“In this story, Cardace quarrels with Gaglione over the phone. Soon afterwards he goes to Gaglione’s apartment, armed with a high-calibre revolver – in other words, intending to carry out an act of violence. Before getting to Gaglione’s building, Cardace, even though driven to that act of violence by such intense malice, stops to have coffee with an acquaintance. Having calmly drunk his coffee, Cardace arrives at Gaglione’s apartment, fires several shots at him and walks out, leaving the victim to bleed to death. He returns home, carefully washes his hands, arms, face, hair and nostrils, clearly conscious of the need to remove all traces of gunshot residue in case he is stopped by the police. Then he leaves again, inexplicably – if we consider how cautious he’s been – wearing the same jacket he had on at the time 264of the murder, goes out for a walk and soon afterwards is spotted and picked up by the police. He calmly admits to the officers that he has been to Gaglione’s apartment. He is given the gunshot residue test and this cunning criminal, who’s washed and cleaned his body with such care, is caught because of the gunshot residue left on his jacket, which he’s continued to wear instead of getting rid of it, as would have been normal.

“Some serious questions as to the plausibility of this story are not only possible, but right and proper. And above all: is this the only possible story that fits the evidence? Or to put it another way: can the evidence we have at our disposal only be explained by this story? If you wish to confirm the original ruling and convict the accused, you will answer this question in the affirmative.

“What you must ask yourselves, however, is if there are other plausible stories able to encompass in an exhaustive, coherent and uncontradictory way all the evidence that has been presented in this hearing. Because if there are other plausible stories, not merely conjectural ones, you have to accept the fact that the evidential framework is not unequivocal, that there is no certainty in these proceedings, and you will have to acquit according to article 530 paragraph 2 of the code of criminal procedure, which provides for acquittal when the evidence that the accused committed the crime is insufficient or contradictory.

“Well, in this hearing it is possible to imagine at least two stories, that is, two reconstructions that explain that mountain of evidence. And it is this possibility that requires you to find in favour of acquittal.