Download - Transcrime - Università degli Studi di Trento

13. The results of the interviews conducted with the most active prosecutor’s offices: best practices in judicial activitiesSome of the most active prosecutor’s offices had sought a solution to the problemin identification by means of ‘atypical’ investigative devices, such as the abovementioneddatabases collecting all information on cases of trafficking andsmuggling (see § 13.1.5). This enabled them to trace traffickers’ and exploiters’identities, establishing them on the basis of leads entered into the databases.Moreover, the different phases of the phenomenon had been reconstructed, and theconnections among the various members of the criminal groups had been deduced.C) S) STATEMENTS BY VICTIMSStatements by victims are, as said, an important source of notitia criminis, aninvestigative device, and, at least potentially, a body of evidence. The prosecutorsinterviewed, however, reported that the use of such statements is difficult, invarious respects.A first difficulty is the lack of reliable interpreters, and it is exacerbated by the factthat the situation often requires the use of experts in the dialects of a specificgeographical area. Yet it may happen that the interpreters from that particulargeographical area know the suspect, or are even his/her kin. In some cases, threatsagainst interpreters or attempts to corrupt them have been reported. Thedifficulties also concern interceptions, which require the availability of interpretersat sometimes very short notice. At some prosecutor’s offices the problem had beenpartially remedied by the presence of specialised schools for interpreters (Perugiaand Trieste), the use of reliable ‘cultural collaborators’ (Gorizia 386 ), and theestablishment of mechanisms to pay fees rapidly. But at most of the otherprosecutor’s offices the problem was not addressed and caused serious difficulties.Whether or not statements are useful for investigations and for the subsequentphase of the proceeding also depends on the methods used by the police to takethose statements. It was observed by interviewees that imprecise statement takingand recording could result in important information being lost if the witness wassubsequently untraceable. For this reason, some prosecutor’s offices had issuedinstructions to the judicial police so that information-taking methods could beharmonised (see § 13.1.3). This question connects with the wider issue of securingthe sources of testimonial evidence, for which various mechanisms (incidenteprobatorio, article 18, T.U. Immigration) are available, as discussed below.A final difficulty regarding statements by victims concerns their reliability and theproblem of reticence. The prosecutors interviewed had observed two differentattitudes among victims, and they warrant attention: there are victims who confirmthe investigator’s conjectures in order to obtain the benefits provided by law (e.g.application of article 18 C. T. Immigration), while other victims, for cultural reasonsor because of threats, provide no useful information at all. Experience at the mostactive prosecutor’s offices with this latter type of informant has led to thedevelopment of specific methods for information-gathering and questioning (see §13.1.3).386 A contractual arrangement between a Bologna association and the Ministry of Internal Affairs enabledthe prosecutor’s office of Gorizia to utilise ‘cultural collaborators’ as interpreters of some uncommonlanguages (such as Turkish/Kurdish).221