A tweet from Dalli’s press conference in Brussels
Published:
October 24, 2012 at 6:22pm
Berlaymonster@Berlaymonster
I fear #Dalli might be losing the PR battle. If not his marbles. Shame. Could have made for an interesting court case. Inasmuchas any are…
73 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Dalli was framed by both Kessler and Barri Leli Barroso I think they were bribed to do so so the tabbaco directive will not come in force as it so happened ad Barri Barroso already said it will be negocaited in 2 years time Iam sure he had some help from Dalli enemy in Malta
Makak, You make me think of Winston Churchill, who said something along the lines of …. One believes in democracy until one spends five minutes talking to an average voter… In your cases not even five minutes…
I heard that OLAF need a chief investigator. I suggest you apply for the post, Makak. You seem to be experienced in the field.
Oh, but first make sure to learn how to spell “negocaited”
Unless Makak improves his spelling, the next OLAF investigation report may find “unambiguous circumcised evidence…”
Jekk inti makak, kittieb tajjeb ma tantx int…
You have a point, Makak. And there’s something else to consider about Dalli enemy in Malta.
Don’t forget that OLAF(Gollcher) was a keen and determined tobacco user. His family came to Malta from Sweden. Get the connection?
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Ara sirtu vera redikoli b’dawn il-hafna conspiracy theories li huma kollha foloz.
What beautiful syntax and lucidity.
I’m sorry?
For a moment, I read “tabbaco” as “Tabasco”. I need third dose of coffee now’
I di agree with you. This is not the EU that we wanted because I never expected this from high officials to Frame Commissioner Dalli, Hope he wins the law suit so we can get rid of these people, Shame Shame Shame for all those involved in this frame up.
And Elvis Lives in Levis and is part of the Evil Click bent on World Domination by bringing down Saint John Dalli through his sidekick the Imqaret Maker.
Please.
Assisted in his grotto by lil Din and Labour’s lil’ elves.
You’re right, makak, and then they framed Roger Rabbit.
Not really – it is rather a ‘Whodunit’ experience. The mystery here is, who are we going to believe, John Dalli, OLAF or Barroso?
We shall not be able to predict or rather judge, this ‘After dinner mystery theatre’ until the OLAF report is brought to light.
Meanwhile, we should NOT point fingers.
A board game shall be available this Christmas .
What do people find so difficult to understand?
It is clear that Zammit traded in influence using Dalli’s name.
Zammit is linked to Dalli as a canvasser. Isn’t that a resigning matter on its own? How can you trust a commissioner with links to, at the very least, a conman.
Dalli lost the PR battle, fullstop.
If I were him I would just hide at Peppi’s in disguise and stuff myself with mqaret while wondering how I could have spent my share of the 60 million I never got.
Maybe the last 60 million never gotten. How are we to know what went on previously? Il-garra gejja w sejra sa flahhar tinkiser, u Dalli ghandu CV qawwija fuq tbazwir iehor.
That’s precisely why OLAF officials started resigning.
€9,000 monthly pension aint bad though, he can buy as much snus as he likes with that,eat at Peppi’s every night with his entire family and still have change.
He should be careful though, because if he loses his €9,000 monthly pension because of his ongoing nonsense, he will join the starving Maltese and resort to buying the odd loaf of bread and a tin of tuna – like the fare enjoyed by so many during the bulk-buying days.
There seems to be no doubt that Silvio Zammit asked for a bribe; no one, not even Dalli, is denying it.
The whole contention is whether Dalli knew what was going on and, given the friendship the two men had, I find it hard to believe that Zammit would keep something like this to himself.
What if Swedish Match had played along and really paid him the first €10 million? How was he going to explain that to Dalli and get him to change the directive?
Spot on !
No, if OLAF interviewed him twice, they must have told him what the investigation was all about and Dalli could very easily have put one and one together.
Rest assured that if Swedish Match had paid any money, Mr Dalli would have received a sizable cut because by his own words, if I am not mistaken, he said that ‘taking such a risk (receiving a bribe) the reward would have had to be large enough to compensate him for the automatic loss of his EU career’.
This is just one example which proves that the best thing for him now, is to shut up, although in my opinion, he has already said too much and to the wrong people.
Dalli is not denying it, but he’s hasn’t done anything about it, either.
If he really didn’t know what was happening, why hasn’t he sued Zammit for misrepresenting him?
How come that when, as we read, there is no doubt that Zammit asked for a kickback, even more how come everyone is accusing Zammit of smuggling and selling snus illegally, and yet no action has as yet been taken by the police?
Sounds fishy. It makes me suspicious.
Is he being protected by someone, as it is intended to use him as a witness against Dalli, in the event there is a court case?
But even more important, are these accusations against him true/ or just a smoke screen?
At the end of this saga, this could prove to be quite lucrative to some.
I think the point is not even that. If Dalli knew, he was breaking the law by not reporting.
Even if Dalli did not know, he is a commissioner linked to someone who is trading in influence.
That is politically untenable at a European level. I guess in Malta it is not, and that is why many people cannot get round to accepting what has happened.
This was on The Times: http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20121024/local/olaf-supervisory-board-head-resigns-in-new-twist-to-dalligate.442473
Why didn’t you quote this very lucid blog post from Berlaymonster last week? It’s the very sort of thing you probably would have written if you didn’t have an axe to grind.
http://berlaymonster.blogspot.com.es/2012/10/unfair-dismissal-without-dismissal-nor.html
[Daphne – Ms Jones, your escalating aggression in the cause of Mr Dalli causes me to believe that you are the one with an axe to grind. It’s always a bit of a give-away when people begin by saying that they don’t a hold a brief for the person concerned, and then go on to argue as though he is their brother/lover/best friend/business associate. I tend not to quote anonymous stuff. I like to put things into context. The medium is the message as they say.]
Whoever writes Berlaymonster (possibly a friend of Kev) apparently changed their mind between 18 and 24 October.
He was playing with sharks. The tobacco industry is worth billions. They can get their way whenever they want to.
Although it’s not the same, this really reminds me of the movie The Informer!
[Daphne – HE was playing with sharks?]
Paul and Shark – when Paul Borg Olivier meets the man from Qormi.
It takes a shark to know a shark.
John Dalli is now relying on the support of Joseph Muscat. On the other hand if Muscat supports openely Dalli against Barroso, Muscat will face consequences when he is elected Prime Minister. We wait for the next move by Joseph Muscat.
Joseph Muscat the ‘Cheshire cat’?
http://berlaymonster.blogspot.com/2012/10/bm-caption-competition-update-dalli.html
Somehow I believe that the more he digs the more he will ruin himself and I wonder whether all this frustration now is for losing his job or for losing the €60,000,000. Or both.
It looks like Maoist Barroso is warning Dalli to mind his “Peas and Ques” and be silent or else he will have a symbolic Jack Ruby type character put Lee Harvey Dalli in the deep freeze.
It would be so handy for the EU commission to have Lee Harvey Dalli out of the way so they can hold a Warren type commission and lump the blame 100% on a non vocal Dalli.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20121024/local/barroso-tells-dalli-to-behave-with-dignity.442446
How about updates on Bilderberg, Trilateral, Davos, NAFTA, IOR, Freemasons, Illuminati, and also Blackfriars Bridge ?
I do not care to write anything about those subjects but here is a cool video concerning Blackfriar’s Bridge in 1896.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fABILtla_lE
While we seem to be at each other’s thoats, read this:
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20121024/world/france-offers-peugeot-state-rescue.442389
Therefore, Gonzi was right to resolve and save OUR National Pride, Air Malta.
HOT from youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cna-8jBBoQ&feature=youtube_gdata
1. He starts his interview by stating: “I have never been offered any money, by anyone, to alter any issue that I am responsible for, including this case of snus, either directly or indirectly…”
As Daphne had observed, Dalli never states that he did not ask for any money.
2. Dalli repeats that the young lawyer who visited him on 6 January only asked questions about snus. The circumstances of this meeting did not convince the journalists, and it does not convince me.
Are these people aware that the indecent haste with which the OLAF report was forwarded, in part only, to Barroso without the appropriate scrutiny by its supervisory board has now caused the resignation of Cristiaan Timmermans, the head of OLAF’s supervisory board? Doesn’t this shock resignation mean anything to them?
Basically it is only Silvio Zammit who can unravel this saga.
That same Silvio who was assisted in being accepted as a candidate for the Sliema Local Council by Dalli and was, according to Sliema residents, assisted by Robert Arrigo into almost getting the top job.
I think you are wrong on the Robert Arrigo comment
According to Frankfurter Allegemeine Zeitung, OLAF handed over to the Antifraud Co-ordinating Services (Afcos) only ten out forty pages of its mysterious report against Dalli. May we ask what was the purpose behind this large concealment not only from victim Dalli but also from Afcos?
The whole process stinks to high heaven.
My heart weeps for “victim Dalli”. golden handshake and all.
Taf x’qed nghid? Ahna l-veru boloh! Biskuttini f’halq il-hmir!
B’din il-materja prima kollha, ahna jmissna jbighu l-iscripts ghall-film…
‘The chairman of the OLAF supervisory board, Christiaan Timmermans, has resigned over alleged breach of procedure in the office’s handling of the John Dalli case, according to reports in Germany and the Netherlands.’
May justice prevail and may the wicked ones be shamed in public, for ever and ever.
Has it ever occurred to you that the art of spin is not the exclusive trait of the Maltese?
Is Franco Debono writing for Maltastar? Same grammatical mistakes.
http://www.maltastar.com/…/20121024-dalli-denies-ever-meeting-swedish-...
Probably, maryanne. Wait for tomorrow.
‘In a blockbuster announcement today, Franco Debono announces that he is a very sad man who has nothing to live for other than drawing attention to himself’.
Has anyone asked him/herself how much would it cost Mr Dalli to file and carry out a libel suit of the order he is threatening the Commission and Swedish Match with?
If goes ahead with his small-time-politico plans where is the money coming from to sustain two such massive law suits?
Indeed he’s been ‘exiled’ in a very lucrative order but would that be enough to take on big tobacco and the European Commission in one go?
Only the likes of Berlusconi can sustain such a financial commitment…..so……is John Dalli in such extravaganza?
As already highlighted elsewhere that MLP-Dalli-JPO-FD-JM are indeed the EVIL CLIQUE, is it a surprise to conclude that the vile attack on RCC was their doing, at precisely the same time in which Dalli was being investigated.
Kemm int baby, John – qisek Franco Debono.
And what about Silvio Zammit?
Fejn hi rasu?
Baqa bla kummenti ta’ xejn?
“A Single Spark Can Light a Prairie Fire” – Chinese Proverb
I think Mr. John Dalli was that spark.
Daphne, take a look at page 2 of the Times today.Pony -theft man defended by Franco Debono. Now we know where he got those ponies from.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20121025/local/Dalligate-as-seen-on-Twitter.442487
On available evidence it is fair to conclude that Barroso dismissed Dalli summarily on the strength of an incomplete report (10 out of 40 pages) that should not have been in his possession prior to scrutiny by the Anti-Fraud Co-Ordinating Service. That is either incompetence or knavery.
[Daphne – No, Dr Saliba, boiled down to its essence, he dismissed him for associating with criminals and unsavoury characters and giving them access.]
You mean, not personally guilty but guilty by association! Few would escape “guilt” by your standard.
[Daphne – No, my goodness! He shouldn’t have had friends and associates like that and granted them access. Let me just put it in terms you will understand, because of your past work. Let’s say a cabinet minister in Malta has a very unsavoury henchman, a person with a reputation for being involved in the illegal drugs trade. Should that cabinet minister be hanging around with him, confiding in him, having meetings at his shop, and granting him access to his office? OF COURSE NOT. It would constitute a sacking offence, at least anywhere other than Malta. People in powerful positions just can’t have bad friends and associates or let them ‘in’. End of story. They are not guilty by association but guilty FOR ASSOCIATING.]
By the same argument, Barroso and Kessler should be dismissed (they are too brazen to resign) because of their association with Timmermans who, at least had the decency to resign spontaneously with the “dignity and integrity” that Barroso proposed to Dalli,
Let me put it in terms that YOU would understand.
I have worked as a general practitioner locally, a Colonial Medical officer in West Africa, a police medical officer and a drug intelligence officer. In all those posts I had no choice but to become “associated” willy nilly with all sorts of criminals but no one ever succeeded to involve me in his corruption, not even police commissioners, and I paid dearly for it.
When serving in West Africa I learned of indigenous junior employees collecting bribes “for the doctor” about which I knew absolutely nothing.
As a drug intelligence officer in Malta, and in the course of my duties, I became aware of an abundant circumstantial evidence that “associated” prominent innocent people with the drug traffic. I do not consider those innocent people “guilty by association”.
To be more specific, I strongly resent that anyone should pronounce me guilty of associating with a bribery that was culturally accepted in Africa but of which I did not form any part.and which I tried to eradicate with little success.
Francis, are you in any way related to Franco Debono? Your self-serving comments sound familiar.
@Daphne
Your reply to Francis Saliba is just supposition based on Kessler’s press conference.
Hopefully the whole report (and not just 10 pages of it) shall be known to one and sundry. Then and only then, can one really judge these allegations.
[Daphne – No, it is not just supposition. Silvio Zammit IS a sidekick of Dali’s and he WAS granted access.]
It’s not supposition, Kessler had evidence which was confirmed by Dalli’s replies during investigations.
One of them being where and when did he get the email between Estoc and Silvio Zammit if he wasn’t aware of anything?
Matthew Vella was left spluttering a good five minutes on TV, when asked where Maltatoday got theirs, according to him, they got it from sources inside Dalli’s office, whereas Dalli said he managed to get a copy from Maltatoday.
Unambiguous circumstantial evidence that one of them’s lying.
@Daphne
I do appreciate your thought and reasoning, fully understanding your point. Yet, if one must put to task your reasoning, then half (and I am being really conservative here) of our local politicians, be they LP or PN should resign…
For goodness sake, the meeting took place at Dalli’s office. Even if he knew absolutely nothing, the fact that talk about money took place there is sufficient reason for resignation.
I’m amazed how nobody is attacking Silvio Zammit for compromising his friend and Commissioner. If he really respected him, he should never, ever have been anywhere near Brussels or a snus company.
A pertinent question would be this. Did this middleman , as Dalli likes to call him, organise any other meetings on any other issues during the past two years?
“To be more specific, I strongly resent that anyone should pronounce me guilty of associating with a bribery that was culturally accepted in Africa but of which I did not form any part.and which I tried to eradicate with little success.”
Dalli wasn’t exactly working in Africa. He was working where he could use safeguards to protect himself and the Commission.
http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=152400
“He has been accustomed to working within the wheels of influence”
Superb Daphne, you couldn’t have said it any better.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence
Validity of circumstantial evidence
A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct evidence. This is only partly true: direct evidence is popularly, but mistakenly, considered more powerful. Many successful criminal prosecutions rely largely or entirely on circumstantial evidence, and civil charges are frequently based on circumstantial or indirect evidence. Much of the evidence against convicted American bomber Timothy McVeigh was circumstantial, for example. Speaking about McVeigh’s trial, University of Michigan law professor Robert Precht said, “Circumstantial evidence can be, and often is much more powerful than direct evidence”. [2] The 2004 murder trial of Scott Peterson was another high-profile conviction based heavily on circumstantial evidence.
Indeed, the common metaphor for the strongest possible evidence in any case—the “smoking gun”—is an example of proof based on circumstantial evidence. Similarly, fingerprint evidence, videotapes, sound recordings, photographs, and many other examples of physical evidence that support the drawing of an inference, i.e., circumstantial evidence, are considered very strong possible evidence.
In practice, circumstantial evidence can have an advantage over direct evidence in that it can come from multiple sources that check and reinforce each other.[3] Eyewitness testimony can be inaccurate at times,[4] and many persons have been convicted on the basis of perjured or otherwise mistaken testimony.[5] Thus strong circumstantial evidence can be a more reliable basis on which to determine a verdict. Circumstantial evidence normally requires a witness, such as the police officer who found the evidence, or an expert who examined it, to lay the foundation for its admission. This witness, sometimes known as the sponsor or the authenticating witness, is giving direct (eye-witness) testimony, and could present credibility problems in the same way that any eye witness does.
However, there is sometimes more than one logical conclusion inferable from the same set of circumstances. In cases where one conclusion implies a defendant’s guilt and another his innocence, the “benefit of the doubt” principle would apply. Indeed, if the circumstantial evidence suggests a possibility of innocence, the prosecution has the burden of disproving that possibility.[6]
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Circumstantial+Evidence
Circumstantial Evidence is also known as indirect evidence. It is distinguished from direct evidence, which, if believed, proves the existence of a particular fact without any inference or presumption required. Circumstantial evidence relates to a series of facts other than the particular fact sought to be proved. The party offering circumstantial evidence argues that this series of facts, by reason and experience, is so closely associated with the fact to be proved that the fact to be proved may be inferred simply from the existence of the circumstantial evidence.
The following examples illustrate the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence: If John testifies that he saw Tom raise a gun and fire it at Ann and that Ann then fell to the ground, John’s testimony is direct evidence that Tom shot Ann. If the jury believes John’s testimony, then it must conclude that Tom did in fact shoot Ann. If, however, John testifies that he saw Tom and Ann go into another room and that he heard Tom say to Ann that he was going to shoot her, heard a shot, and saw Tom leave the room with a smoking gun, then John’s testimony is circumstantial evidence from which it can be inferred that Tom shot Ann. The jury must determine whether John’s testimony is credible.
Circumstantial evidence is most often employed in criminal trials. Many circumstances can create inferences about an accused’s guilt in a criminal matter, including the accused’s resistance to arrest; the presence of a motive or opportunity to commit the crime; the accused’s presence at the time and place of the crime; any denials, evasions, or contradictions on the part of the accused; and the general conduct of the accused. In addition, much Scientific Evidence is circumstantial, because it requires a jury to make a connection between the circumstance and the fact in issue. For example, with fingerprint evidence, a jury must make a connection between this evidence that the accused handled some object tied to the crime and the commission of the crime itself.
Books, movies, and television often perpetuate the belief that circumstantial evidence may not be used to convict a criminal of a crime. But this view is incorrect. In many cases, circumstantial evidence is the only evidence linking an accused to a crime; direct evidence may simply not exist. As a result, the jury may have only circumstantial evidence to consider in determining whether to convict or acquit a person charged with a crime. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that “circumstantial evidence is intrinsically no different from testimonial [direct] evidence”(Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 75 S. Ct. 127, 99 L. Ed. 150 [1954]). Thus, the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence has little practical effect in the presentation or admissibility of evidence in trials.
Further readings
Romano, John F. 1999. “Prohibitions in the Use of Circumstantial Evidence: Key Tips on Gaining Strategic Advantage.” Trial Lawyer 22 (January-February): 2–4.
Romano, John F., and Rodney G. Romano.1998. “The Circumstantial Evidence Generation: 25 Guidelines for Winning the Circumstantial Evidence Case. Trial Diplomacy Journal 21 (May-June).
@Miss Forcina
So what’s the bottom line?