Zarate case, here is the dispute of Canio-Lotito that triggered everything. Lazio’s number one was deferred and sentenced, now … | First page


The service of the Hyenas on Lotito-Zarate has not yet aired but has nevertheless opened the Pandora’s box. The editorial staff of the popular Mediaset show decided to postpone until June 2 the broadcast of the reportage which reveals the alleged irregularities on the payment of the former Lazio striker, now at Boca Juniors, to allow the maximum Biancoceleste manager the right of reply, waiting to listen to all the parts it is right to take a step back.THE ACCUSATIONS OF DI CANIO – Exactly on March 13, 2011, when Paolo Di Canio, former Lazio player and then TV commentator for Mediaset, was the first to raise the fuss over the real cost of Zarate. He did so, at the end of a derby won 2-0 by Roma, in a TV connection with Lotito, who accused of having invested 37 million euros for the tip. “You think of Di Canio being a player and not talking about economic analysis, since he is not informed and does not know what he says”, commented Lotito, finding Di Canio’s immediate reply: “I know very well what I say, I have read the balance sheets and have spent 21 million plus 14.9 transactions, you are also investigated for this, do not allow yourself to say that I am a liar “. Lotito threatened a summons for damages, for a false declaration in public, which did not have its effect: “I say this to point out the mismanagement of the company that spent € 37 million on a player who is overrated” Di Diio closed.

SENTENCED LOTITUS – Di Canio’s statements prompted the Federal Prosecutor to open an investigation, which led, in February 2012, to the referral of Lazio and Lotito, which was then inhibited by the Disciplinary Commission of the Football Federation for 10 months (with a fine of 80 thousand euros for Lazio) , a sentence that on August 28, 2012 was reduced on appeal to two months (with a fine to Lazio reduced to 20 thousand euros). The reason? Having paid the commissions to a company (Pluriel) rather than to a natural person as required by the regulation. The new, burning, revelations of Ruzzi and the new elements available to the Federal Prosecutor’s Office, which opened an investigation, (even the ordinary one could move), if confirmed, they could lead to much heavier charges: tax evasion, tax fraud and false accounting. Which provides for a sentence of up to six years in prison.

Source link


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here