On October 24, 2025, as part of the new investigations into the Garlasco crimethe suspect was asked Andrea Sempio to undergo some anthropometric measurements, the conclusions of which were entrusted to the pathologist Cristina Cattaneo. In Sempio, ankles, feet, upper limbs, height and weight were measured, which will be compared with the analyzes at the crime scene and the wounds reported on the body of Chiara Poggikilled on 13 August 2007. There are those who believe that these measures will also serve for further investigations into footprint 33.
“The problem here is the comparison: there are so many variables, why should I place this person digitally within a reconstructed environment,” the doctor explains to IlGiornale Sara Capoccitticomputer scientist, criminalist, forensic analyst and founder of the Forensically project.
Dr. Capoccitti, what does it mean that the elements emerging from the new analyzes of the Cagliari RIS with the laser scanner, carried out in the summer of 2025, will be integrated into the consultancy that the prosecutor’s office requested from Cattaneo “to guarantee a broader evaluation of the elements collected, both in the medico-legal context of the victim and at the crime scene”?
“I don’t know the entire question. From what you have described to me, I presume that Cattaneo will be asked to produce a rereading of the elements collected by the 3D scan, to guarantee a broader evaluation. That is, in light of the injuries and the medical-legal findings as well as the crime scene that was scanned.”
What does this exam consist of?
“Anthropometry itself is not a new methodology: it has already existed for a century and was invented by the French criminologist Alphonse Bertillon. But, to understand what would be happening specifically with the new investigations into Garlasco, we need to start from the consultant’s intentions and how the consultant wants to use the results of an anthropometric examination.”
What can be done?
“With anthropometric measurements you can compare measurements of limbs and understand whether those physical measurements – which are performed with metric strips – are comparable or not with the measurements of a suspect. Or instead of using a metric strip, I can first proceed to carry out these measurements from a physical, i.e. traditional, point of view, then move on to a 3D scan, which is done with a laser scanner”.
So what?
“This laser scanner allows you to create a point cloud that represents a person, an environment or both. At this point I can test with the results of the virtual ‘twin’ obtained.”
But are there any limits?
“Usually, when anthropometric measurements are taken on a suspect, I have a subject with whom I can compare him. For example, on a surveillance video there is a walking subject, who has certain types of characteristics. I can compare that subject – taken from those frames – with a suspect to whom I subject these anthropometric measurements, in order to understand if they are the same characteristics of the same person. I do this with regards to both the measurements, the posture and the walk. It can take place only where possible, because these comparisons are not necessarily so simple to carry out, they are not immediate”.
Then?
“Then I can apply sensors to the suspect and make him walk, to deduce a motor pattern, that is, a walking style. I then deduce a style which I then compare. Because each of us has a type of walk with characteristic movements.”
Can the measurements identify a single individual, even if suspicious, or multiple individuals?
“Some of these characteristics can also be individualizing, they can be unique. Historically a certain number of measurements give a fairly reliable result. However, usually these body measurements are compared with another figure, for example with a videotaped subject.”
Like a bank robber.
“The video surveillance of a bank, perhaps even with a good definition, allows me to highlight certain characteristics. I look for those characteristics, to verify whether those characteristics are present or not in the suspected subject”.
For example?
“Tattoos are quite important characteristics. If I find a tattoo on a natural person who has previously been videotaped, it is obviously a very strong indicator of identity. The tattoo is in the same position, with the same characteristics.”
And in Garlasco?
“The problem here is the comparison: there are so many variables, why should I place this person digitally within a reconstructed environment. But what do I compare him with? I should compare him with the characteristics deduced from the study of the crime scene, characteristics which are equivalent to those of the murderer”.
That is to say?
“More simply, I understand, from studying the crime scene, that the murderer has a certain height or a certain lateralization. I deduce these characteristics, profile a subject and see if the suspect has these characteristics. However, since we don’t have a real subject with which to compare these measurements, it becomes something very difficult. And above all it greatly increases the margin of error.”
Meaning what?
“It’s not like a DNA test. It’s not evidence of the same scientific weight. Above all because on the other side I don’t have a comparison. I don’t have a physical comparison with which to make a comparison. I can only study the interaction of this digital double with the environmental reconstruction, always done in 3D, of the crime scene.”
The criminologist Roberta Bruzzone commented in the Ore 14 broadcast of 27 October 2025: “The only interesting parameter in this story is the measurement of the foot”. Do you agree?
“Yes. While all the other parameters have a hypothetical nature and are subject to interpretation, the measurement of the foot could be the subject of a slightly more ‘objective’ comparison with respect to the crime scene. But it is what I was saying before: they are investigations that will not provide incontrovertible technical data, but data that must be contextualized. I don’t have a term of comparison, but I have to deduce it from the other data collected. And many changes occur in the body of a person who is first 19 years old and then 37: the variables are innumerable and cannot be kept under control, so the margin of uncertainty is large and not due to the operator, given that we are at the peak of forensic science”.
At this point in the investigations, given the confidentiality of the Pavia prosecutor’s office, is there a need for caution, in the face of certain news, regarding one thesis or another?
“No hypotheses can be made, because we do not know the findings that the consultant included in the report and how he used this type of examination – because this examination must be integrated with the other analyzes and accompanied by other elements.
I repeat: it is essential to understand how the consultant inserted this examination into a question that concerns the new analysis of the entire dynamics of the murder. So yes, be careful: firstly because the exam has many variables, and also because you need to understand how the consultant is using it”.
Are you interested in the topic?
Garlasco crime