Garlasco, a year later the turning point is very close: here is when the truth will be known

It seems like a century has passed, yet only a year has gone by. On March 11, 2025, the new chapter of the Garlasco case erupted with the registration of Andrea Sempio, friend of Chiara Poggi's brother, in the register of suspects for murder.

Since then, morning and evening, television and social networks have relentlessly fueled a debate that, nearly nineteen years after the crime, promises to rewrite one of the most discussed proceedings in recent Italian judicial history. The case has become a television format in its own right: lawyers, former reporters, former magistrates, and criminologists face off in opposing camps, between those who believe in innocence and those who believe in guilt; entire schedules are based on the analysis of blood traces in the house on Via Pascoli, on increasingly daring motive hypotheses, and on learned disputes among experts in DNA and Y haplotypes.

Despite the background noise, regarding the contents of the investigation reopened in Pavia—led by prosecutor Fabio Napoleone with deputy Stefano Civardi and prosecutors Valentina De Stefano and Giuliana Rizza, and carried out by the Homicide Team of the Milan Carabinieri Investigation Unit—very little is actually known.

But the countdown has begun: within two or three months, the prosecuting office could request the indictment for murder of Andrea Sempio, revealing the entire accusatory framework. The “showdown,” the so-called “discovery” of the investigation, is now imminent.

Only then will it be understood whether the entire investigative framework and the trials regarding the murder of Chiara Poggi have produced the most shocking judicial error in the country: in that event, the former boyfriend Alberto Stasi—definitively sentenced to 16 years—would have been unjustly imprisoned for nearly eleven years.

On March 11, 2025, the investigation against Sempio becomes official. A few days later, his DNA is collected for comparison with the genetic profiles obtained in 2007 from biological material under the victim's nails. As early as the end of 2016, the then-friend of Marco Poggi had been investigated, then archived by the Pavia prosecutor's office following a complaint from Stasi's mother and the defenses of the former Bocconi student.

However, a different case now hangs over that closure, opened in Brescia with the hypothesis of corruption: the suspects are former deputy prosecutor Mario Venditti and the father of Sempio, Giuseppe. According to the Brescia prosecutors, the dismissal could have been “manipulated” in exchange for money. After a tough confrontation between judicial offices—the investigation, coordinated by prosecutor Francesco Prete, is now in the hands of other magistrates—the chapter remains open.

What brings Sempio back to the center of investigative attention is primarily the DNA collected under Chiara's nails, but not only that. The Pavia magistrates and the Milanese carabinieri line up possible failures of previous investigations and unusual circumstances: the 2008 records of Sempio and his friends, drawn up simultaneously by the same judicial police officers; the absence, in the documents, of the note regarding the illness that allegedly struck Sempio during an interrogation; some unusual phone calls from the young man to the Poggi home in the days leading up to the crime; above all, the receipt presented by the thirty-seven-year-old as an “alibi” for the morning of the murder.

Meanwhile, the media aspect is spreading. Weaving suggestions about the crime and the Santuario della Bozzola, near Vigevano, is particularly lawyer Massimo Lovati, who, along with Angela Taccia, assists Sempio. His memorable television appearances at all hours, between “strange dreams” and “mysterious premonitions,” are noteworthy.

Then the incident with Fabrizio Corona and a few too many drinks lead Sempio and his family to revoke his mandate, turning to the more measured Liborio Cataliotti. In March, the prosecution requests the preliminary hearing on the comparison between Sempio's DNA and the genetic material under the victim's nails. After a troubled process—geneticist Emiliano Giardina had been indicated, then deemed incompatible—the investigating judge Daniela Garlaschelli appoints the biologist from the Scientific Police Denise Albani.

In May, the prosecuting office summons Sempio to court in Pavia for questioning; simultaneously, Marco Poggi is heard in Mestre, where he currently resides, and the convicted Alberto Stasi. During this session, the prosecutors submit the report on the so-called "imprint 33" found on the steps of the cellar, which had never been attributed before and is now linked to the suspect. Sempio, surprisingly, does not show up. Another twist occurs, with lawyer Taccia celebrating on social media with the now-famous tiger emoticon.

From that moment on, the relations between the prosecution and Sempio's defense become strained. Prosecutor Napoleone imposes a new line: absolute silence, no further communication regarding the merits of the acts. The investigation thus continues in utmost secrecy, while the "media trial" shows no signs of stopping: theories, reconstructions, and alternative motives alternate for months.

A firm point is established, at the beginning of December, with the submission of the Albani report: the genetic profile is compatible with the "Y" of Sempio, albeit degraded. A conclusion that contradicts the second-degree report from 2014, signed by the Genoese geneticist Francesco De Stefano, and supports the assessments of the Pavia prosecutors. However, the matter continues to divide talk shows and social media.

Meanwhile, the prosecution assigns two new assessments: the IT one to expert Paolo Dal Checco and the forensic one to anatomopathologist Cristina Cattaneo. These are the last known acts received by the Pavia prosecutors at the beginning of March: they contain a rewrite of the dynamics of the crime and, according to investigators, decisive elements supporting the accusations against Andrea Sempio and the innocence of Alberto Stasi.

The time—quite short—will tell what future awaits the Garlasco case.