Statement, denial and denial of denial. Then, green light to the swirl of more or less indignant political reactions. A storm has broken out over the Judge Antonio Esposito, president of the working section of the Cassation which last Thursday confirmed the conviction of Silvio Berlusconi in the Mediaset TV rights trial.
In an interview published today by the newspaper "Il Mattino", the following statements are attributed to Esposito: "Couldn't he not have known? It could be a logical argument but it cannot become the principle underlying the sentence. We could say: you were made aware of what was happening. It's not that you couldn't not know why you were the boss. Theoretically, the boss may not know. No, you were made aware of what happened. You could not have known why Tizio, Caio or Sempronio said they told you. It's a little different from the couldn't not know”. Moral: the Knight was condemned because he knew, not because he couldn't not know.
The judge then denied having expressed himself in these terms, but the editor of the Neapolitan newspaper confirmed: the interview was recorded and reported verbatim.
In a note, Esposito called that step "completely made up", denying "of having pronounced in the conversation he had with the reporter - strictly limited to general topics and never pertaining to the sentence, duly documented and transcribed by the reporter himself and approved by me - the expressions quoted in quotation marks: 'Berlusconi convicted because he knew not because he could not not to know'".
Of a completely different opinion the director of "Il Mattino", Alessandro Barbano: “I can assure you and my readers that the interview is literal – he said -, that is, the text, the words and sentences spoken by the president have been reported in full, of which we obviously have proof. I can imagine that the President of the Cassation has assessed in retrospect that, in some way, explaining the reasons for the sentence before having issued it could have a negative return for him. However, it is not a fault to be attributed to journalists, but to the responsibility and maturity of the speaker".
The fatal wrath of the PDL is predictable, which was unleashed amid requests for disciplinary action and suspicions about Esposito's alleged (and for some suspected) search for visibility. He started the dance Sandro Bondi: “Is it normal for Judge Esposito to discuss the merits of the Cassation ruling with an interview given to a national newspaper? – wondered the party coordinator -. Is this the new style of the judges of the Cassation?”.
Luke d'Alessandro, secretary of the Justice Commission of the Chamber, invokes disciplinary action: “Beyond the laughable and highly questionable contents, the interview of the ineffable president of the working day section of the Cassation, Antonio Esposito, is very serious. We hope that the Minister of Justice will promote disciplinary action and take immediate measures against Judge Esposito”.
The comment comes from the spokesperson for the Pidiellini deputies, Mara Carfagna: "Anticipating the sentences in public form, through an interview with a national information organ, appears more like a way to obtain visibility for who knows what future purpose".
