What Happens When You Are In A Comma

The disgraced guarantor

See Brancher and wonder where you got the wrong
Antonio Polito

One passes most of his adult life to support that Berlusconi is not a criminal but a political phenomenon that has happened because the Knight has a message and not just half ( television), which won the elections because it embodies an idea and a hope and not because Italy is made up of a majority of tax evaders and corrupt who identifies with him. One pass

years to say that Berlusconi must be understood and not demonized, even in his lies that there is some truth. That, of course, he makes the laws to save himself from prosecution, but also the processes that are not really all bomb-proof. That, of course, can not afford to insult the judiciary and to challenge the constitutional autonomy of the judiciary, but to see how they behave and how certain judges sometimes use their independence it is clear that the Italian justice has still an urgent need for radical reform.

One takes us back to the face and even some friendship to explain that even the immunity pro-tempore for the head of government is not in itself a blasphemy, which indeed in some countries is expected, and anyway there is need to protect the exercise of popular mandate.

Then Berlusconi, under cover of darkness, saying nothing to anybody, appointing his friend, fellow defendant and Aldo Brancher Minister of nowhere, and Aldo Brancher shall immediately - instead of federalism - the legal impediment to prevent his trial. And you wonder where you are wrong.

from "The Reform", Fri. June 25, 2010

How Much Is A Corn Removal

face on the interception (from "Free" 's June 11, 2010) A dialogue on justice

"What scares gazzettieri of proxy
F. Let us

E'incredibile, all lie. That mind is the best, because otherwise we think that Ferruccio De Bortoli and Greve and Luigi Vittorio Ferrarella (Courier) and Mario and Massimo Calabresi Gramellini (Print) and Ezio Mauro and Gustavo Zagrebelsky (Republic) and many others, virtually all , not so much ignore the new rule on the secret investigation, but the previous one, ie the current, that launched in 1989. What does the old rule, alias Articles 684 and 329 of the Code of Criminal Procedure? He says that an act of investigation is no longer secret after a suspected it comes to his knowledge - and so far we have - but adds that it is equally forbidden to publish the text in quotation marks an interrogation or an interception, if I may say publish the content (the famous 'summary') but no text. So what's the difference with the new standard? Here it is, very Italian: the difference is that if they are all fucked up now, because it was provided for only a ridiculous fine of 130 € (with oblation, that is without even a trial) while the new draft law provides for penalties to journalists and editors can not be overlooked, if any. It's like the law Sirchia on smoke bans even before there were all identical, but they were bland and then gives a damn.
But there's more: The new standard, in theory, is more permissive than the last. The old article 114 of the Code of Procedure, in fact, in the second paragraph read as follows: "It is prohibited to publish, even in part, acts no longer be confidential until the preliminary investigations are concluded or until the end of the preliminary hearing 'This was the old rule, although all the violated. Well, the new permits at least the above summary for publication. In the past - in theory, we repeat - not even that.
Here, then, the real difference between this and the previous law, and all those proposals in recent years, including this Decree Mastella that the Prodi government had tried to launch even more severe current: the difference is that this law c ' is the risk that it works. Only the risk, we fear. And what they are writing, however, all the newspapers? We talk, badateci, including normal and decent fellow, not only of those dipietrini Travaglini and every day are incapable of circumvention. They write lies. They write that there can be no more "informative" write "the truth" 'News', things like that, slogans. The main newspapers are long lists of scandals "that we can no longer know" even if it is true, taken one by one we'd been able to know more about everyone, although without reference to any person outside the investigation and even tried. Even Gomorrah, were able to memorize, and even photos of Stefano Cucchi that journalists saw before the magistrates. The "news" will still be prejudice, just sapersele provide, but do not consider "news" only that which is extracted from a binder judiciary. Just above that interest, the news: the other day, for example, the Corriere del Mezzogiorno has given Available only one that has largely taken over and we both know why. Recall that the prosecutor of Trani Michael Ruggiero, last December, had investigated the director of Tg1 Augusto Minzolini investigation to reveal the secret: this only because he had talked on the phone to call their own attorney. Well, now it turns out that the same pm Ruggiero is under investigation for the same thing, because he had previously spilled on the phone the same episode - the convening of Minzolini in proxy - a journalist. The whole thing seems strange, because it works as a photographer, often, the passage of cards and papers from judges and journalists but the news, as mentioned, has resumed only Free. It does not affect the article? Could possibly spoil the demagogic mayonnaise these days? There is one thing, under the new law, which can no longer do any form, either text or summarized: to publish the first time - before the trial, that is - the contents of interceptions. And thank you very much: it is the main reason why they made the law. Let's talk about those interceptions that no country in the world public opinion as us: yet made are democracies in which journalism and justice are very serious business. Why there and not here
yes? Because in France or the United Kingdom no idiot cries of fascism? Because directors and journalists, we do not want to admit that this is simply maintaining the status quo - to publish everything, rubbish anyone - if only to sell more copies? What then - who told sdottoreggia - in the acts and orders of arrest interceptions there should not be: because they would be the means of gathering evidence, not evidence, just like the anonymous letters, or the blow of confidence or other stuff in issue should not even enter, and which we - unique in the world - become queens instead of evidence, gossip, legal literature. Barbarism, all admit. Before publishing.

Financial Management- I M Pandey

The debate on the regulation of wiretapping must inevitably be accompanied by a reflection across the state of health and the ills that plague the administration of justice in Italy and, especially, the possible cures. A reflection of this kind is given in the dialogue between Charles and Nordio Giuliano Pisapia: "Waiting for justice. Dialogue on possible reforms "(pref. S. Romano, Guerini e Associati, 2010, 191 pp., 18, 50 €). Carlo Nordio is deputy prosecutor in Venice, "prosecutor refractory to any political stance but certainly liberal," while Giuliano Pisapia is a lawyer "on the left politically engaged" (he was elected to parliament in the ranks of the Communist PRC). Beyond the different political stance, however, the two have in common the fact that he presided over (under different governments), the Commission for the reform of the penal code and, above all, a vision of reform that would define "long term", that little attention to political contingencies-election. Romano writes in the preface, both in their constitutional duties, have come to conclusions very similar, but their proposals were not endorsed by the political class, because this "instead of working on medium and long time for the renewal of the criminal justice system, prefer to live day by day chasing the mood of public opinion or the calls from beyond the Tiber "(p. 10), with reference a measure such as a pardon or to the numerous "security packages" that were launched by governments of the center and center-right. On measures on which we can discuss (and the two authors do), but from the point of view of the method have the serious defect of not taking into consideration the long term consequences and not substantially change the underlying problems.

The book is divided into two parts, the first of which analyzes the "diseases of justice", while the second reflects on "poisons and antidotes." The second part is more delicious, because, beyond the technical issues (which are important) widens the look on some "questions of principle" that are particularly close to heart (and, I believe, are particularly dear to those who share a position "Guarantor"). For the insiders, I report only the short end ("Possible Reforms"), in which the authors summarize their proposals for reform in three sections, devoted respectively to "procedural law", the "substantive criminal law" and to "sector regulated directions." The first part, however, is important because it presents a very lucid discussion of the ills of our judicial system and, generally, the administration of justice (while the second focuses on the relationship between justice and politics); examination that, within the space of a review can not be considered in detail. Why limit myself to certain questions that "subjectively" me being me most.

interceptions

After the first chapters, devoted to long periods of Justice, the slowness of the bureaucratic machinery, resources and waste system, the fourth chapter deals with "hot-tapping. According to the North, which the dialogue takes on the role of the disenchanted realism "(while it Pisapia the part of the 'ideal generated), the reality is that the interception of telephone and environmental are "a small number of useful (and perhaps necessary), but overall they are expensive and harmful ... harmful to the citizen who suffers annoying intrusions, and the investigator who flattens them easy to carry on, giving up a more complex instruments, but also more reliable "(p. 45). interceptions, wisely handled, you may say it all, in deference to that of Richelieu, give me six lines of the most honest of men and find a way to have him hanged. interceptions, then as a "necessary evil", "evil" because they go against the art. 15 of the Constitution (which protects the freedom and privacy of our communications), "necessary" as an investigative tool, but often very poor instrument to its limits and "the dangers associated with their liberal use" (p. 46). The idea of \u200b\u200bNorth and that the interception should not be used as evidence but only as an investigative tool, "the truth is that the intercepts were processed by means of gathering evidence to test itself: elements of a dispute, and catch even convictions, then at the end are usually void "(p. 49). As for the "theory", Pisapia is less rigid, for him, in some cases, "the interceptions, including environmental, are conclusive evidence ... That said, I repeat that I am absolutely convinced the need for some changes to the current legislation "(p. 50). Both also express reservations about the reform project, because" it is wrong that we can intercept only in the presence of extremely serious crimes "(Pisapia) and reform as it is, "contains too much, and with too little ... because keeping the intercepts as evidence allows access not only to judges and police officers that have to carry them out, but the lawyers and parties entitled to select the useful points ... But it contains too little for severely limits the freedom of the press during the investigation phase "(north). Both, finally, I agree in condemning the publication of conversations (which are often criminally negligible) in print. Pisapia: "I firmly believe that the publication of wiretapping ... ... it is a barbarism - and here reflect those who decide these publications today and tomorrow could be a rude-violence victims. I have the [...] 'impression, however, that many do not want to see the barbarism in a ruling and closing the door to change. Many do not know whether in good or bad faith, they tend to confuse the right and duty to inform the alleged right to commit crimes; freedom of the press with the freedom to defame, misinform, "rubbish." Because there are loopholes: the trial must be public, investigations are not public "(p. 55).

punishment and custody

Other interesting bits are the first part of the debate on capital punishment and the use (and abuse) of preventive detention. Both are d 'agreement in condemning, in the words Pisapia, the "panpenalismo" of our system, and argued that the penalties should be increased but not decreased. The paradox is reported from north of the "profound discrepancy between the severity of penalties imposed by the Code , that is generally provided for the offenders and those actually imposed by the court ... Our system is well thought out: if you commit a crime theoretically risks a prison high, but in fact the court you will inflict a very low, and most suspended "(p. 66). Pisapia, for its part, points out that in principle all speak of the need to reach a" minimal criminal " "decriminalizing some minor offenses, so as not to overburden the courts and prisons:" We must stop the panpenalismo. Pretend that you can solve everything, including social problems, with the Penal Code is just propaganda, dangerous demagoguery. The first step is to really restrict the conduct of criminal activity to the facts really serious and punishable by appropriate administrative sanctions those offenses which do not cause disruptions or public alarm "(p.67). The use of custody, Pisapia - after reporting a chilling case happened to a senior worker arrested on charges of involvement in a criminal association, which goes to the process after 3 years of imprisonment, is sentenced to four years in the first instance, acquitted on appeal and, finally, after more than six years since the beginning of the ordeal, finally acquitted in the Supreme Court (pp. 72-73) - argues strongly that "The abuse of preventive detention is a major distortion of our criminal justice system" because "it is undeniable this would rarely be used for purposes quite different from those required by law, such as to "anticipate" the penalty (although the process could end with an acquittal) or to obtain confessions (almost necessarily that the suspect is guilty and that the assumption of departure is the presumption of guilt) "(p. 75). The problem lies not in the Code, which states that custody can be applied only if there are serious indications of guilt, and when all other measures prove inadequate (as stated in art. 275, cited by Pisapia), but in the function "unofficially" that is performed by this instrument, on remand, in cases where there is no danger to the community nor the risk of contamination of evidence used to "anticipate a sentence that is feared is not granted then even if convicted. This is not acceptable, because the concept and distorts the very meaning of justice can never be anticipated or vengeance or punishment following conviction for a future "(p. 77). The role of the CSM



Turning to the second part, the dialogue focuses primarily on the issue of constitutional reforms. Those pressing for full implementation of the adversarial process, says the north, are three: the reformulation of the structure and the election of the Superior Council of Magistracy, the elimination of mandatory prosecution and the separation of careers. As a corollary, the reintroduction of parliamentary immunity " (P. 140). Nordio Pisapia and agree that the CSM is a prisoner of the excessive power of the currents, because of one or other of these to determine the allocation of posts and promotions, while the same disciplinary investigations are influenced by the games reciprocal favors, even if there are different solutions: Pisapia opposes the reform of the CSM was approved in 2002, which reduced the number of members from 30 to 24, while "there was quite the need to increase due to the introduction of the concept of justice of the peace and the doubling of the judiciary "(p. 142), while North thought the draw as the only remedy, because" the extraction eliminate the root of lots in the bond that unites voters and elected insidious, and that raises the suspicion that ... as dog bites dog, so each judge is in fact protected by its sponsors at the time that he was asked to vote "(p. 143 ). Regarding the role of the CSM, the opinions are in agreement. According Pisapia is no longer sustainable in a situation where the auditors are elected by the controlled and, therefore, think of a "High Court" is competent to decide on matters of ethics and disciplinary procedures of those who have a role in administration of justice. Even heavier than the opinion of North notes that "concentrations of power like that judges on the lives of people and the State, free from real responsibility, it seems intolerable and, indeed, it is "the Italian public prosecutor is the chief of police, heads the investigation, and may start and perform it alone . This is similar to the U.S. district attorney. Both have a tremendous power, but in the mind Use this power is controlled by the people, as the elected prosecutor, we is not controlled by anyone. [...] From a substantive point of view, the Italian PM is the only body in the world who enjoy power without responsibility equivalent ... It 's useless to say that there is control law, appeals and the SCM, we are savvy enough and mature enough to understand that it is not formal but substantial control "(p. 145).

Prosecution and separation of careers

On the issue of mandatory prosecution, the opinions of the authors disagree. To the north, as we have said, the installation process involves the prosecution's discretion to prosecute, his ritrattabilità, the wide use of the pact, while in Italy the prosecution is required and irritrattabile, the settlements will be reduced to minimum, the careers of judges and magistrates do not distinguish between investigators. The mandatory criminal, says North, "means the duty of the magistrate to proceed whenever it becomes aware of a crime. But this principle, that in itself should ensure the equality of citizens before the law was due to a discretion in the investigation that often borders on arbitrariness "(p. 146). Pisapia, however, supports all the forces that "the mandatory prosecution remains a sacrosanct principle and the recognition of an essential value, the realization of equality of citizens before the law" and, knowing that the current situation is in fact discretion, believes that "worth fighting for the principles into reality, including possibly seeking a mediation (noble), a balance (equal) allowing you to get as close as possible to a satisfactory solution "(p. 147), because, paradoxically, the discretion to prosecute increase the power of the PM instead of reducing it. As for the separation of careers between judges and prosecutors, finally, the agreement is complete, so that North is Pisapia believe is a necessary reform. A magistrate, North points out that his colleagues are terrified of the "suspicion that the separation of careers is the antechamber of the subjection of the executive PM" but the fear is unfounded because "prosecutors may well be released by the courts and enjoy the same independence as judges may be separate from PM while being purely political appointment, as are members of the U.S. Supreme Court" ( p. 150). For its part, Pisapia adds that the separation of careers is also needed to create greater confidence in the city, because "even a child understands that once the arbitrator can not wear the uniform of jacket and another black player" and because only the actual impartiality of those who must decide between theses different, often conflicting, it can give people the necessary confidence that those who viewed both the above parties (pp. 151-2). Conclusion



outdated reference to the impartiality of the judge, who embodies the very concept of justice (for instance, the scale), back in a few important points of north, which I like to bring to a conclusion of this review. The problem is: some elements of the judiciary (and not just one) are concerned that the full implementation of the adversarial process is a weakening of the fight against corruption and the mafia. But, North rightly points out that the "fight" against corruption and the mafia is not and should not be the duty of justice - with all due respect to writers engaged Appeals to sign, that the reviewer does not name to avoid being accused of violating anti-mafia and these fears, according Nordio, resulting from the injury, "the result of good faith as a generator of bad justice" that "judges must fight against someone or something" and if one assumes that "the magistrate must attack and defeat crime, the more the process is carried out, the more the company is inadequate," but the company obviously is not the one (if not, better Torture) but if "you agree with the principles of liberal democracy, we must agree that the concept of struggle is incompatible with that of jurisdiction. The magistrates should only apply the law, absolving or condemning based on evidence gathered in an order governed by codes "(p. 155). The independence and impartiality of the judge, who comes from the independence of the law itself (which is not made for the benefit of some and against others) and is often cited in error, is an important reminder to distract the judges from performing tasks and missions "political" or, worse, "apocalyptic." The administration of justice, he remembered (opposed by anyone), Leonardo Sciascia, not a war against someone (ie, not even the war against the Mafia or "anti-mafia assault"), because war is the continuation of politics by other means and the distinction between judges and politicians is the foundation of our legal culture.

Mysore Mallige Watch Free

processes the intentions and the folly of those who say "all intercettateci"

The controversy triggered by the "Republic", so-called "purple people" and intellectuals from the usual circus on the subject of wiretapping seem a good example of the level of deterioration in the discussion, political or otherwise, in this country. The processes the intentions in these cases, should never be made, probably because if the intention of the majority in carrying out the law is not directed to the defense of "privacy", it seems equally obvious that those who oppose this law (and especially the professionals of the press and information) does not do it for the defense of press freedom. On this point he wrote, in detail, Filippo Facci in an article some time ago on "Free", in which it was said in clear words that the main reason why journalists do not want this law is that eavesdropping issue (especially if itchy) is the only way they can to increase sales of their newspapers. That is a worthy interest, for charity, but particular, and as such must be considered, no stand, however, as defenders of press freedom and freedom of information to (softly) I allow myself to doubt more and more. Moreover, for a while I wonder what the "right to be informed" that, according to our liberals (who are not liberals) should be regarded as a "duty to be informed," according to the motto "I can tell (ie: I read Travaglio), therefore I am."
In the name of duty or right to information (and the rubbish, of course), our liberals are posited opposition between privacy and press freedom at the expense of the first and the second benefit, as noted, quite rightly Worried Giovanni Belardelli "Corriere della Sera yesterday (Sun June 13). It takes little, in fact, to understand that the motto "Intercettateci all" is the negation of every principle of individual freedom and opens the door to every form of totalitarianism (Belardelli Recalls the massive use of wiretapping that was done in the GDR, but apparently does not realize that this model really like the liberals of our house). Anyone who says "intercettateci all" (or "the innocent have nothing to fear from a process", which is another formulation of the same concept) or is in bad faith or is an idiot. If it is bad faith, they are strongly encouraged to make open profession of totalitarianism (so to play cards), while in the case of idiocy, then there are remedies.
In the meantime, we highlight curious reversals in the opinions of some leading intellectual on the phenomenon of interceptions. I remember an old article by Sabino Cassese denouncing the phenomenon of interceptions, but I doubt that today, in his guise of the constitutional court, will decide in favor of the new law. The same applies to Stefano Rodota, former data protection commissioner. As evidenced by an amusing article by Paul Bracalini up the newspaper today (Monday June 14) Now the prof. Rodotà is one of the strongest supporters of the campaign of "Republic" against the law-gag, but when it still employed to ensure privacy, the same Rodotà railed against "this relentless publicizing of private spaces, this remains unknown and unwanted exposure to eyes [that] affects the individual and social behavior, [because] they know scrutinized reduces the spontaneity and freedom. "Rhetoric aside literary, fully shared. Shareable, above all, is the answer Rodotà (one yesterday, not now) provided to the prosecutor Vigna, who regarded him as a disgraced public price to pay to defend themselves from crime, "once even resorted to torture '. It is the same argument that I had used in a conversation with the guests who supported the use of wiretaps, diners which I pointed out that this is the logic of the" end justifies the means "approach to politics that is (according to Machiavelli and his followers), but not the logic of the law, for which not all means are good because it recognizes the existence of something (person, individual) who is an "end in itself."
On the other hand, if you follow the logic first, not just the interceptions should be extended (potentially all citizens) and prolonged indefinitely, but hoped it would be a situation such as that described by Philip Dick, a society in which the Judges include the crimes and the police arrest people before they can do crimes. It would be a very efficient and secure world, would not be a free world. But the right is precisely a "system of freedom" (Kant). That, today, even well-educated people think in such a distorted manner is not a good sign, and also by the legal culture arrived worrying signals. The natural rights of the individual are valid only in words, and has been for a while. If you once mentioned the radical legal positivism of Kelsen, today's "orphans of Marx" rediscover the work of Carl Schmitt (genial personality, but still sentenced at Nuremberg, and theoretician of the explicit right of the strongest).
Forfeiture of the concept of "right" and carelessness towards the "freedom" go hand in hand, which explains the insensitivity of a radical reform of justice (but we are obviously happy exception is the case of the book North and Pisapia which I'll discuss shortly). Not only that you forward a culture that not only look for solutions the problem, but denies the problem. To the cry of "intercettateci all."

Memorial Quest Book Quotes

Dance Brick


Bertolaso's house, accusing Zampolini
"She paid Anemone. Accommodations Di Pietro. Jobs in who was shown by Prodi, Veltroni, Rutelli "

(from Corriere della Sera on Wednesday 2 June)

Bertolaso's house, accusing Zampolini

" She paid Anemone. Accommodations Di Pietro. Jobs in who was shown by Prodi, Veltroni, Rutelli "

ROME -" The rent of the house in Via Giulia Guido Bertolaso \u200b\u200bI have paid me on behalf of Anemone Diego. It was a small house, Diego gave me the cash I was carrying to the owner. He also proceeded to renovate it. " It is May 18. In front of the magistrates in Perugia Zampolini Angelo says the architect. Confirms the suspicions of investigators. It contradicts the version given by the Head of Civil Protection, which was denied by the manufacturer to make available to that apartment. Then he was asked if he knows what kind of relationships were between the former Infrastructure Minister Antonio Di Pietro and Angelo Balducci. Zampolini bulldozing. But four days later asking to be interrogated again. It reveals: "I know that Balducci did the minister have two houses for rent in Rome by the Congregation Propaganda Fide. The first was on the way Vine and has been for a period of one of the sites of Italy of Values. The other was in Via delle Quattro Fontane, I think it was for her daughter. Again Anemone dealt with the restructuring. Replica of Peter: "I exclude those apartments that I have, I will ask the investigators to learn more." Zampolini The architect, who was busy buying houses for the former minister Claudio Scajola, for the general intelligence Pittorru Francis and the manager of Infrastructure Incalza Hercules - paid in part with money Anemone - thus confirms its willingness to cooperate with prosecutors investigating procurement for the "Big Events." The Carabinieri of the ROS and the Financial Police are now checking every detail, including those involving the choice of architects for the work of the G8 summit in La Maddalena, and celebrations for the Unification of Italy. "I was expelled, while working as indicated by Prodi, Veltroni and Rutelli," said Zampolini. The rent for

Bertolaso \u200b\u200band the delay of payments
Referring to an apartment Bertolaso \u200b\u200bwhich you did not know existed, is traced in its "List Anemone." Next to the name there are two addresses: one in via Bellotti Bon, where he resides with his family, and the Via Giulia. Just hours after the publication of the Department Civil Defence issued a statement to assert that "neither he nor his family have no property in that area of \u200b\u200bthe city center. For a brief period Bertolaso \u200b\u200bhas been able to use an apartment in Via Giulia, located in its availability to a friend - that was not the manufacturer Anemone - and he never noticed his stay in the business of restructuring or other construction work, which may not were within its competence or responsibility. " To deny this version we think Zampolini. "The friend - a statement made on May 18 - it is Anemone. It was he responsible for paying the rent, € 1,500 more in cash. I remember once There was a delay of about six months and poured the money together. Anemone was also in charge of the renovation of the apartment. " Of all this Bertolaso \u200b\u200bhad made no mention during the interview of 12 April, when he was summoned by the defender because of suspected corruption. It had failed to speak of office from his wife Gloria Piermarini for the restructuring of the gardens of Salaria Sport Village, the club that Anemone had a partnership with the son of Angelo Balducci. Contracts on which they were willing new findings.

houses for the leader of Italia dei Valori
When the interrogation is to stop prosecutors Sergio Sottani and Alessia Tavernes Zampolini ask whether it is aware of the kind of relationship there was between Balducci and Di Pietro, when the latter drove the infrastructure. The leader of Italia dei Valori has already been played in Florence as a witness claimed to have expelled the top official. Faced with investigators and his lawyer Grace Flight, the architect is silent. But on May 22 asking to be heard again. It reveals: "It is true that Peter kicked Balducci, was to leave him because he was pressed by the demands of the minister who wanted to be introduced in the Vatican. I know that just Balducci's did have rented two houses owned by the Congregation Propaganda Fide. The first is located in Via della Vite in the same building where the journalist lives Cesara Buonamici. Anemone dealt with the restructuring and then the apartment was used as the headquarters of Italy of Values. I do not know if he has never paid rent, however it was a very low figure. " Zampolini goes on: "I understand that Di Pietro also said another house was for her daughter. It is located in Via Quattro Fontane, and I remember Anemone, or one of his aides told me they were doing renovation work for the minister. " The architect explains that it was him to sign some of Dia, the "statements of work early," then filed with the City of Rome "even I was not always me to really care. "

Auditorium di Isernia to get the green light
According to the architect, when Peter was in power "opposed the contracts that were planned for the celebrations of the 150th anniversary of the unification of Italy. Works were greatly desired by Romano Prodi and Francesco Rutelli, while he was against it. He was convinced only when the program of work was included in the Auditorium of Isernia, for which they were allocated 20 million euro. When she had approved the project gave him the green light to all the other works. " On 18 May, when he was questioned by prosecutors in Perugia and Florence, Di Pietro said he was "A witness of the prosecution" and then clarified that it did not "never considered reliable nor Balducci, nor Peter Rinaldi," later became Commissioner for World Championships and is still under investigation for corruption because it accused of accepting money and favors from Anemone . A version that Zampolini denied.

Plans for La Maddalena
During his questioning of ten days ago, Zampolini focused on the dynamics of the "system" set up to manage the work and said that "during the Prodi government in view of my projects G8 summit in La Maddalena and works for the celebrations of the Unity of Italy were discarded because they were privileged others. " In particular, he had two names. "Those who worked were Stefano Boeri, who was a friend of Prodi and Rutelli. And the Neapolitan architect who was a friend of Walter Veltroni. This is probably the professional who has also dealt with the restructuring of the loft overlooking the Circus Maximus was the first headquarters of the Democratic Party. The name appears in the Boer trial papers. Record the carabinieri del Ros: "In the late evening of July 31, 2008 report to the architect Marco Casamonti colleague Stefano Boeri, who has been entrusted with the overall design of the works of the G8 to Mary Magdalene, that the Giaf Construction (Carducci Valerio), awarded to one of these works (a hotel) asked him to prepare the design of a spa having verified that the project prepared by the technical authority, architect Giovanni Facchini, is absolutely lacking ... "I phoned for this ... I called one of the companies that won the races at the G8 ... to Mary Magdalene ... who are the ones that have made us ... you know ... the competition of the Auditorium Florence. ... And I have come to Magdalene gave us the assignment to make him a kind of spa for the hotel ... but it seems that the hotel has designed a Facchini a name ... so ... and says it's a horrible thing ... but you've seen this project of the hotel? Is it really so bad? ". Boeri, after confirming that the company Giaf Construction is difficult to carry out the work because of deficient design, to communicate Casamonti who will arrange a meeting with the engineer Angelo Balducci edificatoria that coordinates all activities. "

Fiorenza Sarzanini
June 2, 2010