Yesterday, the Turin public prosecutor’s office sent some of Prisma’s investigation papers to public prosecutor’s offices in six other Italian cities. Not exactly a bolt from the blue, given that the slowly building scenario is what could have been easily imagined – in common sense, at least – since the first leaked news about the investigation into Juventus’ accounts. The initiative of the last few hours, taken for reasons of territorial jurisdiction, is in fact Related to the relationships that have emerged between Juventus and other clubs. The plaintiffs involved – and he may not be here – At the moment they will be from Bergamo, Bologna, Cagliari, Genoa, Modena and Udine. Referring to the work, according to the first reconstruction, by Atalanta, Bologna, Cagliari, Sampdoria, Sassuolo and Udinese. Some of those were acquitted on the occasion of the overturning of the capital gains ruling that led to -15 for Juventus, and others could soon be called into question in the file that includes “Opaque Partnerships” of the Bianconeri, which Federal Prosecutor Giuseppe Cine is preparing to close by mid-March.
To assume now the consequences of this initiative would risk being more or less a work of the imagination. but Obviously, the tangible danger is the ‘domino effect’. It is scheduled, in this case, to enter into the processing of the entire Italian movement, with the possible investigative work by the prosecutors just requested, which could lead to the investigation taking – in turn – dozens of other companies. second A puzzle that, if matched, would likely take years and years to put all its pieces together: Just think that the work of the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Turin began in 2021 and that the preliminary hearing will only take place on March 27 (unless the complementary activity underway in recent weeks leads to a postponement). But none of this is taken for granted, of course. The six prosecutors involved could, in the same way, actually decide to close their investigation without going so far as to draft an indictment request..
The role of the guarantee board
What seems clear, in this new photo, is how the specific weight of what will be a decision increases day by day Sports Insurance Council Regarding the penalty imposed on the Bianconeri. Affirming the penalty, in its entirety or by asking the Federal Court of Appeal to reformulate it, would in fact shed new light on the treatment reserved for companies acquitted in the context of annulment.. «In the documents obtained by the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office, unlike what happened to Juventus, there is no specific evidence that would allow the other allegations to be effectively supported. – In fact we read in the motives signed by Mario Luigi Torsello, CAF President -. Objections, manuscripts and documents obtained by the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Turin do not directly involve these companies». But they can only do that The new items collected by the Public Prosecutor’s Offices were activated by sending the Turin paperswhich at this point would dictate – always according to common sense, at least – some kind of … Revoke the cancellation.
Meanwhile, Giorgio Chiellini has expressed himself on the subject, which he has documented in recent days in The Athletic. «For me, this situation is painful: I feel sad and hurt by what is happening at Juventus – said the former Juventus captain -. Now the fans have to be patient because the club is fighting for everyone and I hope everything ends in the best possible way. The team on the field has to think about every game, as it does about what happens on the field, however, we don’t know how it will turn out.».
“Award-winning beer geek. Extreme coffeeaholic. Introvert. Avid travel specialist. Hipster-friendly communicator.”