"The two teachers and the janitor accused of involuntary manslaughter in connection with the case of the almost 6-year-old boy who crashed last October 18," caused the death of the child in the stairwell of the Pirelli school in Milan. The boy got into a swivel chair with wheels, fell for about 10 meters and died in the hospital on October 22nd. This can be read in the notice of conclusion of investigations signed by the prosecutor Maria Letizia Mocciaro.
As it is reconstructed in the act, around 9.30 on 18 October, the child "asked the teachers present to be able to go to the services; the teachers, despite the absence of the school assistant assigned to the plan (circumstance that they did not verify) and without accompanying him ( even though they were two in class) allowed him to go out ".
Thus, one reads again in the deed notified this afternoon to the three women investigated, "he went alone to the services and on returning to the classroom (...) he approached the stairwell landing where he found a swivel chair with wheels (abandoned and unattended) he climbed on said chair presumably intrigued by the shouting "of the children of a class who went downstairs to go to the gym.
After that, "from the chair he leaned out, lost his balance and fell into the void (from the top of the parapet to the point of fall a height of about 13.50 meters was measured), causing serious injuries that caused his death some next day in hospital. " As stated in the notice, in particular the Italian teacher and the support teacher are accused of having "omitted due supervision of the child" having allowed him to "go to the toilet outside the scheduled time" and thus violating the regulation of the Institute and the school directive concerning the supervision of pupils.
The school assistant is instead accused of "not having served in the area of competence according to the task assigned to her", of "not having supervised the safety and security of the pupil (...) in particular when moving to go to services, for having used the cell phone for personal purposes during the time he was supposed to carry out surveillance on the floor. " Furthermore, the latter would not have "monitored the corridor entrusted to her, not placing herself in the position foreseen by the ATA staff activity plan", or in a cage from which she could have seen the little one, she would not "have checked the time spent in the services of the child "and would not have" taken him back to class ".
Furthermore, he would have "left an office-type swivel chair unattended near the stairs, causing the danger which then materialized rather than placing it inside the cage".
