[ad_1]
The Sampdoria from Massimo ferrero hired a film company, the Vici Srl managed by his daughter Vanessa, paying € 1,159,000 to renovate the club’s sports facilities in Bogliasco. Subsequently, the same company used part of the sums to cover the debts of four other companies of the “Viperetta” business group, as the Sampdoria boss is known. These elements, however, did not convince the gup Alessandro Arturi who considered the investigation of the Public Ministry of Rome “incomplete contradictory me insufficient“Take Ferrero to court. For this reason, the gup decided to acquit the Roman businessman. The judge, in the 35 pages with which he motivates the sentence, writes that it is legitimate to ask whether it was “the operation of to transfer of capital for the extinction of debts of third companies, to underpin a distracting behavior of the coffers of Vici-Eleven Finance “. Therefore, with” the displacement of the center of gravity of the accusatory approach towards the different gravitational pole constituted by the relations between company that disburses the amount of 1 million and 159 thousand euros and the beneficiaries (Farvem, Cgcs, Film 9 and V Production) “would have implied” more direct knowledge to verify the existence of advantages. “But this was not done.
The survey on financial flows of the “Viperetta” – Acrobatic President Dorian was charged with fraudulent statement, carwash and scam because it would have subtracted 1 million 159 thousand euros from the coffers of Sampdoria, or part of the sum from the sale of Pedro Obiang, the Equatorial Guinean midfielder, sold for 6.5 million euros to West Ham in the summer of 2015. According to the Roman prosecution, that money would have been used by Ferrero, in competition with his daughter Vanessa, his nephew Giorgio and two others mens. of confidence, to cover the losses of its companies that were in “risky exposures of debt”. Sampdoria signs a contract with Vici for the “Gloriano Mugnaini” sports center in Bogliasco. The works include “a new sportsmen’s residence, the rehabilitation of the training grounds and the first team, and the construction of new changing rooms.” All the operations that, however, do not fall within the main business della Vici, specialized in the field of cinema. Of the accounts of the latter there are 17 bank drafts, for a total of 805 thousand euros to Livinston Spa, managed by Ferrero, which would have served to cancel the loan granted by Farvem Real Estate, another Viperetta company. Then there are the 102 thousand euros earmarked for the Cinematographic and Development Management Circuit (CGCS), and two transfers of 110 thousand euros to Film 9 Srl and V Production Srl.
The “incomplete and incomplete” survey – Taking into account the private agreement between Sampdoria and Ferrero’s daughter’s company, signed on June 6, the gup Arturi explains that Vici acts as “general contractor“, With the task of”find leading companies in the market and qualified professionals who will be in charge of designing and executing the sports complex works ”. In addition, Vici itself will join the Eleven Finance, another Ferrero company, which among its functions has the task of managing, buying and selling real estate owned or owned by others. And “does not prove anything,” says the gup, the fact that it was then Sampdoria that directly entrusted the tasks to two other construction companies to carry out the work. Then the operation appears legal. Analyzing the documents, the testimonies of those who later carried out the work, Judge Arturi evaluated the accusatory plan “incomplete and incomplete “, which would be based” exclusively on statements that, although legitimized by Undisputed profiles of perplexity obtained from the singular timing of financial flows between companies of the same business group, appear excessively hasty and apodictic ”. However, the gup writes, “the singular chronological scan of payment“It is adjusted with millimeter precision in the term for the payment of the debts” of the companies of the president of Sampdoria, but “the hypothetical alternative reconstruction of the financial operation within the Ferrero group would not legitimize” the accusation, because it cannot proceed to lack of complaint.
[ad_2]
