“Are you sure? Having the records at your disposal, maybe you could be more precise.”

He checked again.

“Yes, I’m sorry, I made a mistake, it was about three hours.”

“So we’re still within the time frame during which the residue remains on the body of the individual, if no washing has taken place?”195

“Yes, basically.”

“Yes or no?”

“Yes.”

“You then saw the results of the analysis carried out at the central laboratory using a scanning electron microscope?”

“Yes, of course.”

“Can you summarize these results?”

“There were various particles of lead, barium and antimony on Cardace’s jacket.”

“What does that mean?”

“It means that while wearing that jacket Cardace fired a shot or was very close to somebody who fired a shot. You have to remember that particles of lead, barium and antimony don’t exist in nature, and that in our current state of knowledge, they’re the results of a single physico-chemical process, which is the discharge of a firearm. I should specify that lead, antimony and barium are part of the chemical composition of the powders produced by firearms.”

“Were there particles of lead, barium and antimony on Cardace’s hands?”

“No.”

“Were there particles of lead, barium and antimony on Cardace’s arms?”

“No.”

“Were there particles of lead, barium and antimony on Cardace’s face?”

“No.”

“Were there particles of lead, barium and antimony in Cardace’s nostrils?”

“No.”

“So the particles were only on the jacket, is that correct?”

“That’s correct.”196

“You told us earlier that particles remain on the surface of the skin, in the absence of washing, for four hours. How long do they remain on clothes?”

“That depends on many factors. How they’ve been kept, if they’re washed.”

“What if they’re not washed?”

“They can remain for a few days.”

“I again call on your technical expertise. If Cardace had fired a shot that afternoon, how would you explain the complete absence of gunshot residue on his hands, arms and face, and in his nostrils?”

“He could have washed.”

“Thoroughly, we could say, given that there wasn’t even anything in his nostrils.”

“Yes.”

“So the explanation would be that Cardace had washed his hands, face and all the rest, this showing full awareness of the need to eliminate gunshot residue, and yet continued wearing the same jacket. Doesn’t that strike you as odd?”

“Objection, Your Honour,” Gastoni said. “This is a leading question, and certainly outside the provisions of article 194 paragraph 3.”

“I withdraw the question,” I said before Marinelli could intervene. This time Gastoni was right. It wasn’t a question, it was an observation I wanted to plant in the minds of the judges and jury. I would return to it in my closing statement.

I said I had finished and Marinelli asked Gastoni if she wished to cross-examine. This time she said yes.