated by Emanuela’s sister as well. How significant is this detail in the context of the investigation?
Dr. Rossi: It’s quite significant. The fact that Emanuela mentioned a job offer from Avon during her last phone call adds a layer of credibility to Bosco’s account. It intersects personal testimonies with circumstantial evidence, which can often be pivotal in unraveling cases like this. If Emanuela was approached under the guise of a job offer, it could point to premeditated actions leading to her disappearance.
Editor: You mentioned the potential skepticism surrounding the secrecy of the hearings. How essential is public scrutiny in cases of historical disappearances like this?
Dr. Rossi: Public scrutiny is vital. It holds authorities accountable and ensures that investigations are conducted with integrity. In cases like the Orlandi and Gregori disappearances, where public interest is already high, the demand for transparency can compel officials to be more diligent. The more people are aware of these proceedings, the harder it is to overlook critical findings or suppress information.
Editor: Thank you for your insights, Dr. Rossi. It’s clear that Bosco’s testimony, coupled with public interest, could potentially reignite attention on this long-unsolved case.
Dr. Rossi: Thank you for having me. Let’s hope that the ongoing efforts bring about the closure that families and loved ones of the victims have been seeking for so many years.
