Replies

The D'Urso "affidavit" even says, "D'Elia has been deposed by the presiding judge in Naples...."

Yes, D'Urso stated he was in the court room and witnessed this. Unless you have another witness who was in the court room at the time to contradict his account, or the court transcripts to the contrary, D'Urso's affidavit stands uncontradicted. You don't so you go on all kinds of irrelevant points and distractions.

Unnotarized, it is not an affidavit.

Since D'Usrso is confirmed to be a practicing Italian lawyer, and you are not, his statement of what is a valid affidavit in Italy must supersede an Internet troll from across the sea on another continent. Even here in the U.S., all U.S. affidavits aren't notarized. Police routinely sign affidavits requesting search and arrest warrants without having their signature notarized. Also, an affidavit need not be sworn. See 28 U.S. Code § 1746.Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1746

Since December 5, 2020, D'Elia has been in confinement concerning charges related to acts in 2015-2017.

Right, and D'Urso was in the court room and witnessed his statement to the court. The fact that he made his statement the following day, is completely irrelevant to anything.

Hearsay is not admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise:

Any out of court statement is hearsay, including affidavits. The exceptions swallow the rule: business records, present sense impressions, excited utterance, government records, confessions and other admissions, the admission of a co-conspirator, inconsistent statements, etc. Affidavits are routinely used in litigation to establish what is, and what is not, contested. Again, since D'Urso's statement is uncontradicted, there is no factual controversy as to what he witnessed in the federal court in Rome.