are the public entitled to see the actual evidence? or do we just get the results and conclusions?
Buy on AliExpress.com
Calciopoli or Morattopoli.. inter fake orgasm (17 Viewers)
- Thread starter gsol
- Start date
Buy on AliExpress.com
i do not support your theory alen, because i think even when there was an agreement that the actual wrongdoing of juve would not be published the media controlled by inter and milan would surely jump on that and say how it is evidence that we did commit big crime when it is too big to be published ... the media does generally not give a fuck about such agreements and would surely slaughter it
Even if the media were not controlled by Berlu and moRATti, they would publish and be damned! The Italian media especially, as they have no scruples.
Cangaroo-Court. Giraudo doesnt give a fuck and knows he cant get jail-time whatever they say. So he just wanted to get it over with. Too bad though.
It's what happens to Moggi and his quest for freedom that matters. If Moggi finally gets cleared (doesnt have to mean in Neapel), Giraudos pathetic sentence wont matter for shit.
In other words: We wait and see what happens to the legend.
It's what happens to Moggi and his quest for freedom that matters. If Moggi finally gets cleared (doesnt have to mean in Neapel), Giraudos pathetic sentence wont matter for shit.
In other words: We wait and see what happens to the legend.
You have people thinking:
- It's all Moratti's fault
- Our new board works for Moratti to destroy Juve
- We're content being the new Siena
- Cobolli was an interista
others thinking
- Guido Rossi's hiring and past was fishy
- Decision of sending us down wasn't right
- No clear cut proof of wrong doing
- Omission of other clubs involved in it but not punished
...
- It's all Moratti's fault
- Our new board works for Moratti to destroy Juve
- We're content being the new Siena
- Cobolli was an interista
others thinking
- Guido Rossi's hiring and past was fishy
- Decision of sending us down wasn't right
- No clear cut proof of wrong doing
- Omission of other clubs involved in it but not punished
...
These points are no "theories".
- Guido Rossi's hiring and past was fishy
- Decision of sending us down wasn't right
- No clear cut proof of wrong doing
- Omission of other clubs involved in it but not punished
@To the Anti-Islamic Facist
"i don't think you are aware of what a conspiracy theory means"
I think you are the lost one in this matter. Laying forward facts, how hard you have accepting them, is not a THEORY. But when you SPECULATE like this:
"- It's all Moratti's fault
- Our new board works for Moratti to destroy Juve
- We're content being the new Siena
- Cobolli was an interista"
Then you are cleary laying forward THEORIES.
Big difference. Learn the difference.
- Guido Rossi's hiring and past was fishy
- Decision of sending us down wasn't right
- No clear cut proof of wrong doing
- Omission of other clubs involved in it but not punished
@To the Anti-Islamic Facist
"i don't think you are aware of what a conspiracy theory means"
I think you are the lost one in this matter. Laying forward facts, how hard you have accepting them, is not a THEORY. But when you SPECULATE like this:
"- It's all Moratti's fault
- Our new board works for Moratti to destroy Juve
- We're content being the new Siena
- Cobolli was an interista"
Then you are cleary laying forward THEORIES.
Big difference. Learn the difference.
@ Anti Islamic fascist
This is from Gsol. And don't ask from where I got it. 
----------------------------
I have no intentions whatsoever of engaging in useless debates with people in public forums over today’s sentence since I already know that no one will have done today what I have. I read through what occurred and have formulated an opinion based on more than a headline. Few others will have bothered.
I write here for the sake of informing friends.
Antonio Giraudo was sentenced to three years in prison today on the grounds of Association with Intent to Defraud. In a way this is what he asked for since he has been extremely lazy these last four years. While Moggi has spent every waking day defending himself, Giraudo took the accusations all too lightly and today paid for it. I doubt that he will now knowing that it will cost him three years of his life. Odds are he will appeal the verdict but at this point I have to ask what the point is.
The sentence itself (“Association with Intent to Defraud”) is largely unconstitutional in that it requires no proof (how could one prove ill will?). It emerged decades ago as a tactic to group undesirables (Communists, Organized Criminals, etc.) when all else failed. Today it was used as a means of achieving a desired sentence without the burden of proving a single illegal act.
Someone now is going to have to be very creative in explaining how fraud could not be committed or even attempted (according to the sporting tribunal), yet the intention of it still be a punishable offence. Is it illogical to assume that if an association with fraudulent intentions existed that it would at least have attempted it once at some point? Is it logical to assume that someone’s mere desire to commit an act be damaging in legal terms?
How it is possible that the “Association” does not legally exist according to the most recent Civil Court (GEA trial) yet people still investigated and condemned for being members of it is a mystery. How is it possible that the only case capable of reopening the “Association’s” existence (Moggi’s trial) is yet to conclude (which brings forth more and more evidence daily to refute the accusation) and still have people sentenced for its membership.
It is extremely important to note that today Giraudo was sentenced not for wrongdoing of any sort but for being a member of an undesirable “Association” that does not legally exist according to the judges that preside over Italy. How could someone be a member of something that the courts themselves determined never existed?
Today more than ever as an Italian citizen I am grateful that I live in Canada where a citizen’s right to a fair trial is still respected.
----------------------------
I have no intentions whatsoever of engaging in useless debates with people in public forums over today’s sentence since I already know that no one will have done today what I have. I read through what occurred and have formulated an opinion based on more than a headline. Few others will have bothered.
I write here for the sake of informing friends.
Antonio Giraudo was sentenced to three years in prison today on the grounds of Association with Intent to Defraud. In a way this is what he asked for since he has been extremely lazy these last four years. While Moggi has spent every waking day defending himself, Giraudo took the accusations all too lightly and today paid for it. I doubt that he will now knowing that it will cost him three years of his life. Odds are he will appeal the verdict but at this point I have to ask what the point is.
The sentence itself (“Association with Intent to Defraud”) is largely unconstitutional in that it requires no proof (how could one prove ill will?). It emerged decades ago as a tactic to group undesirables (Communists, Organized Criminals, etc.) when all else failed. Today it was used as a means of achieving a desired sentence without the burden of proving a single illegal act.
Someone now is going to have to be very creative in explaining how fraud could not be committed or even attempted (according to the sporting tribunal), yet the intention of it still be a punishable offence. Is it illogical to assume that if an association with fraudulent intentions existed that it would at least have attempted it once at some point? Is it logical to assume that someone’s mere desire to commit an act be damaging in legal terms?
How it is possible that the “Association” does not legally exist according to the most recent Civil Court (GEA trial) yet people still investigated and condemned for being members of it is a mystery. How is it possible that the only case capable of reopening the “Association’s” existence (Moggi’s trial) is yet to conclude (which brings forth more and more evidence daily to refute the accusation) and still have people sentenced for its membership.
It is extremely important to note that today Giraudo was sentenced not for wrongdoing of any sort but for being a member of an undesirable “Association” that does not legally exist according to the judges that preside over Italy. How could someone be a member of something that the courts themselves determined never existed?
Today more than ever as an Italian citizen I am grateful that I live in Canada where a citizen’s right to a fair trial is still respected.
This is from Gsol. And don't ask from where I got it.
----------------------------
I have no intentions whatsoever of engaging in useless debates with people in public forums over today’s sentence since I already know that no one will have done today what I have. I read through what occurred and have formulated an opinion based on more than a headline. Few others will have bothered.
I write here for the sake of informing friends.
Antonio Giraudo was sentenced to three years in prison today on the grounds of Association with Intent to Defraud. In a way this is what he asked for since he has been extremely lazy these last four years. While Moggi has spent every waking day defending himself, Giraudo took the accusations all too lightly and today paid for it. I doubt that he will now knowing that it will cost him three years of his life. Odds are he will appeal the verdict but at this point I have to ask what the point is.
The sentence itself (“Association with Intent to Defraud”) is largely unconstitutional in that it requires no proof (how could one prove ill will?). It emerged decades ago as a tactic to group undesirables (Communists, Organized Criminals, etc.) when all else failed. Today it was used as a means of achieving a desired sentence without the burden of proving a single illegal act.
Someone now is going to have to be very creative in explaining how fraud could not be committed or even attempted (according to the sporting tribunal), yet the intention of it still be a punishable offence. Is it illogical to assume that if an association with fraudulent intentions existed that it would at least have attempted it once at some point? Is it logical to assume that someone’s mere desire to commit an act be damaging in legal terms?
How it is possible that the “Association” does not legally exist according to the most recent Civil Court (GEA trial) yet people still investigated and condemned for being members of it is a mystery. How is it possible that the only case capable of reopening the “Association’s” existence (Moggi’s trial) is yet to conclude (which brings forth more and more evidence daily to refute the accusation) and still have people sentenced for its membership.
It is extremely important to note that today Giraudo was sentenced not for wrongdoing of any sort but for being a member of an undesirable “Association” that does not legally exist according to the judges that preside over Italy. How could someone be a member of something that the courts themselves determined never existed?
Today more than ever as an Italian citizen I am grateful that I live in Canada where a citizen’s right to a fair trial is still respected.
----------------------------
I have no intentions whatsoever of engaging in useless debates with people in public forums over today’s sentence since I already know that no one will have done today what I have. I read through what occurred and have formulated an opinion based on more than a headline. Few others will have bothered.
I write here for the sake of informing friends.
Antonio Giraudo was sentenced to three years in prison today on the grounds of Association with Intent to Defraud. In a way this is what he asked for since he has been extremely lazy these last four years. While Moggi has spent every waking day defending himself, Giraudo took the accusations all too lightly and today paid for it. I doubt that he will now knowing that it will cost him three years of his life. Odds are he will appeal the verdict but at this point I have to ask what the point is.
The sentence itself (“Association with Intent to Defraud”) is largely unconstitutional in that it requires no proof (how could one prove ill will?). It emerged decades ago as a tactic to group undesirables (Communists, Organized Criminals, etc.) when all else failed. Today it was used as a means of achieving a desired sentence without the burden of proving a single illegal act.
Someone now is going to have to be very creative in explaining how fraud could not be committed or even attempted (according to the sporting tribunal), yet the intention of it still be a punishable offence. Is it illogical to assume that if an association with fraudulent intentions existed that it would at least have attempted it once at some point? Is it logical to assume that someone’s mere desire to commit an act be damaging in legal terms?
How it is possible that the “Association” does not legally exist according to the most recent Civil Court (GEA trial) yet people still investigated and condemned for being members of it is a mystery. How is it possible that the only case capable of reopening the “Association’s” existence (Moggi’s trial) is yet to conclude (which brings forth more and more evidence daily to refute the accusation) and still have people sentenced for its membership.
It is extremely important to note that today Giraudo was sentenced not for wrongdoing of any sort but for being a member of an undesirable “Association” that does not legally exist according to the judges that preside over Italy. How could someone be a member of something that the courts themselves determined never existed?
Today more than ever as an Italian citizen I am grateful that I live in Canada where a citizen’s right to a fair trial is still respected.
In short, you are claiming that Moratti owns the civil court too.
Here are the games Giraudo has been accused of sporting fraud:
Udinese-Brescia (1-2) Sept.24th 2004
Yellow cards given to Udinese players that subsequently make them miss the next match Udinese-Juventus (0-1) on Oct. 3rd 2004.
This was the game where Udinese keeper De Sanctis was down for injury but Brescia continued playing and scored. A brawl followed.
Pinzi, Muntari and Di Michele all got yellows and Jankulovski was sent off. The 3 players weren't 1 yellow of suspension so they regularly played against Juve. Jankulovski didn't because of the red.
Juventus-Lazio (2-1) December 5th 2004
Lazio wanted a pk on S. Inzaghi when Juve were up 2-1 but JUve also wanted one on Zlatan when it was 1-1.
Juventus-Udinese (2-1) Febbruary 3rd 2005
After being 2-0 down, Udinese's Fava scores a legit goal but was called off for offside. He wasn't. Cananvaro could of had a second yellow for toucjing the ball with his hand. Same thing happened in Bologna-Palermo but Corini didn't get sent off either. In the end, Pinzi's rough challenge on Zlatan deserved a red.
There was also Juventus-Chievo of October 31st 2004 were Juve won 3-0. Pieri was the ref who got a 6.5 vote from the Gazzetta dello Sport.
In conclusion: :luckyluke:
Udinese-Brescia (1-2) Sept.24th 2004
Yellow cards given to Udinese players that subsequently make them miss the next match Udinese-Juventus (0-1) on Oct. 3rd 2004.
This was the game where Udinese keeper De Sanctis was down for injury but Brescia continued playing and scored. A brawl followed.
Pinzi, Muntari and Di Michele all got yellows and Jankulovski was sent off. The 3 players weren't 1 yellow of suspension so they regularly played against Juve. Jankulovski didn't because of the red.
Juventus-Lazio (2-1) December 5th 2004
Lazio wanted a pk on S. Inzaghi when Juve were up 2-1 but JUve also wanted one on Zlatan when it was 1-1.
Juventus-Udinese (2-1) Febbruary 3rd 2005
After being 2-0 down, Udinese's Fava scores a legit goal but was called off for offside. He wasn't. Cananvaro could of had a second yellow for toucjing the ball with his hand. Same thing happened in Bologna-Palermo but Corini didn't get sent off either. In the end, Pinzi's rough challenge on Zlatan deserved a red.
There was also Juventus-Chievo of October 31st 2004 were Juve won 3-0. Pieri was the ref who got a 6.5 vote from the Gazzetta dello Sport.
In conclusion: :luckyluke:
And the farce goes on, ppl are getting condemned without proves and without even bothering telling us for why exactly.
Did Juve cheated in the above matches? How? Did we pay paid/coerce a ref to favor us? Whom and for what match exactly? How much money did we pay him, or whom did we threaten?
When are we going to get some definate answers to these questions?
We were destroyed financial, gotten stripped of titles and forever tainted our prestige.
We will never recover from that blow and won win anything for at least a decade,
the entire league will suffer as well.
I really want to know how much we paid, which ref, to give us, what match!
All the other teams ad refs have been cleared, we could just by our selves, corruption needs at least two participants...
Did Juve cheated in the above matches? How? Did we pay paid/coerce a ref to favor us? Whom and for what match exactly? How much money did we pay him, or whom did we threaten?
When are we going to get some definate answers to these questions?
We were destroyed financial, gotten stripped of titles and forever tainted our prestige.
We will never recover from that blow and won win anything for at least a decade,
the entire league will suffer as well.
I really want to know how much we paid, which ref, to give us, what match!
All the other teams ad refs have been cleared, we could just by our selves, corruption needs at least two participants...