Ferrari:There's No Evidence I Doped - Page 5 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 12-19-12, 17:31
Bannockburn Bannockburn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Santa Ynez Valley...on a good day.
Posts: 81
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainrman View Post
I also knew and have said on other threads long ago he never got a penny
Which threads would these be?
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-19-12, 17:38
Race Radio Race Radio is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 10,294
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainrman View Post
Hard to see what your post even means.
Pretty clear

You posted nonsense. It was shown to you clearly that it was nonsense, you even admitted it was nonsense.....but you posted the same nonsense 2 more times in an attempt to clog the thread with nonsense

Good work
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-19-12, 18:25
jam pants jam pants is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 93
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Race Radio View Post
Pretty clear

You posted nonsense. It was shown to you clearly that it was nonsense, you even admitted it was nonsense.....but you posted the same nonsense 2 more times in an attempt to clog the thread with nonsense

Good work
Holiday bonuses for increased post volume this year. The interns get extra chances to sniff the chamois.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 12-19-12, 18:43
Velodude Velodude is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,210
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainrman View Post
The point at issue is whether Ferrari can bring an action against USADA - which he claims he is considering - and that is a fact.

The statement I made on Reynolds was incorrect but only on a point of detail - irrelevant to the thread.

I cited the reynolds case as proven example I knew that you can win vindication in a sport case in a US court on the basis of evidence despite sport having declared you guilty. Which he did, in a court in Ohio. So it is true. And also heras in spain. The point I was trying to make was that Reynolds won the case on whether he had been defamed, despite having lost in sport hearings and been sanctioned by sport.

The fact that Reynolds was later overturned on appeal on jurisdictional grounds not veracity of argument is largely irrelevant to this. USADA are in the US. They cannot use the IAAF "we are not in the US argument" used in the Reynolds case.

I knew he had never got a penny which is why I am critical of UCI, IAAF, FIFA etc hiding in jurisdictions to avoid litigation. Also out of interest, in the aftermath of that case it was widely recognised that it was far easier for a non US claimant to take action against a US corporation, that it is the reverse as the Reynolds case , and is why the Reynolds case itself was considered in subsequent attempts to redraft the "Hague convention on international civil enforcement." So it was clearly considered a miscarriage of justice, when used as an argument to change international conventions.

Back to the issue at hand. Ferrari says he is "not guilty of involvement in doping" and is considering action against USADA

That should be of interest to the clinic.

I doubt he will certainly until the Italian investigations are over,
The part in bold - links please.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 12-19-12, 18:54
red_flanders's Avatar
red_flanders red_flanders is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,430
Default

Move on please.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 12-19-12, 19:00
spetsa's Avatar
spetsa spetsa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: between a bar stool and a bike saddle
Posts: 451
Default

Have there been any public statements in regards to when we may expect some finality in regards to Dr. Ferrari's Italian court preceedings? I know that there have been references to jail time by some, but is that really a possibility given the nature of the Italian system?
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 12-19-12, 19:27
Glenn_Wilson's Avatar
Glenn_Wilson Glenn_Wilson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 2,680
Question

While I have no idea what has been going on back and forth here for a couple of pages one thing I need to ask.

Why would this Ferrari fool not be able to file a suite against USADA? Certainly since he is a foreigner to the USA that would make it more difficult but not impossible?
__________________
something less offensive
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 12-19-12, 19:35
spetsa's Avatar
spetsa spetsa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: between a bar stool and a bike saddle
Posts: 451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn_Wilson View Post
While I have no idea what has been going on back and forth here for a couple of pages one thing I need to ask.

Why would this Ferrari fool not be able to file a suite against USADA? Certainly since he is a foreigner to the USA that would make it more difficult but not impossible?
Not try to be condescending here, but this has been brought up a couple of times. My unlawyerly guess would be the fact that the USADA did not make the claims that he would have to argue as being false. The riders in question did. Maybe he could try to sue them.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 12-19-12, 19:38
noddy69 noddy69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 417
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spetsa View Post
Have there been any public statements in regards to when we may expect some finality in regards to Dr. Ferrari's Italian court preceedings? I know that there have been references to jail time by some, but is that really a possibility given the nature of the Italian system?
http://english.gazzetta.it/More_spor...46609743.shtml

Probably already posted in october but no update yet as to finalising but as far as previous poster talking about ferrari suing for defamation etc.....he has enough to deal with at home.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 12-19-12, 21:15
86TDFWinner's Avatar
86TDFWinner 86TDFWinner is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainrman View Post
Missed it. Thanks will go look. Any idea where?

[Update just found this..] posted by someone earlier

"He has foregone any prospective claim against USADA by passing on arbitration.

UCI/WADA rules made it clear and unambiguous that a non licensed person involved in the preparation and support of a licensed rider is subject to the rules as a licensed person (UCI Rule 18).

If Armstrong with his battery of high powered lawyers could not fault the USADA process then Ferrari is just p.ss.ng in the wind
."
Thank you for posting that response someone else made to show what i was trying to say(not very good i might add), thats what i was referring to(that post).
__________________
Quote:
"According to Mrs LeMond, Armstrong said: "There's no way you could have won your Tour de Frances without EPO." And Greg got very angry and said, "Listen, I won my - I was third in 1984, I was second in 1985, I won in 1986. This type of drug did not exist.The difference between you and me is that I have a 95 VO2 max and you have an 82, and you're - you don't - basically you don't know what you're talking about."(Proving Wonderboy is a clueless, lying POS)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.