Scommessopoli

[mukumsplau]

Please note that this has nothing to do with Juventus and any charges brought against current staff were for breaches that 'allegedly' took place while they were at other clubs in Serie B.

where conte is involved, this thing wreaks of someone's personal vendetta...those who know the FIGC know who its senior authoritative officials are in bed with..anyway, the man at the centre is Carrobio, an ex-Siena player under Conte who was convicted of matchfixing and to reduce his sentence he started 'calling names'...the flagship evidence the prosecutor is using is this alleged lockeroom meeting with conte and the 20 plus players where he said conte told them of the fix. every single one of the other players (20+) signed sealed and delivered affidavits to the court saying they dont know what the f**k carobbio is talking about yet, its on the basis of this meeting and this meeting alone that the FIGC wants to hang Conte for failure to report. so then, ask yourself this...why not charge the 20+ player for failure to report also as they were in this same meeting? shit doesnt add up and many across italy have spoken about the inconsistencies not only within this case but across the board..e.g. preziozi (genoa president and inter/milan ballslicker) gets 6months stadium ban for DIRECT involvement in match-fixing...some other guy getting 3 months for failure to report etc...italian judicial system is known as a jokey one but the sporting justice system is worse where ure basically guilty until proven innocent...

Conte lawyers attack Carobbio
By Football Italia staff

Antonio Conte’s lawyers have begun their defence as the Juventus Coach goes to a full trial, risking a 15-month ban, in the betting scandal due to his time at Siena.

Conte was charged with failing to report an attempted fix to the authorities, but the only evidence against him is the testimony of ‘pentito’ (someone who has confessed and receives a large discount on his punishment by naming other names) Filippo Carobbio.

The testimony is based around a team meeting in which Conte allegedly stated there were ‘agreed’ results against Novara and Albinoleffe. However, 23 other players present at the same meeting testified he never said that.

“There is no evidence,” said lawyer Antonio De Rensis. “There is one person’s word against another. No intercepted phone calls, no evidence, no passage of money, nothing.

“I am not here to tell you Carobbio is not credible. I am here to tell you Carobbio is not the only credible one. When we are faced with an accusation and no other evidence aside from that, we have to look at the testimony very carefully.

“When Carobbio was interrogated on January 19, he did not mention Conte, nor did he remember any of his involvement. He only ‘remembered’ on February 29 when testifying before the federal court.

“His accusation is counter to Conte’s history and the 20-month-ban Carobbio got in a plea bargain proves he had interest in dragging others into it.

“The court says Carobbio is credible and Carlo Gervasoni is credible, but one says black and the other white when describing the same thing.

“Carobbio lied about other aspects of the affair, claiming he had no more contact with the betting syndicate although he was shown to have made a series of phone calls using an Egyptian SIM card. So why are you so eager to believe him?

“There were enormous contradictions and admitting would mean you forfeiting the trial. This is not justice, but a pure battle. Carobbio’s testimony on July 10 is a banana skin and the silence speaks volumes. He was not asked about the phone calls. It would’ve been the first thing I’d have asked him.”

The lawyer also made it clear the plea bargain of three months and a €200,000 fine “was agreed with the understanding it did not represent an admission of guilt in any way.”

Many in Italy accept plea bargains in order to avoid a lengthy trial and potentially much longer bans, as one is essentially guilty until proven innocent.

Meanwhile, prosecutor Stefano Palazzi explained why he requested a 15-month ban for Conte and took Carobbio’s word over those of the other 23 players at the team meeting.

“We considered those testimonies to be irrelevant, even if they contrast what was previously said about Albinoleffe-Siena.

“The declarations of those present at the Siena team meeting are not credible, because otherwise they’d be charged with failing to report sporting fraud. Therefore they cannot be used in the trial.”

Many of Conte’s supporters have pointed out if the 23 players were lying about the meeting, then why have they not also been charged with failing to report an attempted fix to the authorities?

The trial continues and a decision is expected next week.


Juventus attack 'dictatorial' FIGC
By Football Italia staff

Juventus President Andrea Agnelli has launched a scathing attack on the sporting justice system, as Antonio Conte refuses a plea bargain and will try to plead his innocence.

Conte was talked into accepting a plea bargain of four months and a €200,000 fine yesterday in the betting scandal, but the Disciplinary Commission judges surprisingly turned it down.

The Coach, who is involved due to his time at Siena and the testimony of just one player – Filippo Carobbio – has rejected a new plea bargain attempt and will go to full trial in order to prove his innocence.

In taking this route, Conte faces a potential 15-month ban. Juventus President Agnelli released a scathing statement that attacks the entire sporting justice system.

“We have realised the FIGC and its sporting justice system continue to operate outside of all logic for rights and fairness.

“For a long time and with great sense of responsibility, Juventus and its employees have maintained a relaxed and consistent attitude towards the institutions and respect for attitudes that straight away suggested a new attack was aimed at damaging the club.

“The results of these various charges show enormous contradictions and seem to protect exclusively those who committed sporting fraud. This is paradoxical and cannot be accepted.”

Carobbio’s testimony is considered credible in accusing Conte despite the fact another 23 Siena players who were in the team meeting also testified that the Coach never alluded to any fixed games.

The Italian sporting justice system is effectively set up so that one is guilty until proven innocent, which is why many take plea bargains to avoid much longer bans and a long trial process.

“Yesterday’s decision of the FIGC Disciplinary Commission to reject an offer of a plea bargain that had already been pondered and underwritten by the Prosecutor, is proof of the total inadequacy of the sporting justice system and the Federation within which it operates,” continued Agnelli.

“I must again point out the incapability this structure has of interpreting the needs of modern professional football at the highest level.

“The path of plea bargaining in order to limit the damage done by a contradictory sporting justice system clashes against a dictatorial system that robs clubs and their employees of any right to defence or honour.

“The respectability of individuals is put in danger and it is therefore up to them to make the final decision on which path to take, aware Juventus will support them in every court.

“It will be a complex and difficult season, but the concentration on performances on the field remains high with the objective to confirm ourselves as winners in May 2013.”

This betting scandal comes in the wake of the Calciopoli investigation and controversy over the intercepted phone calls involving other clubs like Inter that were not taken into consideration during the original 2006 trial.


Conte goes to full betting trial
By Football Italia staff

Juventus Coach Antonio Conte has refused to negotiate another plea bargain, so goes to a full betting trial and faces a potential 15-month ban.

The betting trial took a sensational twist yesterday when the plea bargain of a three-month ban and €200,000 fine was agreed with the prosecutor, but rejected as ‘insufficient’ by the Disciplinary Commission judges.

Conte has been charged with failing to alert two attempted fixes to authorities from his time at Siena in the Serie B 2010-11 campaign.

He has always denied knowing anything about the attempted interference from betting syndicates and was talked into taking a plea bargain by his lawyers.

This is because the justice system is one of ‘guilty until proven innocent’ when there is an accusation from someone who has confessed to another charge.

It was reported that Conte was negotiating another plea bargain with the prosecutor of a five-month ban, but the tactician stood his ground and opted to go to a full trial by pleading not guilty.

This means prosecutor Stefano Palazzi has requested a ban of one year and three months for Conte.

Ex-Siena player Filippo Carobbio claimed Conte had mentioned the ‘agreed’ results against Novara and Albinoleffe during a team meeting, but the other players who were present have testified the Coach never said that.

Siena also had their initial plea bargain rejected, but have now accepted a new six-point penalty for ‘indirect responsibility’ – as Carobbio was their player when he was in contact with the betting syndicates.

It should be noted the ban for a Coach only means he cannot sit on the bench, go into the locker room or give interviews in the Press room on match day, but he can continue day-to-day training.

[mukumsplau]

Conte's stand
It’s not about Juventus or Antonio Conte, as Susy Campanale warns the sporting justice system in Italy is deeply flawed.

Antonio Conte was talked into accepting a plea bargain by his lawyers, one that made it very clear this was not an admission of guilt when charged with failing to alert authorities to an attempted sporting fraud. When that was rejected by the Disciplinary Commission, the Coach decided to take a stand. He and Juventus are embarking on a battle that could change the sporting justice system in Italy forever – and it’s about time too.

Let me be clear, lest many stop reading this blog already and accuse me of white-washing history: I am not a Juventus supporter and I am most certainly not accusing the FIGC of creating some anti-Bianconeri conspiracy stretching back to Calciopoli. That would be daft. What I am saying is that Conte’s situation is a perfect example of why the current system does not work. It could easily be argued it is also a sign of a wider problem within the Italian civil justice system, but that is for another day.

The evidence against Conte is simple – former Siena player Filippo Carobbio claims the Coach said in a team meeting that results were ‘secured’ against Albinoleffe and Novara during the 2010-11 Serie B campaign. That is the entirety of the evidence. One man’s word. This man who had already been caught in contact with betting syndicates and confessed with the promise of bringing bigger names to the prosecutor in exchange for a large discount on his own punishment.

This issue of the ‘pentiti’ – penitents – has been a problem throughout the civil justice system for several decades, most notably in the 1980s and 90s when high-profile showbiz celebrities were dragged through the mud simply because they were named by Mafia underlings who wanted a discount on their sentences. After lengthy trials and even spells in prison, those innocent figures were cleared of all wrong-doing.

Juventus launched a scathing attack on the system, suggesting it protected confessed criminals more than those who profess their innocence. That is without a shadow of a doubt true. The Italian approach to justice seems to consider you guilty until you can prove your innocence, which is somewhat difficult when it’s one man’s word against another.

Except in Conte’s case, it is one man’s word against 24 others. The other players who were in that Siena team meeting all testified that the Coach never mentioned or alluded to ‘fixed’ results. Their testimony has been discarded by the prosecutor. As Conte is charged with failing to alert authorities to something untoward, then either he is innocent or the other 23 players are lying and should also be charged. The fact those ex-Siena men have not been charged just makes the whole thing look completely meaningless.

The prosecutor in his own way already showed he doubts Carobbio’s testimony. After all, Carobbio originally accused Conte of something that would amount to sporting fraud, but the prosecutor realised it wouldn’t stick and opted for the less serious ‘failing to alert authorities.’ This way, the prosecutor has cherry-picked which parts of Carobbio’s story to believe. Why? Either he is a credible witness or he isn’t, you can’t rest an entire case on half-believing a testimony. The more you look at what evidence Conte has against him, the more you can see why he is so angry.

I welcome Conte and Juventus standing up to the prosecutor and the Disciplinary Commission, demanding to see them make a case out of this pitiful evidence. Maybe it will have repercussions throughout this and future sporting trials that risk ruining careers without genuine proof. It might also discourage the dawn raids on people’s houses and training grounds when they have repeatedly offered to testify and been ignored.

Some of you will say, but Conte accepted a plea bargain, so isn’t that an admission of guilt? Not in Italy it isn’t. The justice system is insanely long – so that we are still seeing rulings made on Calciopoli six years later in numerous courts of appeal. It has become a tacit agreement that it suits all parties to just work out a plea bargain and get it over with, saving everyone time and money. This is especially true in the civil courts, where the vast majority of people handed prison sentences don’t ever sit behind bars. Again, this was thanks to a law passed because there was not enough space in the jails. As I said, it is a very strange system in Italy.

Many Juventini, including President Andrea Agnelli, will take this as an opportunity to get payback for Calciopoli. With hindsight and the benefit of wiretapped Inter phone calls that were somehow completely ignored at the time of the trial, Juve could’ve fought those charges a lot harder. It’s not so much that they were innocent – they weren’t – but rather that Luciano Moggi had a point when he said everyone was doing it. The wiretaps showed less of a Juve-led cabal and more of a general moaning towards the referees from all quarters.

In any case, including Calciopoli in this legal battle risks muddying the waters. Conte’s situation is entirely separate and must be treated as such, otherwise people will get swept up in the usual club rivalries and ignore the evidence. It suits everyone to change the current sporting justice system, because sooner or later any of the clubs could find themselves forced to prove innocence when guilt is assumed

http://www.football-italia.net/22581/contes-stand

[mukumsplau]

The new Juventus will not roll over!

In the last year, a scandal has been raging through the lower echelons of Italian football. Calcioscommesse, or “football betting”, has involved players fixing matches for betting purposes, paid off by criminal gangs to assure a result. In some cases, there has been coordination between both teams involved, like when Bari players offered the Lecce ownership to throw the derby. Bari defender Andrea Masiello was paid €300k to score a decisive own goal in the match, which helped Lecce avoid relegation.

Starting out originally in the Lega Pro and Serie B divisions, the scandal has crept up towards the higher levels of calcio. Bari and Lecce players have been charged, Atalanta and their players investigated for various Serie B match-fixing (on their way to promotion), leading to point deductions for the club in the past season and a 3.5-year ban for Cristiano Doni, their captain.

As the scope of Calcioscommesse spread, the FIGC has recently charged 13 clubs, between Serie B and Serie A, of participating in illegal betting schemes, including Siena at the time that Antonio Conte was coach. There are two matches that the FIGC claims Conte was aware of irregularities, Siena vs. Novara and Albinoleffe vs. Siena. Three Siena players have been directly charged with committing match-fixing for betting purposes: Filippo Carobbio, Marcelo Larrondo, and Robert Vitiello.

One of these players in particular, Carobbio, who has been charged for activities at other clubs such as Bari and has since outed other members of the conspiracy in exchange for a reduced sentence), has come out and claimed that Antonio Conte was fully aware of the match-fixing that went on at Siena. He stated that there was a tactical meeting before the Novara game in which then-coach Conte announced to the team that Novara had come to an agreement on fixing the match, so Siena would lose 1-0. Carobbio explicitly stated that the entire team agreed to do so.

Carobbio’s statements have changed frequently: he first alleged that the match-fixing started in January, only to changed his view later and say that it only started in the Spring, when promotion was assured. When interviewed in January, Carobbio never mentioned Conte’s name. It wasn’t until 6 weeks later when he accused Conte of being in on the fix. Carobbio also claimed that the Siena players arranged the fix, only to later add that Siena President Mezzaroma insisted on the result, and passed it on through Conte. It’s interesting to note that in other cases, FIGC chief prosecutor Stefano Palazzi had not considered Carobbio’s statements credible. And while Carobbio alleged Conte was guilty of match-fixing, Palazzi charged Conte with merely being aware of the fix, but then failing to report it.

The FIGC has not indicted Antonio Conte for disciplinary judgement for the serious charge of “match fixing”, thus, rejecting the idea that Conte arranged the fix with Novara or Albinoleffe. Rather, they have charged him with being guilty of “omission”, i.e. of knowing of the plot, but not contacting the authorities. The same charge has been issued to Simone Pepe for his time at Udinese, who was reportedly offered a fix between Udinese and Bari, rejected the idea, but did not report it. Leonardo Bonucci meanwhile, has been charged with direct responsibility with several other Bari players for the Udinese vs. Bari (3-3) match, and could face serious sanctions.


This famous pre-Novara tactical meeting seems very questionable. 23 Siena players were present at this technical reunion, and have since signed sworn affidavits that a fix was not discussed, agreeing with Conte’s defense. And yet, none of these players have been charged with failing to report the incident, nor the Siena ownership, nor the Novara coaching staff. It’s a similar situation for the Albinoleffe game: the FIGC alleged there was another discussion of a fix, yet no other Siena players have been charged with omission. And yet again, neither the Siena nor Albinoleffe ownerships have been directly charged, nor has any Albinoleffe coach.

Indeed, Conte’s players have given strong defenses. Ferdinando Coppola, goalkeeper for Conte both at Siena and Atalanta, strongly denied the discussion of any fix. “There is nothing true in this, Conte and [Siena President] Mezzaroma are innocent. I remember that tactical reunion, we had just lost to Portogruaro. I remember the emotion of listening to Conte, who exhorted us to win after the loss.” Many Siena players were interviewed by the FIGC, each swearing the team never discussed illegal activities, thus contradicting Carobbio’s statements. Yet for some reason, Palazzi has thus far preferred the word of a criminal over the sworn word of 23 men. The question is:

If Conte was charged of hearing of the fix at these tactical unions and failing to report it, why have these 23 Siena players not been charged, all of which who were at the same meetings and swore nothing happened?”

Filippo Carobbio has been involved with Hungarian betting syndicates in the scandal, charged with fixing many games, including matches at Siena in which Conte isn’t implicated at all. And yet, in exchange for rolling over and granting testimony against others (who committed far less serious crimes), he’s getting a reduced sentence. In the most recent round of deals, Carobbio was given a 4-month sentence for several instances of match-fixing, only one month more than Conte’s plea deal would have been.

It’s been a similar situation for Leonardo Bonucci. Like Carobbio, chief “witness” Andrea Masiello has been rolling on other targets in exchange for a lighter sentence, among which the Juventus ex-Bari defender. One of the senior officials in Bari’s medical staff has rubbished the fact that Bonucci was involved. “I hear the name of Belmonte, Bonucci, and Pepe, but these men weren’t involved because if it were true, I’d have known. The money after that match was taken by Andrea Masiello, who told me it was money for charity. I know that Bonucci is a good person, if you ask me, his name was dragged into this, even if innocent, because his relationship was poor with Andrea Masiello. The two rarely talked.”

One of the chief issues we must remember here, is that this is a SPORTING JUSTICE trial, not a criminal/civil trial. Thus, there is not the same burden of proof… and not the same person holding it. In traditional Western countries, you are “innocent until proven guilty.” In sporting trials in Italy, it is the individual charged with the crime who has to prove their innocence, which is an awfully difficult thing to do if… you’re charged with knowing of match-fixing but failing to report it!! How does one prove they did not have knowledge?

This brings us to the recent discussion of a plea bargain. There were 61 charged cases in Calcioscommesse earlier this year, in which 19 made plea deals, 38 were convicted, and 4 absolved. If convicted, Antonio Conte and Simone Pepe could face a year or more of suspension, whereas Leonardo Bonucci is looking at potentially a 3-year suspension. While Andrea Agnelli has stated those implicated have Juve’s full support, it’s rumored the club encouraged Conte, Pepe, and Bonucci to accept a plea deal. For Conte, it was include a €200k fine (donated to charity) and a 3-month suspension effective August 1st, which would prevent him from accessing the team bench on matchdays until November 1st, but enable him to still conduct training sessions.


It’s worth noting that under Article 23 of the ‘Code of Sport Justice’, a plea bargain specifies there is no admission of guilt by the accused. The process would thus formally neither admit nor deny the charges originally presented, which in the eyes of Conte, Bonucci, and Pepe is very important as they yet maintain their innocence (and are very much inclined to fight the charges).

For Bonucci, who faces a ban of potentially up to 3 years, it seemed — by early reports — that a plea deal would initially involve a full year suspension (leaving Bonucci stuck between a rock and a hard place on whether to plea or fight the accusations in court). However, if the charges against the Juve center-back were demoted from “sporting fraud” to “omission” (as they have in the case of Marcelo Larrondo), Bonucci could get away with only 3 months.

In Conte’s case, a plea bargain would certainly damage the coach’s reputation, but it could be better than attempting to clear his name, which would leave a heavy cloud of uncertainty over the current season and possibly result in a longer suspension. His name has already been sullied by those newspapers eager to drag him through the mud, despite the lack of evidence or questionable testimony of a soon-to-be convicted felon.

In a surprising plot twist, the plea deal negotiated by FIGC chief prosecutor Palazzi with Conte’s lawyers earlier this week (and which Conte was persuaded to accept), was however rejected by the sporting tribunal judges, who considered it to be too light! The court counter-offer included a 5-month suspension and a €100k fine, but irritated by the first rejection and fueled by a desire to clear his name, Antonio Conte rejected it, choosing instead to go to trial. The issue will now proceed into a full court hearing, with Palazzi seeking the regular 15-month suspension for all cases of “omission”.

Leonardo Bonucci and Simone Pepe have a bit of time left to decide on a plea bargain. Next Friday, the sporting court of justice and Palazzi will decide on what plea deal to offer the two Juventini. While Juventus encouraged Pepe, Bonucci, and Conte to accept a plea deal, things may change in the next week following the court’s rejection of Palazzi’s plea offer to Conte.


Unsurprisingly, Juve’s upper management reacted very strongly to the sporting judges’ decision, especially after they had encouraged their coach to accept the deal offered by Palazzi. Juventus posted a formal media blackout (silenzio stampa) on their home page, handed Leonardo Bonucci the captain’s armband for the Benfica friendly, and then came out with a strongly worded statement from Andrea Agnelli regarding the FIGC and their judicial system:

It appears that the Federazione Italiana Giuoco Calcio and its system of sporting justice continue to operate in complete disregard of law and equity. For a long while now, and with a great sense of responsibility, Juventus and its employees have maintained a calm and consistent approach in their dealings with the Institutions and in the face of stances which, right from the outset, appeared to suggest the club and its representatives were once again under attack.

The results pertaining to the various charges are littered with contradictions and tend to protect only those who have committed infractions. This is a paradox and unacceptable.
The decision taken yesterday by the FIGC’s national disciplinary committee, which opposed a plea bargain that had already been considered and approved by the federal prosecutor, is testimony to the complete inadequacy of the sporting justice system and the Federation within which it operates.

Once again, I detect an inability to interpret the requirements of today’s top-level professional game. Having chosen to make a plea bargain in order to limit the damage of an antiquated and contradictory system of sporting justice, one is confronted with a dictatorial system that deprives the club and its employees of any right to defend themselves and their honour.

It is the respectability of individuals that is being put in danger and therefore it is up to them to have the final say on the decisions to be made, in the knowledge that Juventus will support them at every level of the judicial system. It will be a tough and demanding season, but as a club we
remain entirely focused on the team’s performances on the pitch and our target is once again to win trophies come May 2013.

Whatever the reason Conte has been targeted, his treatment is unfair and is only further proof of the antiquated, corrupt, arbitrary mess of a judicial system present in Italy. But this will not be like Calciopoli back in 2006. Back then, the media massacred Juventus in the court of public opinion. The entire board of directors resigned, and the new management simply rolled over and never fought the charges.

The new Juventus will not roll over.

http://juventiknows.com/conte-and-calcioscommesse-just-what-is-going-on/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=conte-and-calcioscommesse-just-what-is-going-on