As Switzerland continues to grapple with the aftermath of one of its deadliest public-safety tragedies, Jacques Moretti has categorically rejected any personal responsibility for the fire that tore through his bar in Crans-Montana, killing 40 people and injuring more than 110 others. During a formal interrogation following the disaster, Moretti insisted repeatedly that the events leading up to the blaze were not his fault, attributing critical decisions and fatal safety failures to employees, third parties, and even customers.

According to details from the interrogation, Moretti denied that he personally initiated the candle “spectacle” that has become a central focus of the investigation. He claimed that the display of candles inside the venue was organized by his employees, not by him. “They are the ones who did this,” he reportedly stated, adding that while the idea was not his, he also never explicitly prohibited it. This admission — acknowledging awareness without intervention — has drawn sharp criticism, as investigators examine whether tacit approval amounts to responsibility in a setting later deemed dangerously unsafe.

Moretti also addressed the issue of blocked and locked doors, a factor widely believed to have trapped patrons inside as flames spread rapidly. During questioning, he denied any role in those conditions, asserting that responsibility lay with unnamed third parties. He did not specify who those parties were, but maintained that he should not be held accountable for doors that allegedly prevented customers from escaping. This claim has further inflamed public anger, as survivors and families of victims continue to demand clarity about how basic safety mechanisms failed so catastrophically.

One particularly troubling detail concerns a chair that was reportedly blocking an emergency exit. Investigators have identified the obstruction as a critical factor that may have slowed evacuation during the fire. Moretti responded by claiming that the chair had been placed there by “a customer” the night before the incident. He suggested that the object was not positioned by staff and that he was unaware of its presence at the time of the fire. The explanation has been met with skepticism, as authorities continue to assess whether routine safety checks were neglected.

Perhaps the most controversial moment of the interrogation came when Moretti stated, “We are also victims of what happened.” While he added that he and his wife were not victims “in the same way as the dead and the injured,” the remark sparked immediate backlash. For many, the suggestion that venue owners could be considered victims alongside those who lost their lives was deeply offensive, intensifying calls for accountability rather than deflection.

The interrogation paints a picture of a business owner attempting to distance himself from every element now seen as contributing to the tragedy. From the candles to the exits, from staffing decisions to physical obstructions, responsibility was consistently redirected elsewhere. Legal analysts note that such a strategy, while not uncommon in early stages of criminal inquiries, may prove problematic if evidence demonstrates a pattern of oversight failures or implicit approval of dangerous practices.

Investigators are now tasked with determining whether Moretti’s explanations align with witness testimony, surveillance data, and physical evidence gathered at the scene. The fact that he acknowledged not forbidding the candle display, despite operating a crowded indoor venue, is expected to be closely examined. Authorities are also scrutinizing whether blocked exits and locked doors were isolated incidents or part of broader safety neglect.

Public reaction to Moretti’s statements has been fierce. Across Switzerland, outrage has grown as details of the interrogation circulate, with many questioning how responsibility can be so thoroughly denied in the face of such loss. Victims’ families have expressed frustration and pain, interpreting the statements as an attempt to minimize culpability rather than confront the consequences of the disaster.

The Crans-Montana fire has already prompted a wider national conversation about enforcement of safety regulations, oversight of nightlife venues, and the consequences of ignoring known risks. Moretti’s interrogation has added fuel to that debate, highlighting the tension between legal defense strategies and public expectations of accountability.

As the judicial process moves forward, prosecutors will have to determine whether Moretti’s claims withstand scrutiny or collapse under evidence. The outcome could shape not only the fate of those directly involved, but also Switzerland’s broader approach to preventing similar tragedies in the future.

For now, the words spoken during the interrogation continue to reverberate. Forty people are dead. More than a hundred are injured. And at the center of the storm stands a man insisting, again and again: “This is not my fault.” Whether the courts — and the public — accept that claim remains one of the most pressing questions in a case that has already scarred a nation.