Chapter 03 – I throw back question of provisional liberty of September 10 th 2001

The Apotheosis of mistakes, falsehoods and defamation

The reasons for this “order” were unlimited and the greatest imposture emerged, six pages of falsifications, manipulations and defamation. At the presentation of the request, I attached the Italian certificates, in which it could be deduced that I had never been condemned and wasn’t present in the investigated people’s list, to demonstrate that law and order would have not been disturbed!
Furthermore, as I had all my interests in the Principality, these were also all requested and the necessary guarantees; the answer to the request was a real logorrhoea of defamation and falsehood.
Here follows the unequivocal manipulation of investigations and falsification of documental truth, in order:
In the bank accounts managed by  the Banca del Gottardo, a zealous bank clerk and/or banker was not satisfied with the given declarations at the moment of the various deposits between April and May 1999 and had made a declaration to the SICCFIN closing the banking relationships with my office ,and this was an unusual procedure.
When I deposited  Renato Mangione’s funds, I dealt with Casillo, to whom I explained motivations and to whom I gave all banking receipts  about the derivation of funds, in withdrawn cash , at the Credit Foncier in Monaco and at the Monegasque Companies de Banque. Strangely such documentation was never pointed out or mentioned. In fact during the preliminary inquiry it had never emerged how Mangione had worked at the Monegasque Companies de Banque or at other banks with ciphered accounts.
This inquiry pointed out his “uselessness” as a businessman, which ignored the basic economical and law rules. Furthermore as a consequence some clients found themselves in very delicate fiscal and financial situations because of this incompetence. I think that such defamation is not worthy of comments, but just demonstrates his lowness and stinginess after 28 professional years according to his qualification and my professional excursus. DEFAMATION was one of his means of building the inquiry.
He admitted having used the clients’ funds in favour of other people, and of course the clients didn’t know about such situation .A judicial liquidation proceeding had been carried out and the office was unable to repay the clients.
Such pleasantry had never been declared in the verbal trials and all my clients got everything due to them, to the last Euro cent.
But this motivation hid the wicked plan to hound the office. In fact another proceeding took place thanks to Francesco Castellino’s subornation and bad faith: he was the only client out of 350 ! This person’s story is well documented in the File “The bankruptcy”, the accusatory plan was looking for every possible element even through creating false ones.
Iagher usurped the title of business consultant and claimed to handle tax evasion of Italian clients; it seems to be to his advantage his belonging to the Italian Masonry, as his relationships with the C.D.U. to raise money of uncertain provenance.
Obviously Hullin had never read my dossier at the Chamber of Commerce in Monaco, and didn’t inform himself formally to verify my shares which I had placed with certified copy.
About belonging to the Italian Masonry, I took up the matter with lawyer Pietro Muscolo in Genova, with whom I had established the Loggia and Libertà, inspired by Mazzini. After a brief parenthesis I again took up the matter with Prof. Giuliano Di Bernardo who made an observation about the ancient pillar of Masonic values summered up in a biblical expression: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s”. So there wasn’t any business collusion or anything similar, maybe he hoped to find my name in the notorious P2 list!!
Concerning my relationship with the C.D.U. and of which I felt myself honoured, I had only a professional relationship demonstrated through a trust letter, I had never collected money for anybody, in fact I organized a meeting on 20 November 2000 in Monaco. Various notables were present; it was about rights of European citizens. It’s obvious that everything was unknown to him and transgressed with impunity.
On page n. 2 he dilated on the offshore structures, and in such a way he and the police Inspector demonstrated that they weren’t informed and absolutely ignorant in the subject; he summed up the office activity as creating “untransparant” structures to dissimulate funds! Obviously they didn’t know that there is  “fiscal planning “. If only I had had such intention, I would have hidden the company and fiduciary files, this was a gratuitous mystification of documental truth. And now he approached the matter of Banca di Roma – Mobutu.
An International Rogatory from the Court in Rome , A. Sereni, was in progress , about a fraud committed by Mario Testa ( Director of the agency Roma 200 at the Banca di Roma) helped by some employees and R. Mangione and in the same way another Rogatory had been made by his office in Rome.
We became acquainted with such Rogatory only on 1 August 2002.
Only 24 pages out of 1400 had been outlined! The police Inspector went to Rome five times: on 11 June, on 3 July, on 14 and 15 and 16 October, and on 13 November 2001. Furthermore we discovered forgery on an inquiry made by D.I.A.
It was declared that Mangione and Testa availed of my services, that after having created  DAISY Ltd, I was helped by some bank tellers to make several documents to make the transfer of the Banca di Roma disappear into the personal accounts of the interested people.
Obviously the most natural aspect of this judge was to declare anything false. I had never declared to have known Mario Testa, as also already declared in the previous inquiry managed by Richet and the police Inspector Van de Corpus.
Furthermore, more times I declared but I had been never heard :as they had all files, it would have been easy to understand if Mario Testa really existed. His presence was completely unknown even to employees. All these facts were summered in two fax on 14 and 21 December 1998 for nine bank transfers on Mangione’s accounts, according to his instructions and everything happened openly through the documentation in name only of Mangione for and by Credit Foncier de Monaco.
The belated retraction, denying  knowledge of Testa is supported by the analysis of the documentation of DAISY Ltd and by declarations of some employees of the Credit Foncier de Monaco. Furthermore Mangione and Testa’s declarations according to the art. 391 bis e ter of the Italian C.P.P., are not considered as lawful but as personal declarations.
We are facing manipulation of documentation truth, from the company acts, the fiduciary contract, the correspondence, and accounts. The only name which appeared is Mangione’s . About Iotta and  Curti’s declarations , Iotta withdrew and denied what  she had previously declared during the trial in first instance and superior court. About Curti, even though she was summoned as a witness, she never appeared and there was never any confrontation with the judge, the reason was clear.
At the fourth page, there were other three alarming and dubious stories: he wrote about a fraud attempt in December 1999 against an agency of the Société General in Paris, to make credit on the office account about one million French francs. He declared that I refused myself to answer and that I gratified myself  affirming that a third person would have used the accounts details and that a rogatory commission was on progress in Paris.
Considering that in that period I was out of the Principality, I was in Martinique, it was obvious that I couldn’t personally do operations in Monaco. I was asked to me about the matter and, as I didn’t know what it was about, I asked that the documentation would be shown to me, and something dubious emerged. In fact the Société Generale should have done a transfer on the Fiduciary Ltd account n. 24639 to the Banca del Gottardo on 29 December 1999. But for some illogical intuition of some bank executive, it was charged to the IF Fiduciary Ltd that account n. 16322 and not to the office as it should have been.
Furthermore there had never been any relationship between the TAILLEUR Industries and my office or the IF Fiduciary Ltd.
From 22 March 2001 the Court in Paris had already closed the inquiry, but about this matter I didn’t never succeed in discovering the truth of facts. One note: at the beginning he declared that it was a fraud against the Red Cross, and then it emerged that it was the street of that agency of the Société Generale in Paris.
From the clients’ list it was established that he had created several different offshore companies for Mr. Giampiero Catone, he was known by the Italian police for fraud. The DENICRAFT Ltd had been used to try an anonymous transfer towards CESARINI Srl of about 2, 3 billion Italian Lira on 5 October 1999, that he had organized a meeting between Catone and the Minister Buttiglione in the Principality, that Catone was arrested and imprisoned on 9 May 2001 in Rome with other 5 people (two of them had been in Monaco) for fraud to the State subvention. In such inquiry the names of DENICRAFT Ltd and CESARINI Srl were mentioned. A second rogatory commission is on progress in Rome to clarify the various roles of Catone and Iagher.
The tone is constant; his inquiry style keeps on mystifying the facts or writing great mistakes. In fact it was sure that professional advice had been given to Prof. G. Catone. To be known by Italian police in a negative way (their typical style to label) until condemnation there is the presumption of innocence, but for this judge this is an unimportant juridical aspect. About an anonymous transfer, it would be nice to understand how to do it from a banking point of view. The planned meeting was not for Prof. G. Catone, but for the conference on 20 November 2001, with an excellent witness, the ex Director of the judicial services in Monaco and other Italian personalities and personalities in Monaco.
Concerning the arrest, it would have been better if he had read newspapers…it took place on 9 May 2001 at the restaurant Pergola in Legnago in the area of Verona and not in Rome. Concerning the rogatory I got no more news , it mysteriously vanished, and to understand relationships between Catone and Iagher it was sufficient to have a look at the documentation of the office archives.
It emerged that I held an account at the Banca del GOTTARDO under the name PACE Enterprises Ltd used to receive $ 500,000 in October 1997 through two code accounts RONE and TICE at the same bank. To this transaction another followed with different currency, and the holders’ code accounts, Salvatore IAVARONE (condemned many times in Napoli) and Carmine VORTICE, are both mentioned in Italy in connection to Licio GELLI; it’s important to underline that the PACE Enterprises Ltd, was closed within 48 hours of the arrest, all necessary clarifications about these relationships are on progress.
Even in this case it was necessary to ask oneself if he reported “some gossip” or if he read the facts, superficially extracting his mystifications, even from the banking documentation (see the account opening, signatures timecard, etc…). My name and signature didn’t appear anywhere and the effective managers were Fabio FRAPPI POLDINI and Gerard PASTOR and mail was at the last one’s address;
IAVARONE and VORTICE were two strangers and it seems to me impossible to close account considering the detention state.
One emphasis: this time the “zealous clerk” at the Banca del Gottardo had omitted to do any declaration to SICCFIN, see G. Tiberti.
At the fifth page investigations on the office activity allowed for the identification among the clients, some people who had bad activities, some of them were prosecuted for fraud in Monaco or anyway known by the different European police services. It was declared that I could guarantee for all clients, but I was unable to give clarifications to precise questions.
Concerning investigations, there would have been to discuss about the way they had been done, the form and in the drawn up reports, their partiality, and manipulations of truth which were of usual routine.
Helped by my lawyers, I didn’t succeed in finding out all the people who had strange and obscure activities. Furthermore for each client’s dossier, it was written by whom they were introduced, there was a summary of the activity and the name of the company. All these details were at investigators’ disposal but they couldn’t maybe read them. On 15 May 2002 we discovered that these people were:
Antonio CLEMENTE, who was prosecuted for fraud, introduced by Francesco GROSOLI, official at the HSBC in Monaco. Events were subsequent to his becoming client and his story has a lot of obscure aspects, after four detention months up today, he has not judged yet. It was said that a police inspector  had a grudge  against him.
Gaetano SANGIORGI who was prosecuted for murder, I had never known him even as a client, he was a total stranger.
Mario TESTA and Renato MANGIONE prosecuted for fraud. Only Mangione was my client and events happened after his becoming client.
Benoit CHATEL and Alain DEVERINI prosecuted for murder, disproved by the Rogatory which took place in Vienne and events happened after  DEVERINI became a client.
The brothers CATONE prosecuted for distraction about public works, events happened after Prof. CATONE became a client.
Daniele BIZZOZZERO prosecuted for criminal association in Italy, introduced by Monegasque Consul, Dr. Fiorenzo SQUARCIAFICHI, business consultant in Ventimiglia. What concerns his introducing and the activity in the car import export area, he had never caused suspicion.
So only these five names from list of 318 clients were many. It’s superfluous to add other comments.
Carrying on  with the story, two names drew attention,  Alain DEVERINI and Benoit CHATEL, owners of two companies, the PARAHI Ltd and the DOCKER IMPORT EXPORT Ltd, which were under English rights.
The two above mentioned people had been arrested in Vienne on 29 May 2001 for murder of two people from Zaire who were near the President MOBUTU. As regards the matter about Banca di Roma and Testa with Mangione, all investigations are justified; furthermore an international rogatory is on progress in Vienne.
This page became a bestseller among lawyers ! As DEVERINI was my client, and he would have taken part in the murder of the two people from Zaire who were expatriated and near the ex President Mobutu, it was sure that there was a connection to investigate .
Fortunately I hadn’t Arabian clients, because he would have added my complicity with Osama Bin Laden for the attempt on the Twin Towers in New York! He was totally disproved by rogatory!
At the sixth page to support the rejection, he added :
a) He had begun suspicious orders for clients and he didn’t wonder anything about such illegal facts, playing an active role to do recycling in the banks in Monaco.
b) He had seriously disturbed law and order even over borders; various investigations are necessary as he doesn’t want to explain himself reasonably and such investigations must be done in the Principality and abroad.
c) Considering relationships and qualities between involved people, it would be possible to think about a fraud planning with accomplices escaped abroad, and pressures on witnesses, and evident risks of destruction of real proof or clues.
d) As the office was on liquidation judicial state, I couldn’t face all duties I had with clients and all consequences joined with clients who had been robbed of their possessions.
e) He is predisposed to escape to Italy as he prides himself on having important supporters.
It’s superfluous to underline again all manipulations and mystifications of this investigation. The work which had been done for the clients was in the archives even though the documental truth had been manipulated.
To have disturbed “law and order” made me appear to be a rowdy person given to alcohol as hooligans; all investigations during the months showed only what he wanted, and everything emerged after the COMPLETE rogatory in Rome. All relationships and involved people with refuges abroad had never been clarified by this judge. About pressure made on witnesses, there were only two: one of them retracted and the other one hid thanks to institutional complicity. It was possible to destroy proof because they had free access to archives, so I couldn’t do anything, but I saved my computer archives up to 31 March 2001 to defend myself. The office was condemned thanks to somebody’s help, but anyway they couldn’t lie very much: Everybody had got what was due to them.
At the end the classic formulation that I could have escaped to Italy, helped thanks to important supporters.
In front of this logorrhoea accusatory with lawyers, it was decided to bring the first charge against this judge who was suffering from Jung’s syndrome, the “enantiodromia” overturn into the opposite.