The Bruno case: the investigation refutes the poisoning theory.

The story of Bruno, which we wrote about earlier, has taken an unexpected turn. To recall, Bruno was a service dog of the bloodhound breed who, according to his trainer, was poisoned at the beginning of July this year with food filled with nails. This version caused a wide public outcry in Italy, after which the case was taken up by the prosecutor’s office.
However, the official findings of the investigation turned out to be different.

The prosecutor’s office states that the dog was not poisoned. The forensic examination found no traces of poison, nails, or any bait that had been mentioned in the first days after Bruno’s death. Nothing suspicious was found in Bruno’s stomach either. At this stage, the investigation considers heat stroke to be the most likely cause of death, rather than deliberate poisoning.

These conclusions significantly change the overall picture of a case that had already sparked major public reaction.

This is especially notable given that the person who first publicly spoke about the “brutal killing” of the dog is now at the center of the investigation. The case concerns Bruno’s trainer and owner, Arcangelo Caressa, who described the incident as retaliation for his volunteer work rescuing animals. His statements about poisoned bait with nails and intentional killing became the starting point for widespread media and social media attention.

Investigators are now examining the possibility that the crime may have been staged. As part of the investigation, searches were carried out at the trainer’s premises, and phones, computers, and documents were seized. The prosecutor’s office points to discrepancies between the initial accounts and the forensic findings, as well as the absence of any dangerous objects at the location where the dog was found.

After the publication of the prosecutor’s conclusions, Arcangelo Caressa issued a detailed statement on Facebook. In his post, he categorically rejected the accusations, stating that he never lied and remains convinced that Bruno was killed. He wrote about intense emotional pressure, the pain of loss, and argued that the investigation is drawing premature conclusions. Caressa emphasized that he intends to seek the continuation of the investigation and to defend not only his own reputation, but also Bruno’s name.

The investigation is ongoing. No final conclusion has been reached at this time.