WR: It’s still sore. I try to not think about it. It’s hard to explain. When you do this kind of work, it’s akin to being in a war situation, when you’re in a foxhole. These are the types of guys you would want to be defending alongside you. To lose them is … they each have their own stories. There’s not a day that goes by that I don’t take a look at their picture or think about it.

NYC: One of them was your neighbor …

WR: He used to be my neighbor. He moved to the next town over. He was having rough times. He was a strong guy. He was very able. He went to work with the dock builders, and he asked me for help. I was going to help him and the engineers. I used him a couple of times on the riggings, and he was good. He was safe. He didn’t do anything that he didn’t understand. It was sad. It was just a guy trying to make a living.

NYC: And you’re still in touch with many of their families?

WR: Yes.

NYC: How did they react to your acquittal?

WR: They were ecstatic. They were so happy for me. They all called or stopped by. It was a good feeling to have their support during and after.

NYC: Were you surprised by what you described as the “desperation” of the prosecution?

WR: It doesn’t surprise me because they do not understand totally. I don’t think they understood this case, number one. And I don’t think they understand my devotion to what I did. I grew up in this. I don’t think really did their homework. I think they wanted a scapegoat.

NYC: What did you think of the way you were portrayed by the New York media?

WR: The New York Post wrote “killer crane rigger” in one of [its] stories. My daughters were so upset. That’s how she started her article: “Killer crane rigger.” I left the job. I couldn’t finish the day off. I told my foreman, “I’ve gotta get out of here.” This is what they get away with. I don’t have a subscription to ENR, but a friend of mine is an avid subscriber, and he was saying, “[ENR is] doing a great job. [They’re] just saying the facts.” That’s all I wanted. I didn’t want the sensationalism. I’m 30 years in the business. No violations, with an exceptional track record. And [then-Manhattan District Attorney Robert] Morgenthau is waving a sling saying I cheat because I didn’t spend the money on sling. To do that is disgusting. I did the right thing all my life.

NYC: Do you have any thoughts on the city’s ban on synthetic slings? [In 2008, shortly after the crane collapse the Department of Buildings banned the use of slings unless specifically required by the crane’s manufacturer. Ed.]

WR: It’s their prerogative. Nylon slings have been serving the industry for years. We proved that it was not the slings. So if it makes them feel more comfortable, so be it. In the rigging industry, the nylons are used in incredible situations and weights. For them to ban nylons, it’s just a fear thing. A lot of the manufacturers recommendations are not in the hands of people doing the work, and I think that got a light shined on [in the trial].

NYC: What moments in particular symbolized in your opinion the desperation in the prosecution?

WR: They were attacking the personal details in people’s lives.

NYC: I was kind of surprised by the prosecutor comparing them to …

WR: La Casa Nostra. She compared me!

NYC: Compared you?

WR: The reference was, “Having Rapetti Rigging handling the slings was like having La Casa Nostra handling the banking system of the United States.” It was disgusting. It’s disgusting that she used an Italian reference because I’m Italian. They went through me with a fine-toothed comb. There’s nothing. Zero. For her to bring up that reference was disgusting. They were supposed to be the advocate for the people, and I didn’t feel that she was the advocate for the people.

NYC: What’s next? You still have lots more to do, right?