The day after Acerbi’s acquittal, the fuss raised is such that it is still difficult to keep one’s eyes wide open to understand how we arrived at this decision that few expected.
THE SITUATION
—
It is therefore worth trying to provide some clarity, treating the topic purely from the point of view of sporting justice, neglecting the social, political, opportunity and image aspects of this difficult story. It should be remembered that what happened between Francesco Acerbi and Juan Jesus in the second half of the Inter-Napoli match on 17 March was assessed as per practice by the Sports Judge who, hoping to have more elements to express his opinion, asked the Federal Prosecutor’s Office for a supplementary investigation. Chinè and his team worked for four intense days, acquiring as many images as possible and listening to the protagonists of the clash. On Saturday morning, all the documentation collected was sent to the Judge who made his decision two days ago, acquitting the Inter defender.
PREPARED
—
Let’s start with the auditions. Although apparently the two limited themselves to reiterating the versions put forward in the previous days (“Never uttered racist phrases”, Acerbi; “He told me you’re just a black man”, Juan Jesus), the comparisons with the head of the Prosecutor’s Office Figc Giuseppe Chinè were very different. The Inter fan connected from Appiano Gentile with the CEO next to him. Beppe Marotta and the club’s lawyer Angelo Capellini. Acerbi spent some time with the latter between his return from the national team retreat and the audition. Hours spent studying the best defensive strategy, which obviously started from denying every discriminatory word, but which allowed the player to be ready to answer every question from an expert magistrate like Chinè, certainly on the lookout for possible contradictions in the reconstruction. Hours in which it was also decided not to deny the insult (we are talking about the famous “I’ll make you black”), but to admit it in all its “offensive and threatening” nature, as stated in the Judge’s dispositive, but not such which could be considered “seriously unsportsmanlike conduct”, a violation which would have led to at least two days of suspension. In short, Acerbi was definitely prepared.
ALL ALONE
—
Juan Jesus much less. The player wanted to complete this journey alone, relying solely on his agent Roberto Calenda, without considering the assistance of a Napoli lawyer necessary. Probably he was so convinced of his truth, so certain that they would have no difficulty in believing him, that he approached the audition with a light heart. A good naivety, which from a human point of view can only be appreciated, but when codes and lawyers are involved it is better to be very careful. Let’s take the moment of signing the minutes: in these cases a similar document must be read more than once before signing it, without being frightened by the legal terminology and making sure that everything, down to the last comma, corresponds to your declarations. Without a lawyer at his side, would Juan Jesus have managed to verify everything in such an important document, written among other things in a language that is not his? He was certainly asked if there wasn’t a companion who could confirm his version. He probably hadn’t even put much effort into looking for it (a lawyer would undoubtedly have worked on it) and he candidly said no. A question that must have surprised the prosecutor and the judge, given that the dispositive reads: «The discriminatory content, without calling into question the good faith of the Napoli player, appears to have been perceived only by the “offended” player, without therefore the support of any external evidentiary evidence, whether audio, video or even testimonial”. Behind that “even” there is also the Judge’s desire to underline that little would have been enough, even a clue such as the word of a companion, to have a different outcome.
NOT EVEN A CLUE
—
After all, it is precisely the lack of clues, rather than evidence, that led to Acerbi’s full acquittal. It is clear that if an audio or video capable of ascertaining the Nerazzurri’s racist insult had been found, the “at least ten days of disqualification” provided for in article 28 of the Sports Justice Code on “discriminatory behavior” would have been immediately carried out. ”. It is also true that in the past there have been cases – the one that is talked about most often these days is the disqualification of Santini from Padova for racist insults against Mawuli from Sambenedettese – in which the discriminatory gesture was punished with ten rounds of stop even in the absence of certain evidence, but there was at least a clue, such as the testimony of a comrade we have already spoken about. Judge Mastrandrea was clear on this in his ruling. In fact, he writes that it is necessary that “the imposition of such burdensome sanctions is correspondingly assisted by a minimum amount of evidence, or at least by serious, precise and consistent evidence in order to reach a reasonable certainty in this regard”, underlining the absence of an “external, direct and indirect evidentiary and circumstantial support, including testimonial support”. So there are missing clues. To the point of «not reaching the minimum level of reasonable certainty regarding the certainly discriminatory content of the offense committed». And so, legally speaking, the acquittal is justified.
