Alfredo Cospito
connected by videoconference from the Milan prison, where he is at 41 bis, with the hearing of the review court which will have to re-examine the request to cancel the precautionary measures ordered by the investigating judge at the request of the local prosecutor's office against him and those of five others under investigation for, for various reasons, instigation to commit a crime, also aggravated by the aims of terrorism and subversion of the democratic order in relation to some articles published in the magazine Vetriolo.
The judges are meeting in the bunker room of the Capannne prison.
For this proceeding Cospito and all the other suspects are free.
During the hearing, the anarchist - who appeared visibly exhausted to those who saw him - read a long memorandum and reiterated that he had fought "against the repression of freedom" represented by harsh prison.
He stressed that he did not want to become a martyr but that he was engaged in a struggle to assert his rights.
Regarding the merits of the accusations, Cospito claimed that he did not instigate anyone because this is contrary to anarchist ideals.
The other five suspects also took the floor essentially to express their solidarity with him.
Outside, a group of anarchists is demonstrating in support of Cospito.
"Fuori Alfredo dal 41 bis" is written on one of the banners on display;
"With the pen, with the weight, with the action. Freedom for the companions" reads another.
The Capanne prison area is controlled by an impressive security service.
Also check the access roads to the prison.
Slogans of solidarity with Alfredo Cospito but also for Red Brigade members Nadia Lioce, Roberto Morandi and Marco Mezzasalma were chanted by the participants in the garrison.
A few dozen participants who are still monitored by the security service.
"Out of Alfredo from 41 bis" and "you will not be able to extinguish anarchy" are some of the punctuated sentences.
The Prosecutor of Perugia then requested confirmation of the precautionary custody order in light of the perimeter outlined by the Cassation.
He also highlighted that the writings did not have only an ideological value but led to practical repercussions.
The defense instead asked for the revocation of the precautionary measure speaking of a free expression of thought.
