VIDEO | Toti does not respond to the investigating judge. The lawyer requests the interrogation for next week

IN COURT THE IRA OF JOURNALISTS FOR SUDDEN AND “MSTERIOUS SIGNS”
Toti and his lawyer Stefano Savi were made to enter and exit through side entrances of the Court, arousing the anger of the press who were crowded in front of the entrance to the Palace of Justice. The Ligurian Press Association also complained in an official note that “journalists were prevented from accessing the third floor of the Court during the interrogation, with the appearance of mysterious signs with the writing work in progress shortly before the president’s arrival.” A fact considered “very serious: no one can stop journalists from doing their job”.
THE UNKNOWN ABOUT THE RESIGNATION
At least an hour after leaving the Palace, Savi then returned to speak in front of microphones and cameras. And he explained that “we made use of it with good reason, saying that we are reading the file, which is quite substantial, there are around nine thousand pages and cannot be read in two days. And we have already informed the public prosecutors present of ask for questioning for next week.” The lawyer added that only “subsequently will we also ask for the modification of the precautionary measure because there are needs of a personal nature, but also of a direct confrontation with the world of politics so that President Toti decides which positions to take”. Translated, Toti “is thinking about resigning, but it is a decision that a person inserted in a political context certainly cannot take alone, without having a discussion“, specifies the lawyer. In short, “it is a political decision, which is up to him, but which he will be able to take only after having discussed himself with the people with whom he has worked up to now and the parties that support him. In the state in which he is now all this cannot be done. Now he wants to defend himself and become a free person again.” Therefore, he summarizes, “now we do the interrogation, which is a procedural fact and may have its own relevance, then we ask for the measure to be modified and we will see what will happen”. If the investigating judge rejects the request, it will go to review.

THE LAWYER: “OPEN A DEBATE ON HOW POLITICS IS FINANCED”
The lawyer then answers a series of questions on how his client is feeling at the moment: “It is clear that these are experiences that leave their mark, humanly one can understand that. I found him well, he is very committed to his desire to defend himself, very committed to reading this file because it is his intention to offer a defensive reconstruction to the public prosecutors who give an explanation of the facts alleged against us.” And he reiterates that “he claims political activity was carried out in the open. He is not accused of having taken anything for himself, all the financing was obtained in accordance with the law, it was traced and is accounted for and there are no profiteering of a personal nature. He believes that his way of doing politics has always pursued public and local goals, such as the mandate entrusted to him”. Of course, Savi admits, “the methodologies used could be a source of discussion. But here it will also be the case to open a debate at a national level on how politics is financed because there are paths that must be compared with reality. With a clear conscience, Toti probably considered himself capable of saying anything, even something that, read in retrospect, may appear inappropriate.”