The Court of Nuoro has acquitted a 25-year-old woman of the charge of illegal possession of a weapon, brought in relation to the possession of a taser , a potentially dangerous electrical device.
The young woman was found in possession of the object on October 4, 2022, while she was in Dorgali.
The facts
The story began during an evening spent in Dorgali, where the 25-year-old was staying at a bed and breakfast. According to what she said, she had ordered a take-out pizza and, while she was near a manhole grate, she noticed a red light coming from the device. Struck by curiosity, she initially thought it was a flashlight and picked up the device . The next day, during a routine check carried out by the Carabinieri, the device was found and seized. According to the prosecution, it was a taser, an electric stun gun , and the young woman was supposed to justify its possession.
Italian law, in particular Article 4 of Law 110/75, prohibits the carrying of electrical stun devices, such as tasers, outside the home without a justified reason. For the public prosecutor, the young woman was aware of possessing an instrument capable of offending, and the device should be considered a real weapon. Hence the request for a 4-month sentence and a 700 euro fine.
The defense and the decision of the Court
During the trial, lawyer Adriano Catte argued that the 25-year-old was not aware of the nature of the device, confusing it with a simple remote control with a red light . The lawyer emphasized how it was difficult to recognize a taser as such, unless someone was familiar with the weapon. The defense also highlighted how the young woman had found the device and had not purchased it, making it difficult to believe that she had the intention of using it illegally.
The court accepted the defense's argument, holding that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate the young woman's awareness of the dangers of the device.
Although the prosecutor insisted that the taser was clearly a weapon and that the young woman must have been aware of its contents, the court ruled out any intent or intent to harm on the part of the 25-year-old, who was acquitted “because the fact does not exist”.
