Antonio Conte (254 Viewers)

[Luca]

You probably know this but in sporting trial you are guilty until proven innocent. If he goes on and maintains his innocence he *could* be banned for several months.

For the record, I fully support Conte and trust him 100%.

Here lies the problem, because the person with the burden of proof is already starting so far on the back foot it means that gaining an acquittal is stupidly hard. Even if Conte is totally innocent, he probably has about a 75% chance of landing some form of ban. He'll end up plea bargaining not least because the timing and timescales of this trial are beyond ridiculous.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Fake Melo]

Here lies the problem, because the person with the burden of proof is already starting so far on the back foot it means that gaining an acquittal is stupidly hard. Even if Conte is totally innocent, he probably has about a 75% chance of landing some form of ban. He'll end up plea bargaining not least because the timing and timescales of this trial are beyond ridiculous.

 

[RAMI-N]

This is really fucked up

 

[Buck Fuddy]

Can people stop asking questions no one knows the answer to.

Come on now, JayJay. That would be the end of juventuz.

 

[Ahmed]

You probably know this but in sporting trial you are guilty until proven innocent. If he goes on and maintains his innocence he *could* be banned for several months.

what does this part mean, please explain.

 

[Luca]

what does this part mean, please explain.

See my reply Ahmed.

 

[Fake Melo]

what does this part mean, please explain.

You have to prove your innocence otherwise you are guilty. If Conte keeps saying I don't know anything without having proof of it, he *could* be banned. Depends on if the judge finds him credible or not.

 

[napoleonic]

You have to prove your innocence otherwise you are guilty. If Conte keeps saying I don't know anything without having proof of it, he *could* be banned. Depends on if the judge finds him credible or not.

how can you have a proof of something you don't even know about lol...

 

[JCK]

You have to prove your innocence otherwise you are guilty. If Conte keeps saying I don't know anything without having proof of it, he *could* be banned. Depends on if the judge finds him credible or not.

If he could prove his innocence he would have done it long time ago, from the very first day the news started to surface. Apparently he cannot and that's why I am expecting him to be charged. Hopefully the least he can get but I am not optimistic.

 

[RAMI-N]

You have to prove your innocence otherwise you are guilty. If Conte keeps saying I don't know anything without having proof of it, he *could* be banned. Depends on if the judge finds him credible or not.

Shouldn't the same be said about that Carrobio guy?!

 

[Gerd]

Fuck Palazzi . Somebody needs to teach a lesson to this son of a bitch

 

[Fake Melo]

If he could prove his innocence he would have done it long time ago, from the very first day the news started to surface. Apparently he cannot and that's why I am expecting him to be charged. Hopefully the least he can get but I am not optimistic.

Like Luca said, it's very difficult to prove your innocence in a sporting trial. It's such a bad timing and we can't let this drag on forever. It's best to get a plea deal and get the least punishment as possible.

Shouldn't the same be said about that Carrobio guy?!

The public prosecutor found him credible.

 

[Ahmed]

but not in the case of Conte, so don't see why he should be under undue pressure to prove his innocence.

 

[JCK]

but not in the case of Conte, so don't see why he should be under undue pressure to prove his innocence.

Because if he doesn't he will charged? If the public prosecutor found Carrobio credible then it means Conte will be found guilty, no?

 

[RAMI-N]

The public prosecutor found him credible.

I know he did, but based on what?!

 

[Gerd]

I know he did, but based on what?!

Based on fucking intermerda intuition

 

[Ahmed]

Because if he doesn't he will charged? If the public prosecutor found Carrobio credible then it means Conte will be found guilty, no?

the charge is of him not reporting of fixing that he may have known about, any allegations made by Carobbio were not upheld.

 

[Fake Melo]

I know he did, but based on what?!

Based on his statements

Apparently Carrobbio agreed a plea deal where he would tell all. The prosecutor probably thinks that Carrobbio has no reason to lie about it.

The funny thing is that Carrobbio actually accused Conte of fixing matches. He said that Conte told the players to remain calm and have fun on the field because the match is already fixed

The prosecutor didn't find it credible enough though. If Conte was charged with sporting fraud he'd risk a 3 year ban. Thank God that's not the case.

 

[RAMI-N]

Based on fucking intermerda intuition

Based on his statements

Apparently Carrobbio agreed a plea deal where he would tell all. The prosecutor probably thinks that Carrobbio has no reason to lie about it.

The funny thing is that Carrobbio actually accused Conte of fixing matches. He said that Conte told the players to remain calm and have fun on the field because the match is already fixed

The prosecutor didn't find it credible enough though. If Conte was charged with sporting fraud he'd risk a 3 year ban. Thank God that's not the case.

It's funny and disgusting

 

[Gerd]

By the way "ommited denounce" doesn't work on civil court . You get nothing for it , only in sports justice you get a stupid ban .