Juve’s defense brief: ‘The FIGC public prosecutor’s office does not take into account significant interceptions’. Here’s what | First page

Juventus didn’t agree and counterattacked: the FIGC prosecutor’s office didn’t take relevant interceptions into account. This is what emerges from defensive memory of the Juventus club, presented for the appeal to the FIGC Court last Friday, in which you can read some excerpts from the conversation between Stefano Bertolaat the time the club’s accounting officer, e Federico Cherubinithen manager of the market area.

“No no, there is no intention…” it’s still: “Malicious no. If they’re what they’re looking for, they won’t find anything, they won’t find anything“, says Bertola in an interception regarding the alleged capital gains, which is placed in the context of the Consob inspection, referring to a conversation on July 15, 2021, as reported Calcioefinanza.it.

The conversation thus begins on the part of Cherubini: “But in my opinion, from the spirit it seems that what they (Consob inspectors, ed) are looking for is to understand where there is… as if there has been a clear overestimation, as if among the our cards were there I don’t know… look, Pjanic is worth 20 but we sell it for 50, as if there was an awareness of that… I believe that this… every time there has been an attribution of a value, I repeat it may also have been done more or less correctly, it wasn’t like that…”. Bertola’s first answer is: “No no, there is no intent…”.

Interrupted by Cherubini who says: “Here I am Roby”, then Bertola continues with the rest of the sentence quoted initially. Juve’s defensive memory, in this regard, speaks of “improper ‘transfer’ of the results of telephone and environmental interceptions, wherever you want to fathom its very partial content. One cannot fail to point out, even if only by way of example – the statement continues – that the federal prosecutor’s office does not report in its deed the content of a very significant interception between Cherubini and Bertola on 15 July 2021, of which the Guardia di Finanza in its annotation does not report the very significant final part in terms of non-existence of the offense (criminal and, as far as relevant here, sporting)”.