CONCLUSIONS
“Certainty of my full honesty holds me up, astonishment for this misdeed or mistake, or plot, or
I don’t know what. I only know that I’m innocent.
I want, I must live until when I hear it pronounced. Then I'll be past caring “  
Enzo TORTORA from “ Dear Silvia, letters to not forget”.

The oppressive persecution of this judge has gone beyond unthinkable and carried on for year’s with impunity, thanks to the help of French magistrates in the Principality of Monaco. The concept of serious guilty and justice denied, the first abstract definition must be understood as “ under the influence of such great mistake that a magistrate who normally worries about his duties, can’t let himself get involved”. This definition appeared more times in verdicts of the French Supreme Court of Appeal ( Justice et responsabilité de l’Etat - Mayrise Deguerge).

To give shape to the “LEGAL SUSPECT” there are several examples about “GREAT MISTAKES” or …. About evident forgeries :In his ordonnance :

1) PACE Enterprises Ltd, owner account, closed within 48 hours from arrest
2) Usurpation of the professional role as commercial law expert ( already registered in the commercial law expert roll in Rome n. 1469  
3) Where is it written that I offered my professional experience to Testa , as in the process of  verbal trials I always declared that I didn’t know him
4) Where did he read the name Testa in the DAISY Ltd documents?  
5) The planned meeting on 20 November 2000 for the conference with Minister’s BUTTIGLIONE presence, a supposed funds collection with illegal origin
6)  PACE Enterprises Ltd had a bank account at the Banca of Gottardo which I closed within 48 hours following detention
7) How many are the other figures that had badly defined activities?
8) Which are the half-a-dozen inquiries about the clients?
9) The date of transfers to the U.B.S. was before “ some days after detention”

IN THE “ COMMITMENT FOR TRIAL ON 15 MAY 2002” :

1) MINNIE’s s.c.i. members structure with fictitious names
2) According to the Banca del Gottardo’s manager, Giuliano Lanza had omitted to verify , the receipts of Credit Foncier de Monaco and of Compagnie Monegasque de Banque.
3) In GROSOLI’s declarations, of the Bank HSBC, the tone is different and reported in the opposite way.
4) What are the names of the 40 offshore companies deriving from the fictitious commercial activity ?  
5) How was the proceeding of the companies accounts with the only purpose to dissimulate funds ? Where are the real elements of such declaration? 
6) In the clients’ list, where did he find the names of SANGIORGI and TESTA ?   
7) Where is it proved that I belonged to the “Great Italian Banditry” ?  
8) Where did he read my name in the international rogatory in Paris or the details of the IF FIDUCIARY Ltd ?
 

ROGATORIES :

1) The international Rogatories in Rome and Vienne (France) were on progress on 28 November 2001, but they were put into effect on the 20th day of the same month.
2) In the International Rogatory in Rome it was declared that I had a professional relationship with Testa.
3) In the international rogatory in Lugano I was accused of defalcation and bankruptcy.  
 

In this plan of judge Hullin’s falsify actions, the lawyer Maurizio MASCIA wrote :

“ The common denominator of all these immutabilities of truth cannot be considered simple imprecision’s or neglect in an objective and reasonable way. It seems the desperate need of somebody who has badly planned and carried out an inquiry to avoid consequences harmful to himself and the state on which he depends….”

 

It seems that he was executing an order as the “LETTRE DE CACHET”, through which monarchies (or the caste) settled inconvenient matters.

On page 191 on the book “ Monaco et le Blanchiment, Mission de l'Assemblée Nazionale sur la délinquance financière , President Vincent Peillon e Rapporteur Aranud Montebourg “ a judge declared : “ If Italian police and judicial authorities are not taken by the hand, they don’t carry out investigations ”

What have Ministry of justice and  Ministry of the Interior done, in front of such a gratuitous declaration?    

Furthermore what was declared about human rights by the European Court on 4 February 2003, perplexes : the verdict on 4 February 2003 CDEH, “ an amalgam of a fictitious and anonymous request , omissis… that Court doesn’t want to examine and register omissis…. According to such verdict, seven judges of the European Court for the human rights, condemned as they were delirious, offensive and without foundation omissis…Jean-Cristophe HULLIN omissis.. And others”.

And always under “ LEGAL SUSPECT”:
An article appeared in the paper Nice Matin on 29 September 2002 whose title was
“ Justice doesn’t fall under influence ”. The ex manager of justice services Patrice Davost, declared that he observed the good execution of international rogatories and to conclude business rapidly…”. How can he justify Hullin’s falsehood about rogatories ? The verdicts which would have been reached in the next hours had taken in the further 2,496 hours to reach , what’s the meaning of rapid time ? On 26 February 2003 during an interview with HEBDO MONACO, he repeated that “ rogatories have been followed rapidly and completely “. How can he explain the only registered  24 pages instead of the 1400 pages obtained by the prosecutor’s office in Rome ? It must be underlined that justice in Monaco is empowered and independent … functions are individual but decisions have been reached together with other motivated decisions “.
Which were the facts that convinced, when many times it was demonstrated that they were false and/or manipulated? And which law has been applied as ideological falsehood and forgeries have been endorsed ?
In an article which appeared on 7 December 2003 in the paper Liberation, DAVOST who came back to France to the Superior Council in Paris, in an indictment against Judge Jean-Louis Voirain, claims the heaviest disciplinary penalty for not having fulfilled his duties of honesty, independence and fairness.

IDEOLOGICAL FORGERIES AND JUDGE HULLIN's FORMAL AND SUBSTANTIAL MISTAKES , THE EX MANAGER OF LAW SERVICES DAVOST IN MONACO, HOW ARE they CONSIDERED :

It would be good to read again : “ La conception francaise de la déontologie des  magistrats” by Gui CANIVET, President of the Court de Cassation.

I can conclude saying :
Who ever reads these pages can make comments and reflections. I prefer to conclude reporting what Enzo Tortora wrote : “ It is terrible that Justice believes rascals. My rebellion is not against Justice, as somebody thought. My rebellion is in favour of Justice. It is to liberate it ”.
Francesco IAGHER , April 2 nd 2001. February 29 th 2004