Amine Aassoul (pictured), Moroccan 29enne, killed a young Terni, Davide Raggi, just because the boy had dared to look at him.
A homicide without reason that could be part of the random events that can happen in a city if it were not connected to a series of circumstances of the past that do not allow simplistic conclusions that would offend the dead, his family and the whole of Italian society.
Amine Aassoul, the murderer, already lived in Terni from 2007 to rejoin the mother who resided there with an Italian. He had obtained a residence permit destined to last but very little as revoked because the subject was responsible for unlawful actions in Porto Recanati, Fermo and Civitanova Marche.
He had therefore been expelled from Italy and returned to Morocco.
However, Assoul returned to Italy in May of last year, disembarking in Illegal Lampedusa among illegal immigrants. Immediately he had filed a request for political asylum, as per practice, even if later rejected by a document notified in October
At this point the story is characterized by yellow and induces some questions that someone should give an answer. Questions whose object does not concern only the judicial vicissitudes of Aassoul, but the entire security of the country.
We propose four to the Minister Alfano and who knows that he is not able to clarify the story.
1. Amine, when he was expelled from our country for the unlawful facts ascribed to him, was identified according to the normal procedures reserved for anyone who prevails over the Italian law? Photographs, registration of documents in its possession, fingerprinting, identification and registration of possible characteristic signs (tattoos, scars, etc.).
2. When he returned to Italy with a flow of migrants and asked for political asylum, similar identification procedures have been carried out or have we merely reported the data in his possession, perhaps false? If so, were the identifying elements compared with those stored in the Viminale database for a response which, if any, would have been positive?
3. If, upon arrival, prior to issuing the asylum application, the identification practice had been conducted and developed with due deferral, the Moroccan would have been immediately identified as the one who had been expelled in the 2007. A person, therefore, who could not apply for asylum but who had only one right, to be immediately arrested and sent back to Morocco. Was this practice followed? The facts would say the opposite because Aassoul has submitted his application and in the meantime has returned to be part of the social context from where he had been expelled for facts contrary to the law. An opportunity that is useless to deny it has opened the door to what has happened. Perhaps something should be clarified or asked too much?
4. During the preliminary phase of the application for the asylum application that was then rejected, it would probably have been possible to verify who actually was the individual by comparing, at least at that moment, fingerprints or whatever with the identification data that the Police Headquarters of Terni should have possessed facts of the 2007. It does not seem to have been done because he was granted an extension of thirty days to appeal. Why was it not immediately sent back to Morocco?
On the matter, Minister Angelino Alfano comments: "That the killer does not come out of jail".
Right dear Minister but maybe if you help us to understand by answering my modest questions we could come to the conclusion that now in Italy there would be a murdered dead and a clandestine less.
Does not this fall within the primary task of the Ministry you run, which is to prevent and then prosecute?
Fernando Termentini
