The article discusses the recent remarks made by prosecutors Nicola Gratteri and Antonino Di Matteo concerning those who may vote 'Yes' in the upcoming referendum, suggesting that they inadequately represent these voters and label them as associated with corruption or organized crime. Gratteri's comments point towards a larger issue of political influence within the judiciary, while Di Matteo's remarks further tie voters to a corrupt system, raising questions about the integrity of judicial opinions in political discourse. The piece highlights a pattern of judicial overreach, emphasizing how statements from these influential figures could contribute to a climate of fear and discourage voter engagement. The author recalls specific instances of flawed judicial decisions in the districts where Gratteri operated, noting that of the 1121 arrests he oversaw, 423 individuals were ultimately acquitted. This statistic underscores the potential consequences of judicial actions, which not only impact individuals but also shape public confidence in the legal system as a whole. The criticism in the article serves to question the credibility and motives of those in the judiciary who speak publicly about political matters. It warns that short-term memory can obscure long-term consequences of these judicial decisions, suggesting that the public may overlook the significant damage that can arise from the comments and actions of influential legal figures. The implications of such rhetoric could further destabilize public faith in both the judiciary and democratic processes.