I don't know why is it so hard to understand why he said that the process was deprived of a voice? It is the defendant's right, but obviously, in every case, the truth can be better reached if the defendant speaks, no matter if he is guilty or innocent. IMO. I don't think there is anything more behind Nencini's words. It is so obvious what he meant, IMO, that people think he had some kind of deeper meaning or some meaning behind the words. I think he meant the words exactly as he said them.
JMO.
JMO.