"We express ourselves with the judgments of courts," said the President of the Court of Assizes Justin Gatti, but, unfortunately, and betraying his speech, said in an interview that before the morning of May 18 2007. And the interview, but my short memory, marks an unfortunate news: never a judge had failed to publicly criticize their colleagues to be reformed on appeal his sentence, let alone what is occurred before they were deposited the reasons or even that the sentence was passed in res judicata (an opportunity, in this case, there was the ruling by the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Naples, which was reduced the penalty to the accused of the murder of poor Annalisa Durante excluding the aggravating circumstance under Article. 7 L. 203/91).
"repeat the same sentence, do not change my mind ... waiting to read the motivations of colleagues, but I remain convinced of my choices ... I'm curious, as I said, curious and perplexed in attending the motivation."
Now that our good President is curious is fact of human nature and there is also pleased to learn from the newspapers. Then he is also "perplexed" the decision of the Judges of the Court of Assizes of Appeal and that this "confusion" He should give cognizance public to leave, this time, we really perplexed. Even more so when we read then, by His word, that "there is an appeal hearing, the trial lasted a month ... then I want to emphasize one thing: the problem dell'aggravante the mafia there are a thousand times and in places we do not can be deleted. Even in light of the pardon, that our enlightened legislature to ensure those who commit a murder like that. "
Beyond the latter Incidentally, in itself, is of enormous gravity because a judge is saying publicly, however, ironic take on the Legislature, having recognized the existence of an aggravating circumstance exists also in order to deprive the applicability, in this case, a benefit, such as amnesty for the accused, standing a betrayal of the premise: "we express ourselves with the judgments of courts."
Bravo President, why did not limit his right to express themselves and severe sentence? Does creating, at least, uncomfortable with the interview? Or maybe it is all too aware of? I guess, of course, a good journalist has requested also to the appellate court any reply to his comments. But I want to imagine a more serene appeal court that a journalist has denied any reply: he, yes, it will just talk ... with the sentence! Even the Minister of Justice Mastella, on the morning of May 19, 2007, has annotated with dignity: "I can not but respect the autonomy and independence of the exercise of jurisdiction" ... President meditate, meditate.
"repeat the same sentence, do not change my mind ... waiting to read the motivations of colleagues, but I remain convinced of my choices ... I'm curious, as I said, curious and perplexed in attending the motivation."
Now that our good President is curious is fact of human nature and there is also pleased to learn from the newspapers. Then he is also "perplexed" the decision of the Judges of the Court of Assizes of Appeal and that this "confusion" He should give cognizance public to leave, this time, we really perplexed. Even more so when we read then, by His word, that "there is an appeal hearing, the trial lasted a month ... then I want to emphasize one thing: the problem dell'aggravante the mafia there are a thousand times and in places we do not can be deleted. Even in light of the pardon, that our enlightened legislature to ensure those who commit a murder like that. "
Beyond the latter Incidentally, in itself, is of enormous gravity because a judge is saying publicly, however, ironic take on the Legislature, having recognized the existence of an aggravating circumstance exists also in order to deprive the applicability, in this case, a benefit, such as amnesty for the accused, standing a betrayal of the premise: "we express ourselves with the judgments of courts."
Bravo President, why did not limit his right to express themselves and severe sentence? Does creating, at least, uncomfortable with the interview? Or maybe it is all too aware of? I guess, of course, a good journalist has requested also to the appellate court any reply to his comments. But I want to imagine a more serene appeal court that a journalist has denied any reply: he, yes, it will just talk ... with the sentence! Even the Minister of Justice Mastella, on the morning of May 19, 2007, has annotated with dignity: "I can not but respect the autonomy and independence of the exercise of jurisdiction" ... President meditate, meditate.
0 comments:
Post a Comment