The Signorini-Corona case reflects the Italian judiciary

⚠️ Warning! - This post deals with disturbing and shocking topics. I do not recommend reading it for people who are easily impressionable.

I have to start once again with a premise, perhaps not original but absolutely necessary: I do not have much respect for the figure of Fabrizio Corona, whom I consider—though this is only my personal opinion—to be driven by money or by some ulterior motive in almost every public action he takes.

I have no respect—indeed I openly despise—someone who, like him, in the past had no scruples about blackmailing others in order to make money, or someone who, as he himself admitted, boasts about having pushed his own wife to have an abortion in order to exploit her public image a little longer for profit.

I have no respect for those who mix ten truths with just as many lies simply to inflate the impact of their supposed scoops and present themselves as champions of the people, in the style of Bertinotti: with the Rolex, the Lamborghini and the sailing holidays, all strictly while officially having “no assets.”

In other words, the first question to ask whenever Corona speaks is always the same: “What is he trying to gain this time?” Because only a naive person could believe the fairy tale of a sacred desire to provide honest information, following in the footsteps of his far more respectable father (whom he sometimes cites rather inappropriately), or the idea that he wants to defend the rights of ordinary people against the “system.”

_{Fabrizio Corona, Manuela Capitanucci from assisi,perugia, italy, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons}

Corona always has a goal to achieve, whether commissioned or—more often—personal. That said, even he can occasionally perform a genuine service to information by bringing attention to facts or events involving famous figures and matters of public interest.

This is the case with the story involving Alfonso Signorini, a well-known face on Mediaset networks, investigated for extortion and attempted sexual violence. It was Corona, through his YouTube show “Falsissimo,” who brought the alleged reprehensible behavior of the former director of the gossip magazine Chi, as well as the host of flagship programs such as Grande Fratello, to the attention of viewers.

In reality, in my opinion there is very little that remains merely “alleged,” considering that numerous written messages, voice notes, phone calls and video calls that the popular TV personality reportedly exchanged with hundreds of young men hoping to enter the entertainment industry have ended up online.

I will spare you the most disgusting details that emerged—such as the obscene photos that Signorini allegedly sent to his “targets,” or the stories of previous erotic adventures (complete with horrifying practices)—because what really matters is the modus operandi observed with the handsome young man of the moment. According to what was reported in the episodes of “Falsissimo,” it can be summarized in a few words: career help in exchange for sexual favors.

From what has emerged, the host would begin interactions in a soft and friendly way, gradually moving into more intimate and personal territory until eventually making explicit requests for private meetings—at home, in a dressing room, or in another private location. And it was at this point in the story that the physical approach allegedly occurred.

According to the accounts of two victims interviewed by Corona, if the young men refused to engage in real sexual compromises, Signorini’s attitude would reportedly change drastically—from attentive, affectionate and caring to rude or completely indifferent. In short: if you agree, fine; if not, get lost.

The alleged victims have formally filed complaints against the former director of Chi, and according to the Italian legal system, in cases of attempted sexual violence the victim’s testimony already constitutes evidence, which the accused may later be required to challenge during the trial.

The real question is this: faced with so much evidence, why has Signorini not been placed under preventive detention and is still simply under investigation while remaining free? The risk of repeated offenses (other similar cases have reportedly been mentioned) or the possibility of flight, given the showman’s enormous financial resources, might appear concrete—but evidently prosecutors did not consider them sufficient.

Yet the judiciary has not been entirely inactive. In fact, perhaps the most curious aspect of this story is that, following a complaint by Mediaset, the only measure taken was against the social media channels of Fabrizio Corona, which were blocked along with the episodes of his YouTube show.

The former “king of paparazzi” was not only ordered to delete all previous videos in which he talks about Signorini, but was also prevented from publishing new episodes on the case. In short, a form of preventive censorship that many consider quite dangerous, because it reverses the usual legal order: instead of filing a defamation complaint after the fact, punishment is imposed even on intentions—an unicum in the Italian legal system that could create a serious precedent.

_{The cast of the first edition of Grande Fratello (2000). Public domain image}

Corona still managed to publish the latest episode of “Falsissimo,” titled “The Reckoning,” but YouTube removed the video in less than an hour. The result, however, was to give the story even greater visibility: dozens of small YouTubers, at Corona’s own request, republished the episode in full, ensuring that it continued to circulate widely.

It is rather striking that the State—represented in this case by the judicial authority—acted at lightning speed to protect the rights of the alleged perpetrator, while in other similar situations it has proceeded as slowly as a limping turtle, when it was the victims asking for justice.

Let us close with a sad memory: a thought for the unfortunate Tiziana Cantone (also mentioned by Corona), the young woman who died by suicide a few years ago after becoming the victim of the crime of revenge porn. Some of her intimate content ended up online and, despite a legal battle that lasted years and forced her to spend tens of thousands of euros trying to have her images removed from the internet, the court ultimately denied the complete deletion she sought.

She was not the face of Mediaset. She did not hold the secrets of powerful people. She did not work for a national television network and was not part of exclusive circles marked by “square and compass.” She was simply a young woman—naive, perhaps—who trusted the wrong person and who, like thousands of other “ordinary” people, had the sole fault of not having powerful protection behind her.

But Justice is the same for everyone, they tell us. And we, as subjects, are simply expected to believe it.

I'm part of ITALYGAME Team

together with:
@girolamomarotta, @sardrt, @mikitaly, @mad-runner, @famigliacurione

👉 VOTE FOR US AS WITNESS 👈