Giancarlo Capaldo, the judge with the longest standing investigation into the 15-year-old Vatican girl who disappeared in 1983, and journalist and essayist Ferruccio Pinotti wrote a book called The Girl Who Knew Too Much about the disappearance of 1983, edited by Solferino
A public prosecutor It is a journalist Follow together 40 years of investigations, hypotheses and misdirections Emanuela Orlandi. It’s about Giancarlo Capaldothe judge investigating the 15-year-old Vatican woman who had been missing the longest in 1983, and the journalist and Essayist Ferruccio Pinotti. The two wrote togetherThe girl who knew too much“, will be released on June 27th for Solferino.
A text that traces all the traces that history has encountered in recent years, but which have not yet led to a truth about the fate of the girl. While the journalist, on the one hand, takes into account the hypotheses that have evolved over time, the judge, on the other hand, tries to summarize the meaning of the many hypotheses that have emerged over time. “It is an attempt – says a Fqmagazine Capaldo – to explain what happened and to seek a path that finally leads to the truth. We have evaluated the various clues objectively, but it seems important to us that the Vatican opens something so that the truth comes to light. Despite retirement It’s like I always owed something to the story of Emanuela Orlandi. I had to allow everyone to become aware of what happened. I also believe it is a moral duty to pass the baton to whoever brings the truth to light.”
Why this title, what does it refer to?
“One of the hypotheses about Emanuela that needs to be carefully examined is that she was chosen as the kidnapper because she was aware of something and it was appropriate not to come out. The reason she was kidnapped by us could be precisely because she came against her willaware of the parts of reality that had to remain hidden“.
Are there new aspects of the investigations in your book?
“We tried to get people to understand what the real elements are, on which to base the most reasonable hypotheses, to explain what happened to anyone who wants to think about this story. Our attempt is to give everyone the elements to think about, so everyone can then share our conclusion. It was also important to publicize profiles of the Vatican world that were still unknown because they stayed out of the investigation. By analyzing all the testimonies, we examined all possible cracks and contradictions and understood that the common thread of this investigation was a whole series of errors that were proposed one after the other. Many clues were apparently useless, but they explain why the truth has not come to light. They were created to prevent the judges from understanding the story.”
So it wasn’t just misdirection?
“We believe that as a principle of interpretation, anyone can have ad hoc messages aimed at distancing oneself from the truth, from the mere possibility that it might prevail.” We hope that we will contribute to a better understanding of the have done what happened. The available elements need to be reviewed to understand if our conclusions are correct.”