This is the essence of the story of Sandro Marcucci: Summary case Sandro Marcucci (please take a read all the documentation) Sandro Marcucci was a former colonel in workplaces. With Mario Ciancarelli Environ former captain had done investigative work on the Ustica disaster, after the sergeant had said on the phone to Dettori Ciancarelli "We were the ones to break down Itavia the DC9. "and then" Look at the times of the landings and radar-guided missile and a warhead. Directives military confirm what we could find were those precious clues to Ciancarelli Dettori data from one day to find out if you want really any specific responsibilities and political-military aspects of the Ustica disaster on the evening of June 27, 1980. Sandro Marcucci had found two witnesses, both military at Pratica di Mare, which would have testified to the court that the Libyan Mig fell on Silas had left practice Sea. He kept for himself the names of witnesses, would have revealed just prior, except that 2 February 1992, already resigned from my friend and working for the region of Tuscany, victim remains in a strange plane crash. The two witnesses were afraid of marcucci Licio Giorgieri, killed by terrorists in 1987 red (he had asked the stock but has been denied) and Angelo Carfagna (committed suicide in 1996, but with many doubts about the flight dynamics that made the window). Why the strange accident? The investigation concluded that it was a plane crash caused by wind and by the same Sandro Marcucci that would fly below 500 feet altitude atitudine (VFR rules) without doing so. As the wind all the witnesses denied that there was wind that Sunday, but it appears you do not know why the conclusions of the investigation. As for the fact that Marcucci could not fly safely under 500 feet for the specific mission of sighting fire enough to read the documentation on ssitema maffs in this blog, over the cap. 7 of Ciancarelli to see I'm completely wrong conclusions that the judiciary has come to mass. Below 500 feet (taking into account the highest obstacle on the ground) Marcucci could fly and flew under the law. Sandro Marcucci was also charred. The Committee of Inquiry concluded that the fire had developed after the impact of the piper to the ground. This too is wrong. A few inches from the head of the corpse of Marcucci's as you can see from the photos in chapter 7 a tree is not affected by the flames and smoke. The aluminum frames of the piper beside the corpse of Marcucci are also clearly visible and not affected by no fire. The aluminum melt was in contact with fire and yet in those photos you do not see any of it. Marcucci and between the head of the tree of which I write above, there seem to be in the photos also traces of snow. That the fire did not even melt the snow? What does it say who makes an examination of the body of marcucci? This man is not burned for fuel (aviation-ed). The investigation is concluded without even listening to him. This morgue technician had also found two in the chest by shrapnel Marcucci and the presence of Ciancarelli exclaimed "By God, he exploded on something." These are the reasons why we ask for years to reopen the case summary, please read all the documentation because it is very difficult to explain a complex case to those who do not know.
http://firmiamo.it/sandromarcucciaiutateciariaprireilcaso
0 comments:
Post a Comment