The shocking document about the scandal that dishonoured our history and tried to erase our glorious future.

It’s time to face the facts! Enough lies, enough slanderous accusations.

All the truth about JUVENTUS

Let us win the most important match! All together!

In this report, any statement can be verified, demonstrated, proven. Here we report ONLY the facts, sentences, laws, regulations.

In a few pages we will dismantle the myth of "Juve cheat"; in a few steps you will understand what has happened and what has been done before, during and after that terrible summer of 2006.

Hi everyone,

We are fans, just like you, of that football team that gave us 29 League Titles won on the pitch, nine Italian Cups, 2 European Cups and an endless series of emotions, men and plays remained in the history of football. And in our minds. A team that...either you hate, or you are madly in love with: Juventus.

With this report of a few pages, we would like to trace the origin and the implementation of a farce with no equal in the history of our Country; for years, in fact, some newspapers and TV programmes with self- styled slow-motion replays analysts and commentators have raised the masses against the football power of a team of absolute value, pillorying on the media any conduct of our managers and players and creating this way that “people’s sentiment” that has contributed more than anything else to relegate us to Serie B. We do not want to mouth rhetoric, in fact, quite the contrary. All the statements, as already said, will be briefly analyzed, leaving no space to our comments, surely "biased". We will go straight to the truth. We will not fling any accusations; we will not name the names or report the facts if not widely documented by laws, sentences, documents, statements (and not hearsays).

Over recent years, Juventus and its managers have often been investigated, prosecuted...but are we sure we know the events as they really happened? Have we ever been convicted? And are we sure that other clubs that declared themselves "honest" had not committed out-and-out criminal offences over unsuspected years? We believe that only few of you are aware of how things are and only a careful analysis of all the news circulating on internet has led us to uncover the harsh reality.

Our aim is to spread as much as possible the truth, too often hushed up by the media: the only act of presumption we could be accused of is the willingness to make EVERYONE understand, both Juventus brothers and others, that what was committed in 2006 and all that preceded and followed, is a scandal that should not only concern 2-3000 frantic fans, but an entire people. A Country that declares itself civil, like ours, cannot have concealed a mess so obvious and that includes a series of unheard-of outrages...

We are confident that soon even those who are in the dark will understand.

We conclude by thanking the editorial staff of the website ju29ro.com (read "juventinovero"), online magazine, our precious and irreplaceable source of information and articles, and all "friends" websites we have drawn from to write these few pages, concise to the bone by necessity, but full of news, perhaps unknown to many of you (repeat: NEWS, OBJECTIVE FACTS, not "rumors"). Any link to the original article may be consulted free of charge on the web. Many websites that carry out our own same battles will be mentioned in the links and bibliography section. We do not certainly do it for money, we do not want to pass for a pain in the neck, and we have no copyright. We are doctors, nurses, surveyors, engineers, workers, housewives, clerks, lawyers, students, Juventus small shareholders, journalists…who do not act for profit: print and share as many copies as you can! Maybe we have a last wish: we would like that all the Juventus people could finally be close-knit. At stake there is the restitution of the league titles deservedly won on the pitch and, above all, the return of the dignity as well as the rehabilitation before the nation and the world. We would be pleased that, in the event of a favorable outcome, we could all come together to celebrate; and that, if necessary, we would be ready to give full support to the club management, in every possible, available, civil and lawful way.

Only and forever “Forza Juve”.

THE GENESIS A family saga. Turin - ed] accounts through a particular funding transaction called “prestito convertendo” [“converted loan” - ed]; in short, such loan, once expired in the fall of 2005, would, in fact, deliver FIAT into the banks’ hands, excluding Agnelli's family, led by John Elkann, and reducing it to minority shareholders. (...) In view of this possibility, rumors had it that the then CEO of Juventus Giraudo, following a precise Andrea Agnelli’s input, was organizing a consortium to take Juventus over by buying out the shares owned by IFIL [investment company, now EXOR, which controls FIAT, Juventus etc. - ed] with the collaboration of several important partners both sporting and financial. Under consideration there was a colossal industrial plan that probably would have made of Juventus the best team in the world for many years to come. The same scenario is extensively described by Antonio Giraudo in an illuminating interview with “La Repubblica” on April 1 2006, about a month before the outbreak of Calciopoli (1). Here is an excerpt: "We want to create permanent resources allowing Juventus not only to internally finance itself over the years, thanks to the formidable trademark which represents, but to have a stronger and stronger world class team (...). We want to make of it the greatest club in the world, according to a specific industrial and sports model that has no equal in the football scene (...). I think that the importance of the plan and of the investments is consequent to the results one wants to obtain. We do not ask money to cover the losses or to buy some other player, but to create a formidable model that in football does not exist yet, and that would allow us to bridge the current gap between a club like ours and other major European realities. (...) It is necessary to prepare it quickly. I call it the "Ferrari’s model" since that is the example we want to follow. That is a big industry which produces profits for a sports side of absolute excellence. The same thing should happen to Juventus. It was, again, the thought of Giovanni and Umberto Agnelli. (...) At the beginning we started by working on costs and accounts, together with the sports goal. Then we have worked to consolidate the club Juventus, through operations that have brought us to be quoted on the Stock Exchange and to the ownership of the stadium as well as the implementation of a cutting-edge sports center we will soon inaugurate. The works for the jewel-stadium will begin at the end of the season. These are initiatives that will remain, able to also produce revenues other than those typical of football teams. (...) When you have solved the financial and economical problem, it is necessary gaining more political clout in the media. For Juventus, nowadays it is not so. Some of our opponents have broadcasters and media groups, and this matters a lot". The Elkanns, still according to what reported by the newspapers at that time, manage to neutralize the coup orchestrated by the banks through a bold financial operation, called “Equity Swap”, which effectively will allow them to maintain control over Fiat. At this point, once the hot potato relative to the “prestito convertendo” is settled, the settling of scores within the family begins, including the one about Juventus. (...) The handover had already been established within the family, but the veto imposed by Cuccia [a famous Italian banker - ed], who had never been on good terms with Umberto, forced Giovanni and Umberto to reach a compromise which provided for the latter "only" the bridge deck of IFIL, the company which is in fact the safe of the FIAT empire. In the margin of this agreement, which marked a "turning point" in the relations between the two brothers, Giovanni agreed, as a partial compensation for Umberto, for the latter to also take the reins of Juventus. Once the two patriarchs were dead, the two factions would line up as follows: on one side the Elkann brothers, Montezemolo and the guardians Gabetti and Grande Stevens; on the other side the Umbertians headed by Allegra, Umberto’s widow, with his son Andrea Agnelli and obviously Giraudo who was one of the closest managers to Umberto. In this scenario, it will be several times reported by our sources how Montezemolo intensely dislikes Giraudo, who, despite the gruff appearance, was and still is an excellent manager, one of the best of the Agnelli’s stable(2).

Conspiracy and espionage. Giraudo and Moggi had to be eliminated from the scene, but it was necessary to find the best way: it would have been hard to justify their removal to the crowd. Therefore, an unprecedented plan was studied, exploiting the fact that in Milan and Rome there were many people who had a common interest with that of the new black-and-white course. The removal from the scene of Moggi and Giraudo was also, in fact, someone else’s goal, and not in Turin. Inter, for example: for years, based on the belief that Juventus had won with the help of the referees on the football pitch, the team from Milan instituted an out-and-out industrial espionage using family (Telecom and Pirelli), intelligence and investigation companies (in this regard, see this link: an article which summarizes the recent developments in the Telecom trial, written by Giuseppe Rombolà on 28/09/2010, www.ju29ro.com)(6). Besides, we must not forget that the stability of the Italian football scene was intact since 1999, when the "seven sisters" (Juve, Inter, Milan, Rome, Lazio, Parma, Fiorentina) decided along with FIGC [acronym of the Italian Football Association - ed] leaders, including Franco Carraro, the appointment of two Referees’ Chiefs, while the individual negotiation of the television rights was being approved by Decree-Law; in 2006, favored by the will of several political FIGC powers, the chance of an actual turnaround came up. The scapegoats were Moggi and Giraudo.

A one-sided investigation. Parliamentary inquiries and investigations carried out by several Italian magistrates began (the fate of these activities will be later reminded...). Nowadays in Naples, a process is still going on against Moggi, Giraudo, FIGC and clubs executives, referees and referees’ chiefs, accused of conspiracy to commit sport fraud: keep in mind that everything originated from the confessions of a former Udinese manager, Dal Cin, who mentioned the existence of a 'Roman gang' of referees which would be close to some of the Serie A teams. Since 2004, intense tailing and wiretapping activities began with the investigations carried out by the squad of the Carabinieri [Italian Police - ed] led by Major Attilio Auricchio, assisted by Giovanni Arcangioli (both already known for episodes of wiretap manipulation; the latter was also suspected of stealing magistrate Paolo Borsellino’s diary on the day of the Mafia attack where he was killed in Via D'Amelio, Palermo).Three informative police reports were drafted summarizing the work of the Carabinieri (called "Offside Operation"), thanks to SOME of the approximately 200,000 telephone wiretaps and to the articles of the “Gazzetta dello Sport”. You got it right. During the penal trial, around March-April 2010, Auricchio’s statements left many of us open-mouthed: neither the football matches nor the allegedly illicit episodes were carefully watched, but actually only “Gazzetta’s” score-sheets were considered...and in fact there are numerous mistakes resulting from a conduct that may easily be defined objectionable (matches with inverted scores, unexisting bookings, etc. ...). In short, the referee mistakes and the theorem of "Juve cheat" have been used to disguise the intention to strike and blow away, once and for all, one team only along with some people in particular. This is proved by the fact (but we will come back to this later) that phone calls involving other clubs were not taken into account. The other teams were not "under attention" (as stressed several times by Major Auricchio). But the investigations were not sufficient. The evidence against the suspects was inconsistent, if not nonexistent. Newspapers and TVs, for years accustomed to hunt the “gobbo” [“gobbo”, literally meaning “hunchback”, is a nickname commonly used for Juventus supporters - ed], began to blow up the scandal (then named 'Calciopoli'), also thanks to the first wiretaps which "inexplicably" leaked out of the investigation documents.

The sport trial and the "special" Guido Rossi. While Juventus, in May 2006, was winning the 29th league title on the pitch, the same Juve, along with Milan, Lazio and Fiorentina was being accused of setting up a criminal association to change the course of the championships (under investigation is ONLY the 2004-2005 season). After Carraro resigned, FIGC went into receivership. A special commissioner was chosen through an unknown procedure (the act was never made public) and following an incomprehensible logic: it was Guido Rossi, a former board member of Inter and a leading figure in Telecom. Immediately he placed his trustworthy collaborators (Nicoletti, a man close to Moratti), reduced the stages of the Court in the sport trial from three to two, replaced most of the Bench putting in charge a retired judge (Ruperto), "instructed" the judges to ensure that justice was served in exemplary way. <(...) The process, prepared by Francesco Saverio Borrelli, a former magistrate of “Mani Pulite” [“Mani pulite”, “clean hands” in English, has been a famous judicial investigation into political corruption carried out in Italy over the 1990s - ed], will be remembered forever as a farce with no equal, thanks to its surreal and very short course in which the most basic rules to guarantee the defendants were trampled, starting with the right of defense. To speed up the farce and make it "credible" Guido Rossi sends Borrelli to Naples where, after a phone call from Nicoletti through which unlawful pressure on the Prosecutors is made, he manages to obtain the informative reports of the Carabinieri, fragments of which appear in the newspapers and media despite at this stage they should be highly confidential material. Many magistrates and judges will later state that it has been a real "juridical abortion". The FIGC Prosecutor Palazzi, prompted by Borrelli, asks the harshest penalties for everyone and in particular for Juventus, for which they speak of relegation to third division (C1). Zaccone, [the lawyer heading the defense team of Juventus FC - ed] during the short and farcical debate, plied by Ruperto, awkwardly says that the relegation to Serie B with penalty points would be a fair punishment, a statement which is readily put onto the record. Zaccone’s declaration, which arouses amazement and outrage among the fans, is a direct creature of the agreements between Rossi and Grande Stevens and it is pronounced just to try to keep Juve anchored to the wagon of the other accused clubs, for which relegation to Serie B with penalty was sought. Zaccone’s soft defense is exploited by the biased newspapers which, through banner headlines, show it as an admission of guilt. The first instance sentence arrives soon reporting delirious grounds and managing to turn into overt and repeated offences (i.e. violations of the Art. 6 of the Code of Sport Justice) a sum of unsportsmanlike episodes (i.e. violations of the Art. 1), entirely inventing the crime of “illecito strutturale” [“Structured offence” - ed]. The punishment inflicted to Juventus is actually devastating: relegation to Serie B with thirty penalty points, revocation of two league titles and other sanctions. The second instance sentence (...) overturns the first instance decision, greatly easing the punishment for AC Milan, Fiorentina and Lazio, to which the right to play in Serie A with some penalty points is given back. Incredibly, the “rossoneri” also regain the participation in the Champions League. Juventus, however, remains relegated to Serie B with 17 penalty points. Reading the delirious grounds of the decision we strangely learn that "it is conceptually acceptable the achievement of an advantage in the league table even prescinding from the alteration of a single match".>(3)

The Scudetto of honesty. (4)

The withdrawal of the appeal. On August 31, 2006, the appeal to the TAR is withdrawn. In Turin a summit meeting between Montezemolo, J.Elkann and Gabetti is held. The two elders persuade the family youngster to lay the weapons down. (...) Juventus, his centennial history of success and the passion of its fans are trampled on without mercy in return of the reduction of a few penalty points in Serie B (as set out in the subsequent arbitration). (...) The players themselves and the coach Deschamps are astonished by the behavior of the board that, in a council of biblical duration, sets the definitive withdrawal of the appeal.(5)

The national team and the black-and-white World Cup. Despite the Calciopoli (nicknamed Farsopoli [from the Italian word “farsa”= farce]) scandal, an unparalleled event in Italian history and not only in the football annals, despite the incident involving the player Gianluca Pessotto, despite the criticism of the media and the constant calls for Lippi’s resignation (due to Lippi’s son involvement in the GEA case) along with the proposed expulsion of Cannavaro and other Juventus players from the national team, Italy wins the World Cup in Berlin. Among the world champions 5 players are from Juventus, 3 are in the rival team (France), with 17 men altogether, including staff and players, to have worn Juventus colors.

The clearance sale of the players. Even worse, some of the most representative players of the team coached by Capello during the seasons 04/05 and 05/06 are sold (or better say sold off) by the new owners, even to direct rival teams (see Vieira and Ibrahimovic to Inter, for a ridiculous price). It must be said that those won’t be the only mistakes of the new Juventus management in the players market of the recent years; a management led by Giovanni Cobolli Gigli, with Jean-Claude Blanc as CEO and Alessio Secco (a simple assistant at the time of Moggi and Giraudo) as Sporting Director...

The damage assessment. The appeal lodged with the TAR (later incredibly withdrawn), contained the only, so far, official estimate of the damage Juventus would suffer in the event of a penalty or even relegation. Here is an excerpt: "The only non-participation in European competitions for two years results in a loss of income, and therefore a damage, which can be estimated at approximately EUR 45 million! Based on this initial assessment assumptions, it can be assumed that the overall financial damage burdening on Juventus and due to the Federal sanctions amounts to around 70 million euro (about 30 per cent of the turnover of the club) should the team be kept in Serie A, while it would increase at least up to 130 million euro (over 60 per cent of turnover) in the event that the decision of the Federal Court was fully implemented and the team was forced to play in Serie B. These are economic restrictions without precedent, to which are added sports sanctions of equally unprecedented gravity, as the loss of two titles of Champion of Italy (2004-2005 and 2005-2006 league title), an event never happened in the whole hundred-year-old history of the Italian football, in which only a single revocation of a championship title can be remembered“. It must necessarily be added the loss of many sponsors (including Tamoil), the revenue derived from the Champions League for that and the following year, the non-participation in European competitions for at least 2 seasons, the undoubted damage to the image of one of the most glorious clubs of world football. You try to estimate the possible compensation...

The benefits. These are not, of course, the benefits for our club, but for that team that, since 2006, dominates unopposed the Italian football scene. People used to say that when the Triad [so was nicknamed the Juventus management: Moggi-Giraudo-Bettega - ed] was on, only Juve was winning. Today, is football really better? When Juventus was dominating in the years 1994-2006, AC Milan, Lazio and Roma won championships as well, and the "honest ones" [Inter - ed] frittered away, with their own hands, a championship already won during that famous May 5, 2002. Today only one team wins, there is an absolute monopolism. Not by chance Scudetto and Coppa Italia have a single sponsor: TIM [Telecom Italia Mobile, a company very close to Inter - ed]. One could easily talk of a "Corporate Cup"! The referee errors remain, the controversies as well. But "the evil of football was Juve." We believe that dogma has been amply contradicted by the facts.

THE MEDIA AGAINST TV and newspapers deserve a chapter on their own. Who has never read, at least once, the “Gazzetta dello Sport”? Who has never watched “la moviola” [a slow-motion replay of the unclear incidents throughout the match analyzed frame by frame - ed] on Mediaset, RAI or SKY? Who has never heard or read the words of commentators and analysts? Up to here nothing wrong, except that certain expressions or certain episodes, in the media-football history of recent decades, have been told in a somewhat biased, if not suspicious, way. We'll take as a model two "strands" regarding the troubled relationship between some newspapers and Juventus, their bugbear. But first we need some background. Let's start with some answers taken from the cross-examination of the Lieutenant Colonel Auricchio (yes, after the investigation he was promoted...), which has taken place at the hearing held on March 23, 2010 at the Court of Naples. Prioreschi (Moggi’s defense): Juventus-Bologna, the following match, did you watch it? Auricchio: I think so. Prioreschi: Have there been any particular incidents? Auricchio: Yes, according to the “Corriere”, “La Repubblica” and the “Gazzetta dello Sport”: Juve wins with a dubious free-kick from the edge of the penalty box and two dubious penalties are denied to Bologna. Prioreschi: These are taken from the newspapers... Auricchio: As usual! This importance of the topic is paramount. As you can read, in fact, the entire criminal charge is based NOT on facts, but on journalistic assessments! During the same hearing, the lawyer Prioreschi lists data and comparisons relative to the season under investigation, 2004/2005, reminding that the average of the points gained by Juventus with referees under investigation is equal to 1.89, while with the other referees is 2.63. In addition, many other teams benefited from the so-called "preventing bookings," i.e. yellow cards given from the referees so that, in the next round, the team will miss for automatic suspension the players booked, advantaging the opponents. Leading this special ranking is Atalanta (!), then Reggina, Juventus, AC Milan, Inter...In short, not even the numbers are on the Prosecution’s side. Two other issues capture, during the same deposition, our attention. First, Auricchio says he does not know if AC Milan controls (directly or not) some TV, maybe forgetting a broadcaster called Mediaset [Mediaset is a media company owned by Berlusconi, who also owns AC Milan - ed]; then, the media power of Juventus. Exactly. One of the charges against Moggi in the domain of criminal law (this is not a joke, but a real trial, a criminal offence!) relates to the enslavement of the media by Moggi and Giraudo. But do you know what TV was controlled by Juve, according to the claims of the Police? “La7”! Granted that such TV was owned by Telecom, in a "compromising" wiretapped telephone call, Moggi asked the former referee Baldas (“moviola” analyst in the TV programme “Il processo di Biscardi”, aired on La7) to be generous with Juventus. Does anyone have any idea of the La7 average ratings late at night in 2004? In short, we realize how Moggi’s power can, once again, be reduced and brought back to reality.(7)

Juve cheat? Here's a little snippet of an article, very illustrative, about what it means “creating people’s sentiment”. Written by Pucciogoal87 on www.ju29ro.com, October 6, 2009, talks of the unjust and unnecessary controversy following the match Bologna-Juventus played September 27, 2009, which ended 1-1, with a few mistakes of the referee affecting both teams. Bergamo’s text message to the fourth official during Rome-Juventus 2004-2005. Write down what you remember of each situation and, if you cannot remember, help yourself with the archives of newspapers or Internet; try to reconstruct carefully the story connected with the four episodes. (...) We will show you that what you have written constitutes the essence of popular sentiment used to kill Juventus in the summer of 2006. Finally, if you have time and desire, try to do the same with these other episodes: -The penalty for a foul on Platini during Hamburg-Juventus in 1983; - Manfredonia’s goal in Real Madrid-Juventus in 1986; - Laudrup’s goal in Napoli-Juventus, 1989; - Vieri’s goal in Borussia Dortmund-Juventus, 1997; - Mijatovic’s goal in Real Madrid-Juventus, 1998; - The penalties in Manchester during Milan-Juventus in 2003.>(8) How many matches were reported their own way? In addition: Who does not remember the famous penalty on Ronaldo and the other 5-6 pro-Juve incidents? But who, on the contrary, recalls that in the first round Juventus gave a football lesson, but lost for a Djorkaeff’s goal scored in a dubious position, a disallowed Inzaghi’s goal and a penalty for a foul of West on Inzaghi much clearer even that the Ronaldo-Iuliano contact? (9) Or Roma-Juve, 2005:... (10) And to finish the show, do you remember these headlines? December 20, 2006, the day of a Bologna- Juventus characterized by Zalayeta’s goals: “LA GAZZETTA DELLO SPORT”: "Juve, not this way" emphasizing: "Juventus wins in Bologna with an irregular Zalayeta’s goal”. “CORRIERE DELLO SPORT”: "Scandal in Bologna, penalty denied to Bologna, ghost goal with handball for Juve”. “LA STAMPA”: "Juve with poison: wins with a contested goal of Zalayeta. Andy54, 14 September 2008, wrote the article for the online magazine www.ju29ro.com: "Inter, referees and Gazzetta: not this way!”(11) Have you ever seen a title so harsh for mistakes against Juventus (for example Reggina-Juventus, referee Paparesta, 11/06/2004)? Or for Maicon's goal in Siena-Inter with 4-5 Inter players in offside (20/12/2008)? The famous Cannavaro’s goal in Juve-Parma, 05/07/2000, disallowed by De Santis, on the contrary, is remembered by everyone: did you have by any chance double-checked if the corner kick that led to the goal was actually a corner? One could go on and on...And for those who do not believe or cannot remember, there are many interesting videos on the web. Sure, there are episodes in favor and against, it's true! But some are artfully hidden. To avoid any doubt, to be completely impartial, would it not be better to follow the matches and leave alone those newspapers or TV programmes often so biased? Meanwhile, the same omissions and exaggerations that have continuously palmed us off with for years, created that "people’s sentiment" that helped send us to Serie B.

“La Gazzetta” active part of the investigation against Juve. Well, even this has happened. We're not kidding, nor exaggerating. The “Gazzetta dello Sport” (among other things, business partner of FC Internazionale and newspaper that more than anyone else fueled the formation of the "people’s sentiment" against Juve) openly sided against Juventus management. However, one wonders why that stance was so strong, so detailed...The answer comes from the depositions of Auricchio and Di Laroni (another officer belonging to the “Magnificent 12” team which carried on the operation): some journalists actively collaborated in the investigation of the Carabinieri. It was known that Maj. Auricchio, as mentioned above, used to read the “Gazzetta dello Sport”, and used the newspaper to draft the informative reports and find the evidence of his own work, but only after the testimony of the officers in the courtroom the role of the journalist Galdi was revealed (it’s no accident that he is Gazzetta’s correspondent in charge to follow the Naples trial as well as being the author of a few biased reports often quite close to the prosecution's thesis). Auricchio: “Galdi was a useful source to investigate the world of football, [...]. I asked Galdi about the informative reports and he told me that the first one of the three was circulating through the press, without being precise. [...] Contacts with Galdi began in late 2003. We are friends and I also used him to learn investigative news within the inquiry concerning football. He called me frequently to keep me informed on all the facts that he knew in the sports world. He did it because he felt gratified to cooperate with the investigators. [...] " Di Laroni: “I met Galdi during the investigation on the bank guarantees at the Public Prosecutor of Rome. During the investigation on behalf of the Naples prosecutors we used Galdi to gather information about football, especially to search for websites that would be useful for the investigation, but also information in general. [...] He called me frequently asking news about the investigations; I used to call him to get the news I was interested in. During the drafting of the second informative report we tried to understand the procedure of the referee draw; I asked Galdi for some information and he replied to me on the departmental institutional mail, sending an email containing the rules under which the referees’ chiefs had agreed to make the draws. I politely lodged for him an appeal against a sanction for violation of the Highway Code. [...] I would add that Galdi, after the news leak, complained to me and Major Auricchio about the fact that he had provided contribution to the investigation without receiving anything, unlike some of his colleagues.” Why not making use of institutional sources to conduct the investigation?

The informative reports disclosed to the press before the closure of the investigation. Typical Italian bad habit. This time though with laws that forbid it, responsibilities and precise related sanctions. However, very often it is not possible tracking down the “little hand” who committed the offence; in this case as well, the investigation on the news-leak was closed as it was not possible to positively identify the perpetrators. Changed file passwords, forced documents cabinet at the police station...Besides, thanks to Auricchio’s depositions, it can be certainly established that many journalists knew about the ongoing investigations and frequently called to get information and hot news ("I think the newspaper “Il Romanista” was the first one to learn the news. This newspaper belongs to Riccardo Luna who I’m told has contacts with institutional environments.” Auricchio, May 22, 2007). What is known with certainty is that, once again, was the “Gazzetta dello Sport” the first to report about the police investigation against Moggi and a presumed "cupola" [In Italian language the term “cupola”, literally “dome”, comes from the mafia slang and indicates a body of leading mafia members who decide on criminal activities - ed] (May 6, 2006: "Uproar on Moggi. There is a notification from Naples, and another is coming. A full year of serious wiretaps is under consideration by the magistrates"). Perhaps the lack of penal relevance, perhaps the need (for whom?) to avoid the expiration of any statutory terms for the “crimes” (strictly in quotes) led the unknown mole to reveal the yet secret informative reports. Thanks to the leak, the material could then be used by the sporting justice: the right time, no doubt, was carefully and accurately chosen (at the end of the season), allowing the media to offer the decisive assist, for the anti-Juventus public opinion and for the sports courts, to arrange with breathless haste that creepy show which was called Calciopoli and which, in just 19 days, relegated Juventus to Serie B.(12)

JUVENTUS AND TRIALS We might say it is a never ending story. It must be clear that no one here wants to complain about the work of Italian magistrates. It remains unclear, however, the reason for such fierceness against a club like Juventus: it is true, those in power are more exposed to suspicion. That said, one thing are the headlines, the assumptions...different thing is a penal prosecution, with attached the cost to be borne by the State and working hours for magistrates who’d better deal with more important issues for the life of the country. Again, this is not a preventive criticism, it rather is an impartial observation that everyone could make retrospectively. We use the conditional because if the average citizen is not informed of the facts, the reality then is certainly twisted.

The doping trial. It was 1998. Who can forget Zeman’s accusations? Turin Prosecutor Guariniello opened an investigation. The trial began. There were rumors of anomalous values (two out of hundreds of controls, statistically less than those found in a normally healthy population), there were rumors of EPO. As a result of the first instance, Giraudo was acquitted while Dr.Agricola judged guilty. On appeal, in 2005, they were both acquitted. On March 29, 2010, the Supreme Court ended the debate: Juventus was fully acquitted of doping (it was proved, in short, that there was no use of EPO or other prohibited substances). .(13) It should be noted, however, that the Supreme Court does not enter into the merits of the sentences: it follows that, at worst, the trial should have been revised from the start.

Cannavaro’s case. How can we forget the notorious video about the I.V. drip, filmed when the player was in Parma but broadcasted on TV (Rai) when, of course, the defender had already arrived in Turin? Well, even in that occasion Juventus was paradoxically forced to defend itself. Later on, still Cannavaro, by then one of the alleged drug-takers, was found positive after taking steroids to treat a wasp sting, something regularly denounced by the club doctors. The anti-doping court proposed a suspension for negligent behavior of the Juventus health staff, which immediately turned to the TAS [the international Court of Arbitration for Sport - ed] in Lausanne; the TAS, which approved the appeal, on September 3, 2010 acquitted the two doctors and obliged CONI to indemnify them(14).

Balance sheets. The lines of investigation are as many as two! We will see later how all the other big teams of the Italian league have circumvented the laws on accounting fraud, we will see that all of them took advantage of the so-called “decreto spalmadebiti” [“spread-debt decree”: a decree passed by the Berlusconi Government to save most of the Italian football clubs from bankrupt through the application of accounting tricks and irregularities. The decree was rejected by the EU Commission on Competition – ed]...and the only club to always break even has been Juve, without even having owner’s financial support but only thanks to the ability of the two managers Moggi and Giraudo. Here are the results: - 24/11/2009: "Process for capital gains, the Triad was acquitted. Prosecutors had asked for three years imprisonment for Moggi and Giraudo, and two for Bettega who were judged “not guilty” because "the fact is without fundation”.(15) - 14/09/2010: "Inquiry on tax violations. Cobolli Gigli and Blanc were acquitted. The case about the commissions for the agents was dismissed. Also for the Triad."(16) Such activity is carried out systematically in the same way by all the professional clubs. But Juventus had to undergo even this process...

Paparesta’s case. "Calciopoli, Paparesta dismissed: another innocent in the Calciopoli investigation"(17). Paparesta himself has denied that he was locked up in the famous dressing room; in relation to that, no report by the Commissioners, by the opposing team or by the police was presented…they all have only confirmed to have heard Moggi protesting after the match (just keep in mind that authorized club executives were allowed to enter the dressing room until 20 minutes before the match and/or after the game...not during, as someone else did, and it was also allowed, indeed welcome, giving gadgets and jerseys to the referees). Everyone has belied the one and only phone call in which Moggi boasted about locking the referee into the dressing room (and that he had brought the keys with him!). There's also a sentence of the Court of Reggio Calabria which controverts the event.

Lecce-Parma case. You might wonder what this has to do with Juve. Answer: it is an offence the “cupola” was charged with (by now we could ironically say that the fearful organization was formed only by Moggi, Giraudo, Bergamo and De Santis, with the latter participating on/off) relative to the attempt to avoid the relegation of Fiorentina (Here is an essential link). Besides: (18). Another theorem demolished...

Referee draws. While awaiting the depletion of this strand in the Court of Naples (there is a weekly parade of journalists and notaries who keeps certifying the correctness of the draws), there is already a sentence stating that the draw had taken place in the total compliance with the rules (19). In defiance of the “Gazzetta’s” headline of the 07/11/2009 "Here is how we rigged the draws". By the way, the draws were public. Moggi used to know the name of the appointed officials only after the draw and before no one else...simply the police just paid particular "attention" exclusively to his mobiles! Indeed, they considered relevant only his phone calls.

The GEA trial. The charge is conspiracy for the Moggis, father and son, for Davide Lippi and for other people. In the first instance conspiracy has already been dropped and only the accusation for domestic violence is left (Moggis risk about 1 year imprisonment). The process is still ongoing, but in any case, the charge that rival clubs and newspapers would have desired has now been dropped, and there are only “personal” crimes left.

The trial in Naples. We'll talk about it soon. It's the most important current affair. It is the process concerning the charge of conspiracy to commit sport fraud. Giraudo, as we know, has chosen the abbreviated procedure (strategy? Work commitments?), but in the Appeal there will be many surprises... and reading these few lines you will be more informed than all our friends/enemies who support other teams and very often speak inappropriately.

OTHER CLUBS’ SCANDALS While Juventus had to undergo several processes, which have always ended with the acquittal or dismissal of the cases, there are much more serious crimes (and not simple offences) committed over the past years by our rivals, only that they did not receive the same treatment and, above all, the same punishment. We will only take a few teams (Inter, Milan, Roma) which, for historical reasons, we care more about even if, for reasons of space, we are forced to neglect some episodes that concern either them (1910, 1929, championships etc. ..) or other clubs (Lazio, Fiorentina, Parma, ...). The content and structure of the following paragraph is based on Dr.Zoidberg’s article "Find the differences/1”, 4 of July 2007, published on ju29ro.com(20) with some important additions and news.

Balance sheets - Milan. 190 billion lire [old Italian Lira, nowadays around 95 million Euro but without considering inflation and real currency value – ed] of slush funds destined to the players (1992-97): everything goes unpunished due to the expiration of the statutory terms thanks to the new law on accounting fraud enacted by Berlusconi (August 3, 2001). Lentini’s case (1992). 10 billion lire [around 5 million Euro – ed] under the table. For half of the 1991/92 season Berlusconi is the owner of two teams (AC Milan and Torino): the statutory terms expire. 2002/03. AC Milan is granted to close the devastated budget on December 31 instead of the standard date, June 30. Balance sheets - Inter. Late honored surety (2002). The FIGC allows Inter to “close” it on March 31, rather than December 31. In practice, while other teams bring the credentials to enroll in the following year championship, Inter closes the registration procedure for the year before. Balance sheets - Roma. False surety (2003). Among other things, it was submitted beyond time limits. Cosenza club, for the same reason, had to go bankrupt. We will avoid talking about the recent bankruptcy of Roma, whose management has been now entrusted to Unicredit, to which Sensi’s Italpetroli owed 325 mln euro [Sensi family owns the Italian holding Italpetroli through which they control and own the football club Roma - ed]. Inflated capital gains - AC Milan and Inter. (1999-2005) How to fix the balance sheets and be in compliance with the parameters required to take part in the league? By adopting the system of fictitious capital gains, as simple as that. A gain is obtained by trading a player for a value greater than the price he was paid for. This is fictitious because if I sell for 20 million a player whose real value is, for example, 1m euro, I fix the budget. But the other team does not want certainly to do some charity: so they trade another player of little value for the same amount (fictitious crossed capital gain). Why? That’s simple! Unlike earnings, costs do not directly affect the current fiscal year, but they are amortized, or spread, over several years. The cost of the players, in particular, is amortized over a period equal to the duration of the stipulated contract. So, if by trading a player of mine I make 20, buying a new one I only lose 4, at least in relation to the current season. The method of the “cross fictitious” capital gains is, however, a double-edged sword. If it is used only once, it does not hurt, but if becomes a habit, the risks are many. Many Serie A clubs (with the exception of Juventus and a few others), in order to compensate for the operating loss, have not taken up a plan to reduce the costs but have used the system of capital gains, burdened each year with additional depreciation expenses. To cite a specific case, in 2002 Inter have made 102 million gains but has reported on the balance sheet depreciation for 108 million. And this against an operating income of 125 millions! Thus, revenues of 125 million were used to cover just the disproportionate depreciation expenses generated over those few years, when they resorted to the system just analyzed. Just like Inter, many other Italian clubs have found themselves with huge debts due to reckless use of this mechanism. Suffice it to say that in 1998, capital gains on player sales accounted for 31% of total revenues, rising to 71% only a year later. A situation that would have led to a complete collapse of the Italian football system if it was not occurred, in 2003, the infamous "Decreto Salva-Calcio" [another name of the “Spalmadebiti” – ed]. Major protagonists in the "system" have been Inter and AC Milan. In July 2002 the full-back Francesco Coco, sold to Inter for 29 million euro, has provided the “rossoneri” a gain of 28.8m. Reverse path for midfielder Clarence Seedorf who left Inter for the same amount. Many other players have changed team, raising suspicions: Ginestra, Bogani, Cordone, Bonura, Polizzano, Di Sauro. Each trade has yielded gains between 3.5 and 5.5 million euro. Inter, which between 1997/98 and 2004/05 obtained 400 million euro in capital gains, was able to sell in 2001 Macellari to Bologna for 12 million euro!(21). Brunelli’s case (2006). Wild capital gain for an unknown kid. False signature to sign the contract right on time to close the fiscal year (the player was in Sardinia). Inflated capital gains - Roma. (2000-2004). At the end of the fiscal year June 30, 2002, 95.3 million capital gains are recorded in the balance sheet, derived from the sale of the following top-class players: Marco Amelia, Cesare Bovo, Franco Brienza (at that time unknown), Simone Casavola, Daniele Cennicola, Daniele De Vezze, Giuseppe Di Masi, Simone Farina, Alberto Fontana, Gianmarco Frezza, Armando Guastella, Daniele Martinetti, Giordano Meloni, Matteo Napoli, Simone Paoletti, Manuel Parla, Marco Quadrini, Cristian Ranalli, Fabio Tinazzi, Alfredo Vitolo.

“Spalmadebiti” Law (2003): In the fall of 2002, Italian football is on the brink of precipice. Only Juventus, Bologna and some lower level club can be declared "healthy", while all the others are in a pre-bankruptcy situation. The presidents, scared, address the Parliament. On February 27, 2003 the infamous law, called "spalmadebiti" or better, "Salva-Calcio" [“football-saving” - ed], is issued and allows recalculating the value of player assets, i.e. allows “devaluing” them. The only way to amortize the costs of players’ registration and contracts (costs that are additional to other management needs) is by reducing the player assets, in order to pay annually lower depreciation expenses. A permitted operation, indeed required, but that no one has ever performed. However, if one operate a correct devaluation, losses are generated: thanks to the “Salva-Calcio” Law, clubs devalue their assets and the consequent loss is "smeared" over ten years, instead of burdening all and only once on a single financial statement (as indicated by the Civil Code). So those who operated craftily with the capital gains got away with a slap on the wrist. Those who behaved properly are instead left with absolutely nothing: just think of the four teams in Rome and Milan which have total write-downs for 900 million euro that, if reported in a single statement, would have caused their bankruptcy. The figures are staggering: Inter, that before the entry into force of Salva-Calcio claimed to have player assets worth 357 million euro, was left with assets for only 38 million. Magic. A record difference of 319.39 million. Second place for AC Milan, which brought down the assets to 242 million, followed by Lazio with 212.91, and finally Roma with 133.6. There are also many other smaller clubs but they do not reach such stratospheric amounts. As it is well known, Juventus did NOT make use of the Law. However, such Law violates the Italian Civil Code and the Fourth EEC Directive. On 14 March 2005, the European Commissioner on Competition, Mario Monti, rejects irrevocably the Law, referring Italy for infringement: the “spalmadebiti” decree, a brainwave of Italian politics to save fourteen clubs in Serie A and B from bankruptcy during the 2003 season, violates the EU Directive on financial statement and consolidated financial statement, general accounting rules. It should be noted once again that the Salva-Calcio has been passed by the Berlusconi government (incidentally the owner of AC Milan, three TV stations that broadcast football, the advertising agency that takes care of the Italian National team and also Adriano Galliani’s boss, who still incidentally is president of the League) and strongly supported by his friend Franco Carraro, president of FIGC and of Mcc, merchant bank of the Capitalia group, which has loaned a lot of money to some Serie A teams.(22)

Sale of the brand: once the effects of the “spalmadebiti” Law were cancelled, a new accounting artifice was created: the sale of the brand to oneself, which allowed AC Milan to save 181.3 million euro, Inter 159 and Lazio 95.36. The same procedure was also followed by Roma, Sampdoria and other smaller teams. In the world of football, companies that buy the brand are legal entities specially created and owned by the selling football clubs. The money that the subsidiary company pays to the one selling the brand comes, as a matter of fact, from a bank loan. This way, the assignee (the selling club) pays every year the capital quota of the loan, plus the resulting interests. This entire money circle is nothing more than a bank loan in disguise, which allows financially troubled clubs to spread the debt for the umpteenth time over several years. Here are (taken from the financial newspaper “Il Sole 24 Ore”, 4/11/2006) the values of the sales, the name of the subsidiary and the date of the sale: Milan: 183.7 - Milan Entertainment srl (30Sept05); Inter: 158 - Inter Brand Srl (29Dec05); Roma: 125 - Soccer sas (21Nov06); Lazio: 95.4 - Lazio Spa Marketing & Communication (29Sept06). Once again, as for the “spalmadebiti”, Juventus does not appear, having the management acted to get the accounts square. But what gives more to think, is the . "Interesting" is the case of Inter which managed to sell the brand to itself and at the same time offer it as a pledge to the bank, filtering everything through a holding company to this purpose established. In addition Inter, thanks to Guido Rossi’s dexterous work, mocked the severity of the Covisoc, enrolling without problems in the 2006/07 season, the one following the judgments of Calciopoli...Did you know that Inter and AC Milan enrollments in that Championship were initially rejected?(23) Even the Sports Justice intervened and closed the sporting trial with financial sanctions for the alleged accounting fraud of Milan, Inter and other teams. These clubs made use of Article 23 of the Code of Sports Justice under which parties may reach an agreement with the Federal Prosecutor's Office before the end of the first instance trial, asking the Judges to apply a reduced penalty. In practice, admission with plea- bargain. (24)

False passports - Milan. Dida’s case. 1 billion lire [around 500000 € - ed] fine, 4 months suspension for the player who is loaned out. False passports - Inter. Recoba’s case (1999). . In 2000, several Serie A players are found to be in possess of fake documents and the phenomenon seems to be widespread. Vicenza, Sampdoria), 14 players (including Recoba, Veron, Fabio Junior, Bartelt, Dida) and 15 managers (Oriali, Ghelfi, Baldini, Cragnotti, Governato, Pulici, Pozzo, Marcatti, Marino, etc.). Inter is officially involved on January 30, 2001, when the prosecutor of Udine, Paolo Alessio Vernì, orders an inspection into Inter headquarter and Recoba’s private home in Milan: even his passport is forged. (...) The prosecutor of Rome, Silverio Piro, who heads the investigation, (...) states that Inter manager Oriali, suggested by Roma consultant Franco Baldini, has been in contact with a mysterious recruiter who helped him obtain the document. (...) There is only a possibility: the passport is false. Not only that, Inter management was fully aware of the fraudulent way they were going to take up, since it was never submitted to the Italian authorities any request for a passport release. (...) According to the regulations, every match where Recoba has played as EU citizen should cost Inter a defeat by forfeit and a penalty point. The penalization points in total would then amount to the enormous figure of 56 points, leading to the relegation of the “nerazzurri”, should such measure be applied in the previous season (1999/2000, where they reached 58 points) or in the ongoing season (2000/2001, later that year they will reach 51 points). But there is a loophole, on which Milan CEO Galliani is working more than everyone: a reform of the article of the FIGC regulations limiting the use of non-EU players. A modification of the rule would lead to a very substantial attenuation of the punishment. (...) Moratti sides with Galliani (olden times...) and makes a statement that, with hindsight, proves to be incredibly funny: "If Recoba is suspended and then the ordinary court acquits him, who is going to give us back suspensions and penalties?"At the outbreak of Calciopoli, on the contrary, no one expected the end of the judicial procedure: the sentences were handed down in two weeks. And if the ordinary justice acquits Moggi and Giraudo, who will give Juventus back the Serie A and the Scudetti?. (...) Six days before the end of the season and despite the strong opposition of the Players Association headed by Campana, arrives the modification of the rule on the enrolment and use of non-EU players. And never mind if the rules are changed when the season is ongoing, with Roma and Juventus contending for the championship point by point. It is now clear that everything is going to be forgotten: (...) June 27 arrive the sentences confirming the expectations. Suspensions only for the players, a pat on the cheek for the clubs (i.e.fines). Inter gets away with a fine of two billion lire [around 1million € - ed], Recoba and Oriali are suspended for one year, Franco Baldini for nine months. Inter CEO Rinaldo Ghelfi is obviously acquitted, he was charged with direct liability. This way the much dreaded penalty affecting the league rankings is avoided. (...) Inter complaints work and, in October, the Chamber of Conciliation of CONI completes the picture, reducing Recoba’s suspension to 4 months (and he serves half of it during the summer), Oriali’s to 6 months and reducing the fine for the club to a billion four hundred million lire [around 700000 € - ed]. Anyway the response of the ordinary justice to put an end to the story is still missing. On May 25, 2006, seven years after the facts in dispute, the Court of Udine sentences Oriali and Recoba, who admit the forgery of the documents (also a fake driving license pops out for Recoba) and negotiate the punishment: ANSA: - The magistrate of the Court of Udine, Giuseppe Lombardi, accepted the request for settlement of the Uruguayan Inter striker Alvaro Recoba and Inter manager Gabriele Oriali, inflicting the penalty of six months imprisonment each (replaced by a fine of 21,420 euro) for the crimes of falsification and receiving within the investigation on the procedures carried out to make EU citizens a few players without European ancestors. (...) After the conviction of the Court of Udine, some Juventus fans noticed a detail of the story which was shamefully neglected. This would be a new piece of investigation that can lead to the reopening of disciplinary proceedings, in accordance with Article 18 paragraph 3 of the Code of Sports Justice. But no one wants to get their hands dirty and go against the new masters of Italian football after the farce of Calciopoli: Massimo Moratti and Marco Tronchetti Provera. On July 26, during the news broadcasted on Rai, it is announced that, following the judgments of Calciopoli, the 2005/06 Scudetto is awarded to Inter. To collect the reactions of the “nerazzurri”, a live special is broadcasted from Brunico, where the team is going to play a friendly match. To answer the correspondents’ questions there is Gabriele Oriali, who talks of "Scudetto of honesty." Just the same Oriali that two months earlier bargained the punishment for fraud and receiving…shameless ....>(25).

Irregular championships - Inter. Case Genoa-Inter 2-3 (1983). Fixed match ruined by an unexpected Bagni’s goal 3 minutes before the end; teammates and opponents are left perplexed and speechless. Milito-Motta case (2010). On May 21, 2009, Inter and Genoa found the agreement for the trade of Thiago Motta and Milito from Genoa to Inter. The point is that Preziosi, at the time of negotiation, was suspended. In fact, the accusation the two presidents are charged with is a meeting, immediately flaunted by both (only later clumsily withdrawn by Moratti who became, as a result of this, guilty of "unreliable testimony" in front of the Federal Prosecutor Palazzi), where the agreement between the parties was actually reached. More than a year later, (26) Here's how it ended: 3 months of suspension for Massimo Moratti, 6 for Enrico Preziosi, € 45,000 fines to Inter...no other penalties. Dubious matches - Roma. Referee Vautrot’s attempted corruption before Rome-Dundee, European Cup (1984). One year disqualification from the cups converted to a fine of 168 million lire [around 85000€ - ed]. Rules changed on the run (2001). 3 days before the decisive match for the title, the rules on the use of non- EU players are changed. Juve of the “powerful” Moggi and Giraudo tries to oppose, but gets nothing. Therefore Roma can line up the non-EU player Nakata who is decisive scoring the equalizer (2-2).

Doping - Inter. Kallon tested positive for Nandrolone (2003). All the other cases were occurred in 2001, arousing suspicions on “faulty” supplements. Kallon's case is isolated (two years later), those supplements were no longer commercially available. Georgatos reveals to have witnessed strange drug practices inside the Inter dressing room (2006). No investigations. Doping - Milan. Gattuso, Seedorf and 3 other Milan players (5 out of 15 denials overall....) refuse to undergo the cross-tests (5 and 20 March 2005) requested by, among others, Galliani himself and introduced a year before. Their justifications (lack of proper hygienic conditions) are completely disavowed by the managers of the anti-doping labs: in an official statement the President of the sporting Federmedici, Maurizio Casasco, rejects the justifications adduced by the “rossoneri”: Gattuso has never entered the room for blood collection but only the room prepared for the collection of urine samples. (...) The sports doctors do not treat athletes like "animals", but they exercise their role with sensitivity and professionalism. It is therefore not justifiable that to justify a decision, however legitimate, they make untrue claims and ascribe the blame to the behavior of the doctors. Despite Galliani’s proclamations and Carraro’s promises, Gattuso and Pancaro are not excluded from being capped for the national team. In addition, the Milan midfielder, who is in the board of AIC (Italian Footballer Association), seems to have forgotten that he fought for the introduction of the new method of control, as confirmed by the commitment made in front of Campana.(27) No one investigates on the matter. Borriello tested positive to anti-doping for two corticosteroids (2006). The justification about the vaginal cream of his girlfriend does not hold (such a small amount cannot result positive in the tests).Where did the footballer take those substances? For him three months of suspension.

Espionage - Inter. De Santis, Vieri, Jugovic were tailed. Juventus phones were bugged. (28) Do you still have doubts?

THE TRIAL IN NAPLES This entire section is 'in progress'. The ongoing process held at the IX Criminal Chamber of the Court of Naples is not over yet, at least at the time of this writing. We strongly recommend to all of you to follow the developments and read the sentences: each update will be faithfully published on the websites that you will find in the 'Links' section.

The “cupola” like mafia and P2. On July 10, 2007, the Neapolitan Prosecutors Filippo Beatrice and Giuseppe Narducci requested for remand of 37 out of the 48 suspects (for the others, the Prosecutor’s Office requested for the acquittal due to lack of evidence). After the first ruling (02/10/2008), there were 24 people left indicted (excluding even Ghirelli and Carraro, respectively secretary and president of FIGC). The accusation is of sporting fraud, but for some defendants there also is the crime of conspiracy. The hypothesis is that they would set up an organization (Narducci even say 'with secret purposes', so to be addressed by some journalists as “mafia- and P2-like” *a massonic lodge operating illegally in Italy in the ‘70s - ed]), with the former Juventus general manager Luciano Moggi as the main promoter, which de facto ruled the Italian football world and altered the outcome of the matches (prosecutors identified 29 matches in Serie A).(29), (30) Giraudo and the already vanished offences. On the 14th of December 2009, the first sentences for the suspects who chose the abbreviated procedure were issued. It does not mean plea-bargain, it does not mean confession. The Italian justice system provides, in fact, for the defendant the possibility to avoid the hearing stage of the first instance and defends himself, thanks to his/her lawyers, from the allegations of the prosecutor without being able to rely on witnesses or additional evidence. Former CEO of Juventus Antonio Giraudo was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment. Could have the abbreviated trial been a defensive error? A strategy? We only know that it is not over yet. On appeal, in fact, the sentence can be turned over, in light of the developments lately emerged in the trial. It does not even seem very unlikely, even in virtue of the grounds (apologies for the comment, but they are absurd to say the least) adduced by the Judge De Gregorio. Three are the matches contested: - Udinese-Brescia, September 26, 2004 refereed by Dattilo. This game was already dismissed even at the time of the sentence of the sports justice! During this match, preceding Udinese-Juventus, the referee had sent off Jankulovski and shown the yellow card to Finzi, Muntari and Di Michele. All of this, according to the investigators, in a fraudulent manner. Too bad that the three booked players were not “diffidati” [in Serie A every player has a limited number of yellow cards he can receive over different matches before getting an automatic one-match suspension; when the player reaches such a limit, and therefore the next yellow card will cost him a suspension in the following match, it is said he is “diffidato”, which can be translated as “cautioned”, warned”; he must be very careful in order to avoid the ban. - ed], and they played against Juve! Jankulovski, rightly sent off for packing a punch against an opponent, was the protagonist of the mega-fight unleashed in the last minute of the match while the infractions were reported by the linesman, who is not even charged of anything! For that fight, Dattilo could have sent off half of the team, but he did not. At the end of the game, in one of the few phone calls in which Giraudo appears (out of about 180,000 in total), the CEO says to his friend Moggi: "If he’s smart, he blows away half of the team..."[referring to the referee’s decisions - ed], a sentence, once more, said in retrospect after the match. For many newspapers that phrase dated back to the day before the match! - Juventus-Udinese February 13, 2005 refereed by Rodomonti. AC Milan had substantially reduced the gap from Juventus, also thanks to some referee favors. Juventus management perhaps believed to be in a position of weakness with respect to their opponent. Moggi and Giraudo, therefore, decide to organize a meeting with Pairetto to present their issues. Moggi clearly says to his colleague (phone calls made before the match): "Here we have come to the point that when in doubt…when in doubt you can go in favour or against…here, when in doubt it is always against (...)" to reaffirm the demand for fairness, and not an advantageous position or the request of favors. There will be, shortly thereafter, the famous phone call about the grids between Bergamo and Moggi. And how does the call of the grids end? That is eventually appointed a referee that Moggi did not consider in "his" grid: Rodomonti. But what would Giraudo’s fraud be? - Juventus-Lazio December 5, 2004 refereed by Dondarini. It ends 2-1 for Juve. There are no major referee incidents, although the investigators, to analyze the game objectively, choose to refer to the Lazio official website. Giraudo’s phone calls? None. Before the game there is a dinner between Juventus managers and referees’ chiefs, with Christmas gifts for them. A dinner that does not constitute a breach of any regulations (as Bergamo restated many times "Facchetti was the one who came to my house more often." Again, no offence!). Dondarini is appointed for the match, and Moggi, as he often did, shows he already knows the names of the referees. As already written, the draw to appoint the referees was public and the names could have been reported to him by any journalists attending, or even in some cases received by the press, as for everyone else. But Giraudo? (31)

The beginning of the hearings. May 19, 2009, finally the long-awaited trial of Naples begins: 50 witnesses for the prosecution (brought by the prosecutors with the intention to find, once and for all, the evidences to nail down the “cupola”') and 50 for the defense (especially those proposed by Bergamo, Pairetto, Moggi and De Santis) will follow one another. The depositions may be read in full on ju29ro.com website in the Download section, where there are also the judgments of the Juventus’ trials, arbitrations, appeals to the TAR, police questionings, the Swiss SIM cards tables, the sports codes: all in their full, uncensored, uncut, uncommented versions. (32) Unthinkable examining here dozens of witnesses. In summary, it can be said that from the witnesses of the prosecution and of the defense, no confirmation of the allegations of 4 years ago has emerged: only "impressions", "feelings", but no evidences. The regularity of the draws was confirmed, as well as it was confirmed the habit of all the clubs to give presents (gadgets and jerseys) to the referees, it was established that calling referees’ chiefs on the phone was not illegal but it was rather pleased by the federation, and also that managers of all the clubs used to participate in the referees’ Chiefs Christmas dinners, besides it was understood that Paparesta was never locked in a dressing room, and that the method of investigation has been, to say the least, defective, inaccurate, rough and, above all, one-sided. (33) Here are some interesting and emblematic strands of the entire process.

A masterpiece of absurdity: Nucini. On May 26, 2009, the former referee Danilo Nucini testifies. He tells he has always been hindered by the referees’ chiefs (certainly his irreverent character did not help him) and that he was excluded from Serie A after Juventus-Bologna in 2001 for a non-existent penalty awarded to Bologna (later missed). The circumstance is belied by the facts: Nucini, considered by many only a mediocre referee, continued to officiate in Serie A and B until the last year of his career. That same year, the turning point: rebuked by the referees’chiefs Bergamo and Pairetto for the umpteenth wrong game, he takes refuge in his longtime friend Giacinto Facchetti (both from Bergamo, they often met at the bar and have often be in contact by phone, since 1997), to whom he tells about alleged wrongs and pressures he would have suffered. Such conduct would already be punishable on itself, for referee and managers, according to Art. 6 of the CGS, with the relegation of the concerned team, Inter (to be clear, Moggi was not in contact nor there are calls with operant referees!). After the title of the May 5, 2002, Inter wants to be on it and, in fact, willingly accepts the help of Nucini: starting from a dossier on the careers of the referees (pro-Juve errors would have allowed to gain credit with the referees’ chiefs, except that in the courtroom he said: 'I wrote what I was interested in'), he tells about a secret meeting with Moggi and Fabiani (former General director of Messina Calcio), when the two managers would have given an Italian SIM card to the referee, to be used strictly for the contacts with the two managers. Even in this circumstance, the former referee contradicts himself several times: he never used it…no, he did make2-3 calls...well, what is sure is that it was practically thrown away immediately. Such an overwhelming evidence thrown into the bin? The tips that the referee received by Inter managers make think: they asked Nucini to understand well what Fabiani was doing and to investigate on the alleged SIM phone cards...well, one might think (as the defendants have stated many times): could it be that the espionage by Inter-Telecom against Moggi & co. had led Moggi himself to adopt the system of the Swiss SIM cards so to be more difficult to be wiretapped and prevent the competitors from listening to his talks about the player market or his private calls? But was Nucini’s card Italian? In this story, who was defending itself? Inter or Juve? Who had to be relegated to Serie B? Indeed, confirming the fact that the witness is not so reliable, there is his renunciation to go to the Milan Prosecutor's Office, invited by circles close to Inter management, to tell everything to the Prosecutor Boccassini(34). Anyway, Nucini’s rumors, not confirmed directly by the former Inter president who died in 2006, were later corroborated by a memorandum prepared by Facchetti himself and presented in the Naples courtroom by his son Gianfelice.

The unheeded “pentito”: the linesman Coppola. On December 4, 2009 Rosario Coppola, former assistant referee until 2002, testifies. He says that in May 2006 he went voluntarily to the Carabinieri in Rome to tell his version of the events, after having heard Borrelli’s appeals who complained about the climate of silence in the world of football. In the courtroom, Coppola reports the same considerations he had made at the police station, three years earlier, when he was told by the Police: "We are not interested in Inter." Coppola, in fact, reports that, following the match Inter-Venice a couple of years before, he wrote in the final report about an incident regarding a punch by Cordoba against Bettarini and suffered pressure from Mazzei, referee representative, who asked him to change the report in order to reduce the penalty for the player. Coppola did not do it: since that moment he no more refereed in Serie A. The same prosecutor Giuseppe Narducci snubs the statement, but defense lawyers ply the witness as the episode is not so insignificant.(35)

The swiss telephone cards. How many inconsistencies! As many people know, from the Neapolitan investigations have emerged clues on the dissemination and use of foreigner telephone cards (mainly Swiss), owned by some of the alleged members of the “cupola”. A total of 21 SIM cards, belonging to Moggi (5 cards), to the referees De Santis, Racalbuto, Bertini, Paparesta, Pieri, Dattilo, Gabriele and Cassara, to the linesman Ambrosino, to the referees’ chiefs Bergamo and Pairetto and to the manager Fabiani. However, just as many are the inaccuracies and mistakes (as evidenced by the abuse of the words "likely", "probably", with which the police have tried to explain in the courtroom the method used during the investigation). The discovery dates back to February 9, 2005, when Bergamo called Moggi from a landline phone (wiretapped) to a “Swiss” number of the Juventus manager. But why then did the Police not wiretap the calls of such articulated "network" that, being in roaming on Italian territory, could and should have been wiretapped? Why not seizing the SIM cards in a blitz during the referee meetings in Coverciano? Fact is that many of the matches considered offences (79) are actually identified thanks to the telephone traffic on these foreign SIM cards, but without knowing the contents, only the number of the alleged calls. A flimsy evidence to say the least, it seems. Many facts lead to different conclusions: the referees Gabriele, Cassarà and Paparesta have already been cleared of allegations in the preliminary investigative phase; however, all the referees have strongly denied having those SIM cards, even when they were plied by the investigators and the Prosecutors. The statistics of the Juventus matches of the 2004/2005 season refereed by the "Swiss" referees are against the “bianconeri” (points average equal to 1.88 against points average of the entire season equal 2.26!), but in favor of Milan (only one defeat and 5 wins away!). Same numbers considering the overall championships from 2004 to 2006 (Juventus is the only team to have, in the match directed by the referees under investigation, an average points lower than the total average points!); besides, Juventus has not been directed by those referees in the Italian Cup that season. In addition, we believe it is not by chance that Mariano Fabiani (ex general director of Messina Calcio) became litigant (source ANSA 02/05/2007)in the story of Telecom espionage; perhaps the circumstance needs to be correlated to the tip-offs of the former referee Nucini to Inter managers. The investigation on these foreign SIM cards began “a posteriori”, based on the system of "cells", i.e. on the detection of signals from the telephone antenna towers: however, as pointed out by some experts, the margin for error is high, because for topographical reasons or because of traffic, not always the same cell is picked up from the same place, and many cover a radius of more than 100 Km. It is impossible to determine the exact number and the duration of the phone calls! In addition, often have been attributed contacts departing from a number located in a certain place...but the subject was to be anywhere but there: for example, on March 21, 2005, two phone calls are linked to Paparesta. An anomaly, because, as demonstrated, at that time he was on vacation with his family in Spain. Or De Santis who, while was attending a refresher course at the same police station where Auricchio was (ironically), was identified in another location. Same fate for the referee Bertini, who was not in Arezzo, but his alleged SIM card was...and it was making calls! Furthermore, De Santis would have used the card and made calls as soon as he had left the “cupola” (according to the Auricchio’s “Magnificent 12”). Yes, De Santis, based on errors pro or against Juve, was part of the “cupola” or not! More inaccuracies arise from the summaries reporting the calls made with foreign cards: these tables, one for every investigated referee, divide the calls in weekly periods. Hard to think of a typo or transcription error, since the discordances are present in 12 different tables and 4 different weeks. One might also wonder how Mr. Moggi could have 3-4 mobile phones, 5 Swiss cards plus the Italian ones and constantly change the SIM from one phone to another between different towns…and never make a mistake! And then, since Moggi, as claimed by the sports courts, influenced the referees through the referees’ chiefs, why were not found any calls (actually not even on Italian numbers!) between referees’ Chiefs and referees? And the contents of those were not they more important? Perhaps evidence of Moggi's guilt would have been found; perhaps we could have understood why we have been relegated to Serie B! Instead, nothing.(36)

The others’ wiretaps. The police has collected and listened to about 180,000 telephone wiretaps. From these have emerged the calls that have convicted Moggi and Giraudo. Among all of them, and we report it as a means of comparison, the one regarding the referee "grid" decided by Moggi and Bergamo is unanimously considered as the "mother" of all the wiretaps. Calling the referees’ chiefs was not an offence and talking about referee grid was not difficult: many journalists used to do it as well. For each match-day of the season, 5-6 groups of matches were identified: from the first (including the “hot” matches) to the last, with the match considered easier. For each group of matches, as many referees were chosen, among all the available ones, but with some limitations: a referee cannot officiate a team of the same province, nor he can officiate in succession the same team; besides he can direct only for a limited number of times the same team throughout the year, in case records are checked, etc... Finally, during the draw (which, again, was public and regular!) each game is matched with a referee among those designated for that group. In short, it was not impossible, through these preclusions, guessing the composition of a grid. Moggi compared his grid with that of Bergamo! Furthermore, the next game, a referee that Moggi had not even put in the same group as Juventus match was, went right to direct the Bianconeri! But as time goes by, the truth begins to emerge. <"THE DEFENDANT LIKE IT OR NOT, THERE ARE NOT PHONE CALLS BETWEEN BERGAMO OR PAIRETTO AND MR.MORATTI”. These are the words of the prosecutor Giuseppe Narducci, interviewed October 27th last year on the possibility of the existence of phone calls not included in the folders of the investigation. Possibility that the same prosecutor boldly called: "Bullshits disproved by the facts."> (37). Allow us to make a comment: it is preposterous that a prosecutor, which by law has the duty to verify through investigation ALL the possible people responsible for fraud, in fact has never tapped the phones of all the clubs, but only those which were involved in the scandal (think of what could have come to light...in a few lines we’ll talk of what has emerged with the only “bounced” calls); Moreover, although aware of the very serious calls made by “honest teams” [Inter - ed], calls that were already part of the investigation dossiers, it is scandalous that he releases such statements in a courtroom! Here are some examples. To you all the comments.

November 16, 2004, Facchetti calls Pairetto: "Have you decided for the Cup? Because that one in Germany is important"[...] "We want to finish first in the group."

November 25, 2004, before Juve-Inter. Who was choosing the referees? Those who was really trying to manipulate (and not to guess) the grids? Mazzei: I'm in the car on the way to Coverciano. Facchetti: You going to Coverciano? Mazzei: Yes, because I’ll meet Bergamo in half an hour. Facchetti: Choose them wisely for Sunday night, eh... Mazzei: Number 1 and number 2, I think, at this point I think from what...Ivaldi and Pisacreta. [As it will actually happen - ed]. Facchetti: Ivaldi and Pisacreta. Mazzei: They are the number 1 and number 2. Facchetti: Yes, and the number 1 of the referees [Collina - ed] Mazzei: Yes, we hope to pick him with this damn draw…to pick the number 1. Facchetti: Come ooooonnnn...they do not have to make draws there, they have...ehhh Mazzei: Eh, how can you do it, Giacinto .... Facchetti: Ehhh .... Mazzei: Unfortunately, it takes luck there, because I tell you the truth, the draw here is made by a journalist. They should work out a grid where the chances are higher: that’s the only thing... Facchetti: Come on, they put De Santis, who has already officiated Juventus on Sunday and therefore he cannot, put Rosetti who is from Turin... Mazzei: But they have to leave an open field for at least 50% according to what is written in the regulations, I think. The day after... Facchetti: Listen, for Sunday then... Bergamo: For Sunday we make a group of international refs because we do not want to risk anything. So, there are four refs. All four of them can officiate the game, there's... Facchetti: All right, but put in some ... [It is not clear who says “Collina” - ed] Bergamo: Collina is in, Paparesta is in, Bertini and Rodomonti are in. Facchetti: With Bertini we had some problems, eh...Also last year in Turin and in a couple of other games we had some problems with Bertini. Bergamo: If it ever was unfortunately this way, I will talk to him. Indeed…it is better…I’ve got to tell you, you know ... uh, uh Facchetti: I do not know, I wanted to tell you ... Bergamo: You did well, you did well. Facchetti: Some problems we had it just in Juve-Inter ...

February 25, 2005 Bergamo: We make a large grid, because we have some referees in shape…so, except Paparesta who refereed your game last Sunday and therefore is for you precluded, there's Collina, as usual, Trefoloni, Messina and De Santis. They are four good ones, there are no problems" Facchetti: I understand, but rather, they should come in the right mood. Bergamo: Yes, do not worry, and then as assistants we put Griselli and Mitro who are two…apart the fact that they are two of those selected for the World Cup..so they are among the best ones, well ... Facchetti: More than the name, I trust the mood, I trust you.

May 11, 2005 (the day before Cagliari vs Inter, much-discussed match of the Italian Cup) Facchetti: “Listen, I checked out, I checked out Bertini’s score [meaning the stats Inter has when refereed by Bertini - ed]…four wins, four draws, four defeats…” Bergamo: “Damn, let us make it five, four, four then…hehe” Facchetti: “hehe”. Bergamo: “I mean wins!” Facchetti: “Tell him he’s decisive tomorrow” Bergamo: “Sure, I’m gonna call him now, he just called me this morning but I could not answer” Facchetti: “He’s decisive; he refereed twelve games, four, four, four…” Bergamo: “As you say, he’s gonna change one [referring again to the stats - ed], but he must change the one that begins with “W” [Bergamo refers to “Wins” or “matches Won” - ed].” Facchetti: “The right one, the right one, the right one” Bergamo: “Yes, but he’s coming the right way, you’ll see…because he’s a clever lad and has now understood how to walk. It took a while to make him understand but, well, better late than never” At the end of the game, Bertini called Bergamo, complaining about the fact that Facchetti entered the officials’ dressing room to alert them about the “4-4-4”...

March 24, 2005. Remember: there are no calls of Moggi with referees in activity. De Santis: Ready. Facchetti: Massimoo. De Santis: How are you, Giacintooo? Facchetti: Oh, fine and you? De Santis: I have to congratulate you, indeed…you are interested in referees. Facchetti: (laughing) Well, we'll see, but you know, I think there will be many people interested... De Santis: Oh, okay, everyone is interested…now it is the current topic. Facchetti: Oh yes. Oh, are you already in Paris? De Santis: No, I’ll leave tomorrow morning. Facchetti: Blatter called me. Gagg is there too. De Santis: Oh, Walter (Gagg) is in Paris? Facchetti: He’ll be there and told me he will bring you my greetings. De Santis: Eh, or else I’ll give them to him. Facchetti: Anyway, he will come and greet you. [...] [Walter Gagg is known to be a close friend of Blatter; former head of the stadiums Committee of FIFA, he is now in charge at Inter of international relations - ed]

January 3, 2004. There's going to be a meeting at Bergamo’s house, for dinner. (Confirmed in a call on made on January 5) Bergamo: If you like, on Wednesday evening, if you are not busy with team, why do not you come to dinner at my house? Facchetti: Yes, yes, sure...I come there with the plane of the team and then maybe I'll call you, and I do not know how... Previously, it was already preannounced another meeting... (in Milan or Forte dei Marmi) Moratti: Look, I really wanted to meet you, when you have a minute, whenever it suits you, when you are in Milan, you tell me where you are, maybe I…we’ll meet for a second…I would really be pleased. Bergamo: I, too, because I wanted to confide something to you.

January 9, 2005. Before Inter-Sampdoria 3-2 (comeback from 0-2), Facchetti informs Bergamo ... Facchetti: Nothing, I just wanted to tell you that I tried to tell my players to be tactful with Bertini, to have some confidence... Bergamo: You'll see he’ll be good, he is a good person and he comes, say, prepared to make a good game, believe me...they are guys that I'm counting on. It's a challenge, you'll see, that we’ll win together, come on. The next day, January 10, 2005, Facchetti calls Bergamo. Here is who was actually able to know the referees before the matches... Facchetti: Paolo, you see that we have come back? Bergamo: Historic!...yesterday…what I suffered, you cannot even imagine, because the game seemed to be compromised...There was an incredible reaction. [...] Bergamo: Look, Sunday, er…Wednesday [Bologna-Inter, Italian Cup match played three days later and finished 3-1 for Inter - ed] I was planning to send as assistants…as in Bologna it is not a match to take for granted in my opinion, I was going to put Gemignani and Niccolai who are two good Tuscans eh ... Facchetti: Well, we haven’t had Gemignani anymore... Bergamo: No, no, and I just wanted to send him to you on Sunday. Yes, sorry, Wednesday, there is this Italian Cup which we are still interested in so we...and then I’ll send you a young guy…since we wanted to get back on track Gabriele and Palanca, I wanted to send you Gabriele... Facchetti: All right. Bergamo: It’not a problem for you, he is doing well .. Facchetti: No, No, it’s allright and I trust you…you are…

February 11, 2005, a strange phone call after another, brief, in which Facchetti asked Pairetto: “Listen, you've done there for the Cups?” Facchetti: Hello? Pairetto: Giacinto? Facchetti: Here I am!!! Pairetto: Here you areee!. I've tried there...[but what other phone number is Pairetto referring to? - ed]it was not possible and then I tried here. So, Graham Poll for the first leg in Porto. Facchetti: Ah Poll... Pairetto: Poll is good, you've already had him. Do you remember? [...] Instead in Milan, Hauge, the Norwegian ref. They were both European, etc. therefore high level. [...] Pairetto: Everything okay? Yes!? Facchetti: Did you put Trefoloni in shape? [But what does it mean asking that to a referees’ chief? - ed] Pairetto: Yes, the last time it had gone well. Facchetti: I confirm, yes, yes, he's good. [...] Pairetto: Well Giacinto, good luck. Talk to you soon, please, you know these things are always private, eh?! Facchetti: Yes, yes, no ... no ... Pairetto: These things are not known, it is just a thing between us. Facchetti: All right. Look up on the newspapers for Moggi’s calls and compare the “offences”. Who were the honest guys? Who was defending himself? (38)

AC Milan. Although it was one of the clubs involved in the investigation, AC Milan seems to have been pardoned. Only 8 penalty points for the 2005/2006 season and participation in the Champions League (later even won!). We challenge anyone: who has ever read or heard the wiretaps regarding AC Milan managers? In this regard, we report, as a finishing touch, a passage taken from the article “Calciopoli: enough fairy tales, it's time for facts!” by the very talented Emilio Cambiaghi, incisive, sharp, polemical...a real request for justice. (39)

AUTHORITATIVE OPINIONS Corrado de Biase: (Head of Investigations Office in 1980): "The trial held this summer has given birth to a “juridical abortion”" Francesco Cossiga: "I feel ashamed for that travesty of justice which is the Commission of Federal Appeal: I was very surprised that a serious jurist stooped so low as to go to chair it... " Enzo Biagi: "An insane ruling because it was built on nothing, on wiretaps difficult to interpret and unserviceable in a trial worthy of the name (...). It might be that to cover a giant-sized scandal (Laziogate, Telecom, ed) they have identified Moggi as the villain to feed the populace?" Piero Ostellino (journalist, formerly director of “Corriere della Sera”): "All of them agreed to a moralistic formula, for a visceral hatred against Juve or just stupidity (...) because the Italian press too often (not just in this respect) is simply obscene."

GOALS For the dignity, for the history of Juventus, but also for the future of the team and the club For Italy: for the cancellation of an unprecedented farce, which hit the 4th industry in the country (football) 1) Revocation of the of the “cardboard” 2005/2006 Scudetto, awarded to Inter in 2006; 2) Complete revision of the sports sentences; 3) Return of the titles for lack of crimes (along with any penalties for other clubs found guilty); 4) Compensation under the civil law;

DUTIES OF THE FANS - UNDERSTANDING AND SPREAD THE TRUTH - SEEK JUSTICE THROUGH CIVIL AND ALLOWED METHODS - URGE THE OWNERS, WITH THE AVAILABLE MEANS (letters, e-mail, banners, ...) SHOULD THEY NOT COMPLITELY COMMIT IN THE DISPUTE (but finally, after four years of devastating management, with the arrival of Andrea Agnelli, signs of a strong and determined club presence can be seen).

USEFUL LINKS www.ju29ro.com (email address: [email protected] for communications, suggestions, requests) www.j1897.network.com Juventus fans forum, including journalists and more or less famous personalities) www.vecchiasignora.com ( “ “ “) www.juveforum.net ( “ “ “) www.giulemanidallajuve.com (website of the same association which fights for the restitution of the titles) www.uccellinodidelpiero.com (blog) www.stefanodiscreti.blogspot.com (blog) www.tuttojuve.com www.farsopoli.com (We apologise for the websites not listed. The selection was determined by arbitrary criteria: many are, in fact, the web pages created after the 2006 events. For further interesting info and material, please check on youtube.com and facebook).

SUGGESTED BOOKS “Che fine ha fatto la Juve”. Ju29ro.com. Feb 2010. Cardana Libreria editor. “Manuale di autodifesa del tifoso Juventino”. Emilio Cambiaghi. Mursia editor. “Mandiamo la Juve in B. Calciopoli o Farsopoli?”. Antonello Oggiano. Libri di Sport editor. “Juventus il processo farsa. Inchiesta verità su calciopoli”. Mario Pasta e Mario Sironi. Guerini e Associati editor. “Il processo illecito”. Luther Blisset (collective alias). Lulu editor. “La Juventus del Dottore”. Nicola Negro. SBC editor. “I lupi e gli Agnelli”. Gigi Moncalvo. Dec 2009. Vallecchi editor.

BIBLIOGRAPHY (1),(2),(3),(4),(5) Dominiobianconero, “Calciopoli o Farsopoli? Una ricostruzione”. 09 Maggio 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/farsopoli/336-calciopoli-o-farsopoli-una-ricostruzione.html (6) Giuseppe Rombolà. Caso Telecom: fatta la festa, gabbatu lu santu. 28/09/2010. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/contro-informazione/2417-caso-telecom-fatta-la-festa-gabbatu-lu-santu.html (7) www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/dossier/cantanapoli-il-processo/1835-prioreschi-ad- auricchio-dove-sono-letelefonate-di-moratti-.html (8) Pucciogoal87. L’accademia del sentimento popolare. 6 ottobre 2009. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/controinformazione/1452-laccademia-del-sentimento-popolare.html (9) AA. VV. Il Campionato dei Piagnoni. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/archivi/dossier/i- piagnoni.html (10) Andy54. Roma-Juve 2005: la verità. 30 Giugno 2010. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/farsopoli/2202-roma-juve-2005-la-verita.html (11) Andy54. Inter, Arbitri e Gazzetta, non così! 14 Settembre 2008. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/controinformazione/607-inter-arbitri-e-gazzetta-non-cosi.html (12) Redazione ju29ro. Calciopoli, dalla fuga di notizie al ruolo di Galdi e della Gazzetta. 14 Maggio 2010. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/farsopoli/2040-calciopoli-dalla-fuga-di-notizie-al-ruolo-di-galdi- e-della-gazzetta.html (13) La Cassazione chiude il processo per doping contro la Juve. 30 marzo 2007. Wikinotizie (14) Il Tas sul falso doping di Cannavaro “Il CONI risarcisca i medici della Juve”. 04/09/2010. Il Mattino. (15) Processo per le plusvalenze, assolta la Triade. 24/11/2009. La Stampa (16) Alberto Gaino. Inchiesta sulle violazioni fiscali. Prosciolti Blanc e Cobolli Gigli. Archiviato il caso sulle provvigioni degli agenti. Anche per la Triade. 14/09/2010. La Stampa (17) Calciopoli, archiviata la posizione di Paparesta: un altro innocente nell’inchiesta calciopoli. 26/02/2008. Blogosfere. (18) F. Zagari. Ancora innocente. 10/06/2009. www.giulemanidallajuve.com (19) 29/09/2007. “Il sorteggio arbitrale non era truccato. La Corte d’Appello ha dato ragione a Bergamo e Pairetto diffamati da due articoli di giornale”. La Nazione (20) Dr.Zoidberg. Trova le differenze/1. 4 luglio 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/altri- scandali/279-trova-ledifferenze1.html (21) Dr.Zoidberg. Le plusvalenze fittizie. 29 Maggio 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/archivi/articoli/altriscandali/95-le-plusvalenze-fittizie.html (22) Dr.Zoidberg La legge spalma debiti. 29 Maggio 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/archivi/articoli/altriscandali/34-altri-scandali/97-la-legge-spalmadebiti.html (23) Dr.Zoidberg. La vendita del marchio. 30 Maggio 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/archivi/articoli/altriscandali/34-altri-scandali/96-la-vendita-del-marchio.html (24) Redazione. Bilanciopoli: patteggiamento e multarella per Inter e Milan. 12 Giugno 2008. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/archivi/articoli/altri-scandali/34-altri-scandali/508-bilanciopoli- patteggiamento-e-multarella-per-inter-e-milan.html (25) Dr.Zoidberg. Inter: la vera storia del passaporto di Recoba. 11 Maggio 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/altriscandali/87-inter-la-vera-storia-del-passaporto-di-recoba.html (26) Enzo Lombardo. Di cartone anche le pene. 10 Luglio 2010. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/altri-scandali/2226-dicartone-anche-le-pene.html (27) Dr.Zoidberg. Milan: Doping, sospetti e reticenze. 10 Maggio 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/altri-scandali/80-milan-doping-sospetti-e-reticenze.html (28) Pinobici. Per la gup di Milano i vertici Telecom sapevano. E per la Figc? 15 Giugno 2010. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/altri-scandali/2151-per-la-gup-di-milano-i-vertici-telecom- sapevano-e-per-la-figc.html (29) Redazione. La Procura di Napoli chiede 37 rinvii a giudizio. 10 Luglio 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/dossier/cantanapoli-il-processo/488-la-procura-di-napoli-chiede-37-rinvii-a- giudizio.html (30) Mario Incandenza. Calciopoli, rinvii a giudizio: Carraro e Ghirelli fuori dalla 'cupola'. 03 Ottobre 2008. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/dossier/cantanapoli-il-processo/646-calciopoli-rinvii-a-giudizio- carraro-e-ghirelli-fuori-dalla-cupola.html (31)Inunmondoche. Ecco per cosa è stato condannato Giraudo. 15 Dicembre 2009. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/dossier/cantanapoli-il-processo/1604-ecco-per-cosa-e-stato-condannato- giraudo.html (32) http://www.ju29ro.com/download.html (33) Mario Incandenza. Farsopoli, i testi d’accusa/1-5. Settembre 2010. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/dossier/cantanapoli-il-processo (34) Mario Incandenza. Il mio nome è Bond, Danilo Bond. 28 Maggio 2009. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/dossier/cantanapoli-il-processo/1231-il-mio-nome-e-bond-danilo-bond.html (35) Andy54. Coppola, gli inquirenti e il teorema Juve. 07 Dicembre 2009. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/dossier/cantanapoli-il-processo/1586-coppola-gli-inquirenti-e-il-teorema- juve.html (36) Dr.Zoidberg. Farsopoli 2 - Le schede svizzere: tutte le incongruenze. 08 Giugno 2007. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/farsopoli/73-farsopoli-2-le-schede-svizzere-tutte-le-incongruenze.html (37) Emilio Cambiaghi (Dr.Zoidberg). Piaccia o non piaccia, le telefonate ci sono.03 Aprile 2010. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/farsopoli/1873-piaccia-o-non-piaccia-le-telefonate-ci- sono.html (38) http://www.ju29ro.com/archivi/articoli/farsopoli.html?start=50 (39) Emilio Cambiaghi. Calciopoli: basta favole, è tempo di fatti.12 Aprile 2010. www.ju29ro.com - http://www.ju29ro.com/controinformazione/1910-calciopoli-basta-favole-e-tempo-di-fatti.html