Calciopoli or Morattopoli.. inter fake orgasm (53 Viewers)

Hist

Founder of Hism
Jan 18, 2009
11,403
The Supreme Court has released its reasoning following the final Calciopoli verdict in March.

A sentence of over two years for criminal conspiracy for former Juventus director general Luciano Moggi was written off as the statute of limitations had expired, but he was not acquitted of the charge.

The court has now released document of almost 150 pages outlining its reasoning, where it states that Moggi was the ‘undisputed prince’ of the Calciopoli system.

The disgraced director has also been found guilty of sporting fraud “in favour of the company he was employed by [Juventus]” as well as obtaining “personal benefits in terms of greater power”, with his existing influence described as “truly remarkable, with no apparent justification”.

It was noted that comments by Moggi made on television or in other media “could decide the fate of this or that player, or match official”.

In finding the former director guilty of criminal conspiracy, it was remarked that the system was “pervasive, with the full knowledge of the participants, even in the top positions” in order to “condition the referees”.

Moggi was said to have an “uncontested” ability to “condition the subjects with whom he interacted”.

Post-match visits to the referees’ changing room were deemed to be “aggressive and threatening” and “the outcome of an unrestrained exercising of power”.
Perhaps there is more to this than meets the eye. I doubt that Moggi is clean. He was not acquitted of a single charge by any court. Its a bit of a stretch to think that the supreme court is bought too by Moratti and Berlusconi. Others should have been punished too but now I don't think Moggi was innocent.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Mark

The Informer
Administrator
Dec 19, 2003
96,103
He was not acquitted of a single charge by any court
not true

One of the main charge he got was for locking up Paparesta in the ref dressing room. Charge that was immediately dropped by the Reggio courts.
Other one was the ref draw he supposedly fixed with the designators. Also dropped. Video evidence "disappeared" that would have had them cleared immediately, not later. At first they used images of the draw that were not in order and would look like a dodgy draw. It was later proven the draw was a-ok.
Must be others too...

- - - Updated - - -

When did the FIGC announce they will counter sue?
I think they mention the possibility of suing.

also, why sue only Juve and not milan, viola. lazio and other clubs that got pts deducted at the time. That didn't "damage" the image of Serie A? Most of all, why not sue the guys who really broke articles 1 and 6 that should of been the only club get relegated? The one and only merdazzurri? Palazzi said so but we all know about the statute of limitations. Why only talk about suing Juve? Why FIGC? WHY?
 

Lapa

FLY, EAGLES FLY
Sep 29, 2008
19,954
Perhaps there is more to this than meets the eye. I doubt that Moggi is clean. He was not acquitted of a single charge by any court. Its a bit of a stretch to think that the supreme court is bought too by Moratti and Berlusconi. Others should have been punished too but now I don't think Moggi was innocent.
Italian supreme court doesn't know shit about anything related to us, I can bet on that.
 

Tanu_Mz

Senior Member
Jan 5, 2014
1,881
Perhaps there is more to this than meets the eye. I doubt that Moggi is clean. He was not acquitted of a single charge by any court. Its a bit of a stretch to think that the supreme court is bought too by Moratti and Berlusconi. Others should have been punished too but now I don't think Moggi was innocent.
He was definitely a bit dodgy but if you take someone to court, find no evidence, and your conclusions are "aye pet, he was very powerful and conditioned everybody" is a bit of a weak outcome of the trial especially if you considered that:

- the tobacconist who supposidely sold the swiss SIMs has been sentenced for purgery and he admitted he simply told the italian police "what they wanted to hear";
- Of the 37 referees, only one has been sentenced, De Sanctis, with whom we had a disastrous record (4 defeats in one season, something unheard of in these days and with that team);
- Moggi overwhelming power on media was limited to 2 (yes, two) journalists from Processo del Lunedi, a show that was broadcasted on RAI3 that wasn't even visible in the whole country and used to have an average of 300,000 viewers;
- Paparesta was never closed in the changing room, as he admitted himself. Paparesta was at the time employed by Fininvest, no need to remind you who Fininvest owns;
- Moggi was talking to the Referees boss like everybody else did; infact Juve didn't get the article 6 punishment as it was perfectly legal to talk to the referees bosses. It was not legal talking directly to referees, something done by Inter who infact got article 6 (which would have meant serie C) in the trial against Inter that was written off because of statute of limitations.
- All the players that in the Calciopoli trial were shown as been red carded or yellow carded in a presumed attempt by Moggi to prevent from playing against Juve, were infact all on the pitch against Juve except for Jankulowski of Udinese who actually punched an opponent on the face in a free-for-all that started after the game, so a suspension was rather inevitable;
- the referee's draw that was supposed to be manipulated was regular; what turned out to be manipulated was the video that once they found out had been manipulated misteriously disappeared; the policeman who broguht the tape as evidence had previosuly been found guilty in a completely different trial of manipulating evidence and had been sentenced for that. He is the same policeman who was taped in Palermo on the site of the bomb explosion that killed Judge Borsellino and was seen walking away with the Judge's personal briefcase, containing his famous "red agenda" that disappeared.

So, was Moggi a saint? No.
But all of the above should have raised a few eyebrows even on non-Juve fan. Infact you will find that some journalists who are declared anti-Juventini like Sconcerti, Beha, Ravazzani who have tried to talk about this .... and Sconcerti got quite sick with Moratti during a Sky show and said "Moratti should have the decency to shut the f-u-c-k up considering he got away with murder and if he had some morality, must have given the 2005-2006 scudetto back after the trial where they would have been relegated to Serie C"
 

Hist

Founder of Hism
Jan 18, 2009
11,403
He was definitely a bit dodgy but if you take someone to court, find no evidence, and your conclusions are "aye pet, he was very powerful and conditioned everybody" is a bit of a weak outcome of the trial especially if you considered that:

- the tobacconist who supposidely sold the swiss SIMs has been sentenced for purgery and he admitted he simply told the italian police "what they wanted to hear";
- Of the 37 referees, only one has been sentenced, De Sanctis, with whom we had a disastrous record (4 defeats in one season, something unheard of in these days and with that team);
- Moggi overwhelming power on media was limited to 2 (yes, two) journalists from Processo del Lunedi, a show that was broadcasted on RAI3 that wasn't even visible in the whole country and used to have an average of 300,000 viewers;
- Paparesta was never closed in the changing room, as he admitted himself. Paparesta was at the time employed by Fininvest, no need to remind you who Fininvest owns;
- Moggi was talking to the Referees boss like everybody else did; infact Juve didn't get the article 6 punishment as it was perfectly legal to talk to the referees bosses. It was not legal talking directly to referees, something done by Inter who infact got article 6 (which would have meant serie C) in the trial against Inter that was written off because of statute of limitations.
- All the players that in the Calciopoli trial were shown as been red carded or yellow carded in a presumed attempt by Moggi to prevent from playing against Juve, were infact all on the pitch against Juve except for Jankulowski of Udinese who actually punched an opponent on the face in a free-for-all that started after the game, so a suspension was rather inevitable;
- the referee's draw that was supposed to be manipulated was regular; what turned out to be manipulated was the video that once they found out had been manipulated misteriously disappeared; the policeman who broguht the tape as evidence had previosuly been found guilty in a completely different trial of manipulating evidence and had been sentenced for that. He is the same policeman who was taped in Palermo on the site of the bomb explosion that killed Judge Borsellino and was seen walking away with the Judge's personal briefcase, containing his famous "red agenda" that disappeared.

So, was Moggi a saint? No.
But all of the above should have raised a few eyebrows even on non-Juve fan. Infact you will find that some journalists who are declared anti-Juventini like Sconcerti, Beha, Ravazzani who have tried to talk about this .... and Sconcerti got quite sick with Moratti during a Sky show and said "Moratti should have the decency to shut the f-u-c-k up considering he got away with murder and if he had some morality, must have given the 2005-2006 scudetto back after the trial where they would have been relegated to Serie C"
I know its definitely fishy the whole thing stinks. I am only saying perhaps moggi is guilty while others are equally or more guilty but they got away with it and he did not.
 

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
Jun 25, 2003
38,227
Perhaps there is more to this than meets the eye. I doubt that Moggi is clean. He was not acquitted of a single charge by any court. Its a bit of a stretch to think that the supreme court is bought too by Moratti and Berlusconi. Others should have been punished too but now I don't think Moggi was innocent.

It's a lot of Italian 'blabla'. Moggi 'pressured' refs. Or he had 'influence'. How exactly he'd do this is not know. I bet the case against him is paper thin.

- - - Updated - - -

He was definitely a bit dodgy but if you take someone to court, find no evidence, and your conclusions are "aye pet, he was very powerful and conditioned everybody" is a bit of a weak outcome of the trial
He was found guilty without evidence. Because he was 'powerful'. To me it reeks of an Italian society that needs to find scapegoats for their failures.
 

Tanu_Mz

Senior Member
Jan 5, 2014
1,881
It's a lot of Italian 'blabla'. Moggi 'pressured' refs. Or he had 'influence'. How exactly he'd do this is not know. I bet the case against him is paper thin.

- - - Updated - - -





He was found guilty without evidence. Because he was 'powerful'. To me it reeks of an Italian society that needs to find scapegoats for their failures.
Wouldn't have been sentenced in any decent democratic country.
Even a moron would have understood how all prefabricated the "evidence" was
 

Scottish

Zebrastreifenpferd
Mar 13, 2011
7,976
I always get so upset when reading discussions about Calciopoli. Of course Moggi bent or broke some rules, but it has transpired that others were too and indeed some worse than Moggi.

The scapegoat theory holds water, especially in that nothingwas done by Palazzi to bring the evidence he had to light before the statue of limitations expired, instead deciding to publish his full report days later.

Nothing resembling justice and we are right to sue the FIGC for negligence and conspiracy, asking for a huge sum of money for the immesurable damage done to our global image.
 

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
Jun 25, 2003
38,227
I always get so upset when reading discussions about Calciopoli. Of course Moggi bent or broke some rules, but it has transpired that others were too and indeed some worse than Moggi.

The scapegoat theory holds water, especially in that nothingwas done by Palazzi to bring the evidence he had to light before the statue of limitations expired, instead deciding to publish his full report days later.

Nothing resembling justice and we are right to sue the FIGC for negligence and conspiracy, asking for a huge sum of money for the immesurable damage done to our global image.

But did he really bend rules? He 'influenced' people. How exactly did this happen?
 

Scottish

Zebrastreifenpferd
Mar 13, 2011
7,976
But did he really bend rules? He 'influenced' people. How exactly did this happen?
To be honest im a little rusty on Calciopoli, it's been years since I really read up on the facts. Your question reminds me of an idea in F1 about not just going by the wording of the rules but by 'The spirit of the rules'. I think that they were all at it, and to change the system a big fuss had to be made and we took the bullet.

I don't believe for a second that professional football is anything resembling clean. Serie A, la liga, BPL, SPL - it all stinks but what happened to Juventus was above and beyond.
 

Juliano13

Senior Member
May 6, 2012
5,016

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 51)