Alla fine il giudice lumaca salva Travaglio: e così cade la condanna per diffamazione
Il presidente di sezione della Corte d’appello Rome, Dr Afro Maisto, has thought long and hard. So long, which - after much consideration - it has lapsed. The process, moreover, was a magistrate who frighten and require careful thought. On one hand, Cesare Previti, a lawyer and former MP of the PDL, the other journalist Marco Travaglio: Previti in the role of the victim or the victim; Travaglio in that a defendant, for having written Espresso Previti the presence of a summit in the study of another excellent lawyer, Carlo Taormina, to throw off the investigation for mafia on Marcello Dell'Utri.
At first instance, Labor had been in pretty bad: eight months' imprisonment, inflicted by the court Robert Di Gioia, bypassing the requirements of the Public Prosecutor, who had asked for the journalist sentenced to 500 euro fine. Five months and ten days were also inflicted with Daniela Hamaui, then director of the Espresso. Both journalists had appealed. And the January 8, 2010, the Court of Appeal in Rome had changed the decision at first instance. Both the Labor Hamaui were again convicted, but instead of jail - that penalty is applied in trials for libel sparingly and only in severe cases - the Court imposes a fine of both defendants with a simple: one thousand € to author Article eight hundred to managing director. Plus damages to Previti, to be determined a parte.
Fin qua, si dirà, nulla di strano: la legge concede un secondo grado di giudizio anche per consentire agli imputati di limitare i danni. Ma è quel che accade dopo a lasciare un po’ stupiti. La Procura generale, che aveva chiesto la conferma del carcere per Travaglio, aspetta le motivazioni della Corte d’appello per poter ricorrere in Cassazione. L’articolo è del 2003, e già la Procura di Roma ci ha messo del suo, tenendosi sul tavolo per anni la querela depositata da Previti prima di chiedere ed ottenere il rinvio a giudizio. Bisogna fare in fretta, insomma, perché la prescrizione incombe. Invece qualcosa, inspiegabilmente, si inceppa. Il giudice Maisto, invece dei quindici giorni previsti by the code, it is assigned - to write the sentence - sixty days, as permitted "when the writing of the reasons is particularly complex." But two months passed without anything happening. Here comes the spring, then summer, then fall. Finally, another winter. In short, a year passes. And only 4 January this year to file Maisto reasons. The next month, with Salvatore Pino, who defended Previti, was notified of the filing. But at that point to Pino no choice but to close the case on file. There will be a court of Cassation. The ruling became final because, as time was running, the offense has prescribed.
how it was possible, it is something that only a judge can explain Maisto. Whether it was a case, "particularly complex", in reality, it seems, at least to read the decision at first instance, that of Dr. Joy: Ten pages, filed in just over a month and a half after the pronouncement of the decision . For the judge, the matter was simple: Labor had cited a report interrogation but had "cut" the bit where the witness explained that, in fact, perhaps Previti that day was spent in the study of Taormina, but for another matter, and attend the meeting without offending. "An arbitrary break that has changed the meaning of the phrase misrepresenting the fact. " Now the requirement has swallowed everything. Chuckles Travaglio: "What can I do? It happens. It happens in the best families. " At first instance, Labor had been in pretty bad: eight months' imprisonment, inflicted by the court Robert Di Gioia, bypassing the requirements of the Public Prosecutor, who had asked for the journalist sentenced to 500 euro fine. Five months and ten days were also inflicted with Daniela Hamaui, then director of the Espresso. Both journalists had appealed. And the January 8, 2010, the Court of Appeal in Rome had changed the decision at first instance. Both the Labor Hamaui were again convicted, but instead of jail - that penalty is applied in trials for libel sparingly and only in severe cases - the Court imposes a fine of both defendants with a simple: one thousand € to author Article eight hundred to managing director. Plus damages to Previti, to be determined a parte.
Fin qua, si dirà, nulla di strano: la legge concede un secondo grado di giudizio anche per consentire agli imputati di limitare i danni. Ma è quel che accade dopo a lasciare un po’ stupiti. La Procura generale, che aveva chiesto la conferma del carcere per Travaglio, aspetta le motivazioni della Corte d’appello per poter ricorrere in Cassazione. L’articolo è del 2003, e già la Procura di Roma ci ha messo del suo, tenendosi sul tavolo per anni la querela depositata da Previti prima di chiedere ed ottenere il rinvio a giudizio. Bisogna fare in fretta, insomma, perché la prescrizione incombe. Invece qualcosa, inspiegabilmente, si inceppa. Il giudice Maisto, invece dei quindici giorni previsti by the code, it is assigned - to write the sentence - sixty days, as permitted "when the writing of the reasons is particularly complex." But two months passed without anything happening. Here comes the spring, then summer, then fall. Finally, another winter. In short, a year passes. And only 4 January this year to file Maisto reasons. The next month, with Salvatore Pino, who defended Previti, was notified of the filing. But at that point to Pino no choice but to close the case on file. There will be a court of Cassation. The ruling became final because, as time was running, the offense has prescribed.
(The Journal-L.Fazzo)
0 comments:
Post a Comment