Valverde Appeal To CAS

[Anonymous]

They put 5 names on one list which is made public and send another list of names to the teams for them to sort out their own riders, never mind the Gusev backlash. Who makes the selection which name goes on which list? The panel of experts which apparently doesn't even know whose data they're looking at? Somehow I doubt that.

Elapid: DNA doesn't change. It is entirely irrelevant how much time elapsed between two DNA tests. If they match they match, if they don't they don't. CONI showed that a bag of Valverde's blood was stored by a Spanish gynecologist who is a known doping doctor. This is sufficient evidence for doping and consequently they banned this particular rider from riding in Italy. The whole thing wouldn't be any issue if the Spanish authorities did not drag their feet.

UCI has sanctioned 5 riders. The 50 list is NOT for teams to sort out. They will targeted for additional testing before and during the tour. It is not a list made up of riders with "suspicious" values.

The 9 member panel analysed the testing data, which doesn't have rider names attached to them. The panel returned to UCI the five profiles that were sanctionalbe. There's no way UCI gets to chose which riders those are.
The numbers have to be given to the accused for them to see what they are being accused of.

There are members of that panel that are respected here even by the more conservative posters. If the numbers they see finally attached the five riders are not the numbers they saw when they did their work I'd expect them to scream bloody murder. There's no way they'd be involved in such a subterfuge.

 

[Cobblestones]

cobblestones coni are effectivly charging sanctioning a forgein rider for something he did in his own country by this logic they could also jail tom boonen for snorting coke in belguim it doesn't make sense

Utter nonsense. CONI is not a court of civil law.

Elapid, read rhubroma's post. In your world, the following is entirely possible:

1) rider 'A' decides to ride with a license from corrupt country 'B'
2) rider 'A' regularly travels to corrupt country 'B' to dope. Hell, he might as well point a webcam at his centrifuge to broadcast the whole thing (so he could finance his habit through web ads)
3) rider 'A' races in country 'C' which has absolutely no power whatsoever to ban him because in your world, they'd have to show he doped in their country.

If that's the system you like, then why not give up right away.

I say, more power to CONI.

jackhammer, read the thread here on this board concerning the issue.

 

[VeloFidelis]

Utter nonsense. CONI is not a court of civil law.

Elapid, read rhubroma's post. In your world, the following is entirely possible:

1) rider 'A' decides to ride with a license from corrupt country 'B'
2) rider 'A' regularly travels to corrupt country 'B' to dope. Hell, he might as well point a webcam at his centrifuge to broadcast the whole thing (so he could finance his habit through web ads)
3) rider 'A' races in country 'C' which has absolutely no power whatsoever to ban him because in your world, they'd have to show he doped in their country.

If that's the system you like, then why not give up right away.

I say, more power to CONI.

jackhammer, read the thread here on this board concerning the issue.

Actually Cobblstones, there is no "Your world" or "My world" at play here. There is only the real world, and in that world there is no evidence legally obtained or otherwise that links Valverde to doping. No failed test, no lab results, no smoking gun.

There is illegally obtained DNA evidence which establishes a bag of blood seized in OP investigation belongs to Valverde (important distinction "belongs to") as much as we can all deduce the reasons for it being there. We cannot prove anything.

If the UCI decides to follow CONI down this slippery slope where the Rule of Law is suspended for their purposes of sanctioning Valverde in this case, cycling will be the big loser. Unfortunately they have to play by the rules when catching those who don't. If not, they're all equal criminals.

If the UCI does follow CONI, they had better get ready to eventually write Valverde a huge check, because CAS will most likely not uphold the sanction, and even if they do a civil court will not. The damages Valverde is sure to be awarded will be substantial.

 

[biker jk]

Actually Cobblstones, there is no "Your world" or "My world" at play here. There is only the real world, and in that world there is no evidence legally obtained or otherwise that links Valverde to doping. No failed test, no lab results, no smoking gun.

There is illegally obtained DNA evidence which establishes a bag of blood seized in OP investigation belongs to Valverde (important distinction "belongs to") as much as we can all deduce the reasons for it being there. We cannot prove anything.

If the UCI decides to follow CONI down this slippery slope where the Rule of Law is suspended for their purposes of sanctioning Valverde in this case, cycling will be the big loser. Unfortunately they have to play by the rules when catching those who don't. If not, they're all equal criminals.

If the UCI does follow CONI, they had better get ready to eventually write Valverde a huge check, because CAS will most likely not uphold the sanction, and even if they do a civil court will not. The damages Valverde is sure to be awarded will be substantial.

The broken record right on cue.

Damage to the sport of cycling will be far greater if Valverde isn't punished. Is that the "real world" you want to live in? Kudos to CONI for acting against Valverde and calling out this doper.

 

[Cobblestones]

Actually Cobblstones, there is no "Your world" or "My world" at play here. There is only the real world, and in that world there is no evidence legally obtained or otherwise that links Valverde to doping. No failed test, no lab results, no smoking gun.

There is illegally obtained DNA evidence which establishes a bag of blood seized in OP investigation belongs to Valverde (important distinction "belongs to") as much as we can all deduce the reasons for it being there. We cannot prove anything.

If the UCI decides to follow CONI down this slippery slope where the Rule of Law is suspended for their purposes of sanctioning Valverde in this case, cycling will be the big loser. Unfortunately they have to play by the rules when catching those who don't. If not, they're all equal criminals.

If the UCI does follow CONI, they had better get ready to eventually write Valverde a huge check, because CAS will most likely not uphold the sanction, and even if they do a civil court will not. The damages Valverde is sure to be awarded will be substantial.

Since you claim to live in the real world, I assume you will accept the following facts.

1) A bag with Valverde's blood (I assume ~1 pint) was found in storage at a Spanish gynecologist.
2) The identity of the bag was established by DNA test (I don't know what you think should be illegal with that).
3) The blood in the bag was laced with a form of EPO
4) Other clients have confessed that said gynecologist is a doping doctor

Do you see anything wrong with this?

 

[VeloFidelis]

The broken record right on cue.

Damage to the sport of cycling will be far greater if Valverde isn't punished. Is that the "real world" you want to live in? Kudos to CONI for acting against Valverde and calling out this doper.

OK, Now that's funny!

 

[VeloFidelis]

Since you claim to live in the real world, I assume you will accept the following facts.

1) A bag with Valverde's blood (I assume ~1 pint) was found in storage at a Spanish gynecologist.
2) The identity of the bag was established by DNA test (I don't know what you think should be illegal with that).
3) The blood in the bag was laced with a form of EPO
4) Other clients have confessed that said gynecologist is a doping doctor

Do you see anything wrong with this?

Of course, anyone who considers themselves a cycling fan has a problem with that. Unfortunately none of those facts are relevant to what can be proven. Valverde has legal rights just like you. And I am sure that you would complain vehemently if your rights were being abused by special interests in order to convict you of a crime.

Unfortunately you can't pick and choose where to apply the law.

 

[BroDeal]

There is illegally obtained DNA evidence which establishes a bag of blood seized in OP investigation belongs to Valverde (important distinction "belongs to") as much as we can all deduce the reasons for it being there. We cannot prove anything.

It is hardly illegally obtained. Evidently when the presiding judge went on vacation, someone forgot to bribe the substitute judge. That substitute judge released the DNA evidence. Now Judge Serrano is trying to prevent its use, although I have not seen any sort of reasoning as to why the DNA evidence should not be able to be used.

DId not the ASO require all riders in the 2007 TdF to sign a statement saying they were not involved with Operation Puerto? The ASO should use Valverde's clear lies to prevent him from racing.

 

[Cobblestones]

Of course, anyone who considers themselves a cycling fan has a problem with that. Unfortunately none of those facts are relevant to what can be proven. Valverde has legal rights just like you. And I am sure that you would complain vehemently if your rights were being abused by special interests in order to convict you of a crime.

Unfortunately you can't pick and choose where to apply the law.

So I see you do not deny the facts. Instead you come with innuendo of 'special interest' and 'abuse' which you do neither explain nor substantiate.

You said Valverde has rights as everybody else. He has a right for fair process. He did not even chose to attend that trial (which is his right of course). In this trial, the evidence I listed (among others) has been deemed relevant and sufficient to ban him from riding in Italy. (Similar evidence has been used to keep a whole lot of other riders from riding, such as Ullrich and Basso just to name a few). Valverde has the right to go to CAS and let them look at it. All fine with me. Doesn't change that CONI made the right decision.

 

[biker jk]

OK, Now that's funny!

I find your "Rule of Law" argument to exonerate Valverde much more amusing. It has me in stitches.

 

[rhubroma]

In a serious war against doping, and not the legal farse we have today, the real issue should be: is Vlaverde's blood the same as in the Val-Piti bloodsack?

CONI has made the DNA match. Therefore...

Whereas those here who are supporting Vlaverde's jurisdiction argument are the same ones who are claiming that we who would like to see him convicted don't understand the legal issues. But they are the very legal issues which are distorting reality and ruining justice. And it is the tasteless national rivalries which are commanding here and not the kind of international cooporative spirit necessary to make any gains toward more just sport.

So while I respect Alpe's arguments, I don't find them to be helpful to a sport right now which is afflicted with a lethal illness, is fouled by the corruption which is at the basis of the omerta/mafia psychology currently ruling it and so needs a radical treatment. And besides Basso was sanctiond for "attempted doping" and not real doping and didn't even have a DNA match, because the Italian could not relly on a false juristiction alibi as the Spaniard is doing because he knows he can exploit a legal technicality. Why was Basso sanctioned for "attempted doping" because he confessed even without a DNA match, but Valverde who has a DNA match is able to lean on his lawyer to get off the hook and away with murder? And isn't such a legal defense the same as reinforcing the omerta which is killing the sport?

1.) Why are the Spanish authorities or Judge Serrano or whoever's in charge dragging their feet with OP?

2.) Why are the Spanish authorities brushing potentially the hugest doping scandal in history under the carpet and protecting their athletes?

3.) What conflict of interests and behind the scenes manuveuring and greed and power are at the basis of such lameness?

Until we get answers to these valid questions, doping has won another major battle, whereas ethics and justice have been once again mocked.

 

[VeloFidelis]

So I see you do not deny the facts. Instead you come with innuendo of 'special interest' and 'abuse' which you do neither explain nor substantiate.

You said Valverde has rights as everybody else. He has a right for fair process. He did not even chose to attend that trial (which is his right of course). In this trial, the evidence I listed (among others) has been deemed relevant and sufficient to ban him from riding in Italy. (Similar evidence has been used to keep a whole lot of other riders from riding, such as Ullrich and Basso just to name a few). Valverde has the right to go to CAS and let them look at it. All fine with me. Doesn't change that CONI made the right decision.

There is morally right, and there is legally right. Morally right is subjective, legally right should be objective, but then again it can surprise you. CONI's decision should be overturned by CAS. If laws exist to protect you and me, then the have to protect Valverde as well.

This is not an endorsement of Valverde's behavior or involvement in OP. Neither is it the emotionally charged and morally indignant argument that you seem to want to make it. Please do not insinuate that you understand my opinion regarding this matter. Should I choose to make it known, I am sure that I will be both clear and articulate.

There have been many posts on this subject in the past few weeks from many who are well versed on this subject. I am sorry that you have not seen them. They both explain and substantiate the position. The facts as you know them are not admissible, the evidence you refer to is not either. CONI has overstepped it's authority in this matter.

I am sure that these are all actions taken by people who are as frustrated as you and I about doping in cycling, and who have the best intentions for the sport. But the fact remains that you cannot violate the law and someone's civil rights in an effort to convict them. If it were happening to you, I have little doubt that you would have trouble understanding this point.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

DId not the ASO require all riders in the 2007 TdF to sign a statement saying they were not involved with Operation Puerto? The ASO should use Valverde's clear lies to prevent him from racing.

That's a valid point and question. One I've asked before in the past why it hasn't been applied.

As I said before, if Valverde is cleared by CAS I honestly don't know how I'll feel about it. I do believe he doped and despite some of my echoes of his legal team, that there's no doubt about when, and how. But I also don't think justice has been at all even here and he's been singled out in many ways.

It's indeed a big mess.

 

[BroDeal]

As I said before, if Valverde is cleared by CAS I honestly don't know how I'll feel about it. I do believe he doped and despite some of my echoes of his legal team, that there's no doubt about when, and how. But I also don't think justice has been at all even here and he's been singled out in many ways.

With Armstrong welcomed back by the UCI and ASO, it is like a mafia street soldier being prosecuted while the family don hobnobs with elected officials while the press' society pages report on the don's every move. It is hard to work up a lot of anger at Valverde when rules are bent to allow a far more egregious example to race.

 

[quadsRme]

and the saga moves on to the next race

 

[rhubroma]

With Armstrong welcomed back by the UCI and ASO, it is like a mafia street soldier being prosecuted while the family don hobnobs with elected officials while the press' society pages report on the don's every move. It is hard to work up a lot of anger at Valverde when rules are bent to allow a far more egregious example to race.

There's a famous 80's Italian film with Alberto Sordi as the Marchese del Grillo set in early XIX century papal Rome. Kinda like an even more cynical version of Mel Brooks History of the World: Part I. The noble Marchese who passes his time at practical joke making, Ornolfio del Grillo, is about to get arrested for illeagal gambling and insighting a tavern brawl by a rather unsophistocated and rough police officer, until the commisariato (chief of police) arrives on the scene, and, recognizing the nobleman's aristocratic pedigree, not only orders his immediate liberation and asks his underling if he doesn't know how to destinguish a nobleman from an oridnary plebian, but has the police officer fired on the spot!

At which point the Marchese del Grillo looks onto the bar group of hapless souls and, entering his horse drawn carriage says: "Hey guys, sorry. But I'm me and you aren't fooking sh!t..."

 

[lucybears]

latest

http://www.elperiodico.com/default....a=CAS&idnoticia_PK=623544&idseccio_PK=1011&h=

 

[Zoncolan]

http://www.elperiodico.com/default....a=CAS&idnoticia_PK=623544&idseccio_PK=1011&h=

Google translation:

Those responsible for the Tour is trying to find a way to unblock the situation of Alejandro Valverde, ranking number one in the cycling world, so that it can compete in the next round of the French, which begins on July 4 in Monaco.
The rider from Murcia has been suspended as a precautionary measure by the Italian National Olympic Committee (CONI) that it has, contrary to the terms of the time by the Spanish and international sports authorities, the port operation and prevents it from competing for two years in Italy. The 16th stage of the Tour 2009 through the valley of Aosta, and then all the controversy that has occurred.
The Caisse d'Epargne, with support from the leadership of the French savings bank which sponsors the team, is now much more optimistic and still maintains his leader in all that take part in the test. The ASO company, responsible for the race, as the Caisse d'Epargne are awaiting a ruling from Pat McQuaid, president of the International Cycling Union (UCI), which calls into question the legal arguments Italian It would be enough to give you back twice winner of the Dauphiné Libéré.

INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN / McQuaid, in 2007, was the architect of an international campaign that questioned Valverde, and which led to the broker, defended by the Spanish Cycling Federation and supported by the Consejo Superior de Deportes (CSD) go and won in the TAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) The lawsuit against UCI. In fact, Valverde was the only scapegoat in a clash at that time maintained the UCI and the CSD against Spanish federation.
But now the situation has totally changed. McQuaid is an ally of the new board of the Spanish federation and the UCI has made peace with the full Tour, Patrice Clerc after he left the presidency of the company that hosts the race last year.
Moreover, the ruling of the CONI against Valverde offers various interpretations on the explicit prohibition to compete in Italy. The rider is not allowed to take part in competitions organized by Italian federations or clubs. However, this is not the case in the Tour, which is managed by a French entity (ASO) and not Italian.

REFUSAL TO BOONE / / Last week, the Tour issued a note declaring the person as "not welcome" to the world rush to excampeón of Tom Boonen, due to its consumption of cocaine, and they said that damaged its image of proof. Instead, let alone Valverde, which has been interpreted as a positive gesture towards the rider from Murcia, who last year became even leading the race and wore the yellow jersey after winning the first stage.

http://www.eurosport.yahoo.com/23062009/58/technicalities-save-valverde-spanish-ban.html

 

[dr_wok]

Valverde needs to go down.

Why aren't the press hammering Valverde when the physical evidence proves he is guilty?

Why are the press still covering his victories, printing his excuses, outlining his CAS appeals, when no-one seems to be aggressively investigating why a Spanish judge is sitting on a big ol' fat pile of evidence and won't release it to the RFEC or UCI because OP was a 'criminal' case not a 'sporting fraud' case?

The press need to start yelling, the fans need to start booing, the national bodies need to start politicising (which is what CONI is doing), and eventually UCI and WADA will get off their butts and find a legal loophole to get access to the evidence.

Cycling will never turn over a new leaf until the Operation Puerto and 'dope-and-deny' brigade have left the sport.

 

[rhubroma]

Why aren't the press hammering Valverde when the physical evidence proves he is guilty?

Why are the press still covering his victories, printing his excuses, outlining his CAS appeals, when no-one seems to be aggressively investigating why a Spanish judge is sitting on a big ol' fat pile of evidence and won't release it to the RFEC or UCI because OP was a 'criminal' case not a 'sporting fraud' case?

The press need to start yelling, the fans need to start booing, the national bodies need to start politicising (which is what CONI is doing), and eventually UCI and WADA will get off their butts and find a legal loophole to get access to the evidence.

Cycling will never turn over a new leaf until the Operation Puerto and 'dope-and-deny' brigade have left the sport.

Couldn't have summerized it better myself. To the various questions I proposed before, I would also add: why have there been no athletes from other sports besides cycling, above all soccer, which have not been made known to the public and prosecuted?

The question is a rhetorical one, since I believe that there is a cover-up going on here to protect the soccer players because the authorities either don't have the stomach to drag the hyper-rich and lucrative world of world cup soccer into the doping mire with cycling (a much "poorer" and consequently less powerful sport), or else they have been threatened by some very powerful force not to do so.

There are over 200 blood sacks in OP and not all of them can possibly be linked to cyclists. No there is something very powerful indeed which has tied the hands of the courts, and it's not cycling.

As far as Valverde goes, there have been some who have argued that even if the guy is guilty (which anybody with a rational brain knows - not believes- but knows for certain that he is, for the simple fact that a DNA test has prooved it's his blood in the Valve-Piti sack. Case closed), it is unjust to prosecute him on the grounds that so many other athletes have been protected. And that real justice is only served if all, not just a few persecuted ones, are brought to task for their involvment with OP. Well my response is simply that, fine, if that's how you feel, then you should find it equally unjust that riders like Basso and Scarponi have been sanctioned for their involvment but not everybody else. Naturally I can't be in accord with this rational, because even if it isn't fair that what is being applied here is two different measurments to the same weight, that does not excuse those guilty few who have been identified. If anything it is a partial and, in many ways, grotesque justice: however it is important in cases like these to not have sentimental feelings with respect to the unlucky rider who for whatever reasons (political vendetta or other) has been made to take the fall, while the others get away with murder.

In that same Italian film with Alberto Sordi I mentioned above, in another scene the pope says "justice is not of this world, but the next." And while I don't believe in the notion of a divine justice, I am quite sure that the justice of men is often hypocritical and even false. But even so I'm not willing to use such an imperfect and in many was inadequite state as an alibi to excuse the illicit actions of the guilty, because of sentimental and not rational reasoning. We must never be sentimental and allow our emotional selves to get a hold of us and cloud our judgment, when looking at a case like Valverde's. Amen.

 

[Bala Verde]

http://www.elperiodico.com/default....a=CAS&idnoticia_PK=623544&idseccio_PK=1011&h=

Interesting news.

Caisse d'Epargne is indeed a French sponsor, which could have gone unnoticed, so ASO might be a little easier persuaded when a French sponsor starts throwing its weight around.

Especially the comment that CONI's suspension shouldn't/cannot aply to Valverde's participation - since it's a tour organised by the French, not the Italian(s) (clubs) - seems to stretch a previously held interpretation on the presence of cyclists on national soil.

Wasn't it TVM in 1998 who fled abroad so that French authorities could not interrogate them about the 100 ampoules of EPO found in the trunk of a car? In that case, perhaps, if CONI/Italian authorities want, couldn't they hold him in custody/interrogate hime when he crosses the border. Isn't that one of the reasons he didn't attend his own trial?

 

[VeloFidelis]

We must never be sentimental and allow our emotional selves to get a hold of us and cloud our judgment, when looking at a case like Valverde's. Amen.

Given your stated position, the irony in this statement is overwhelming. You are the proverbial "Pot calling the kettle black"

 

[Escarabajo]

Valverde is out of the Tour now. So ASO could not help him with the Italian authorities. So it looks like the Italians won the first battle.

http://www.todociclismo.com/

 

[Aguirre]

well, Now Valverde is officially out of the Tour. Is a meassure by his team, since the CAS cannot judge before the start of the Tour.

But, sorry for all you who want condem Valverde. Sorry because he wil be cleared by CAS, sorry for all you, guys, because UCI wants to leave behing the OP, and ASO will welcome him next year. Loosing today will mean to win (logic of dialectics).

And of course: he will win spanish championship this week-end, then he might win the Vuelta and Worlds. Finishing first at UCO class.

Remember that Contador was left out the Tour last year. ANd? why?

Sorry for all you, guys, because the half of you shows to have little cycling culture, ah, it's called globalisation.

 

[Aguirre]

Couldn't have summerized it better myself. To the various questions I proposed before, I would also add: why have there been no athletes from other sports besides cycling, above all soccer, which have not been made known to the public and prosecuted?

The question is a rhetorical one, since I believe that there is a cover-up going on here to protect the soccer players because the authorities either don't have the stomach to drag the hyper-rich and lucrative world of world cup soccer into the doping mire with cycling (a much "poorer" and consequently less powerful sport), or else they have been threatened by some very powerful force not to do so.

There are over 200 blood sacks in OP and not all of them can possibly be linked to cyclists. No there is something very powerful indeed which has tied the hands of the courts, and it's not cycling.

As far as Valverde goes, there have been some who have argued that even if the guy is guilty (which anybody with a rational brain knows - not believes- but knows for certain that he is, for the simple fact that a DNA test has prooved it's his blood in the Valve-Piti sack. Case closed), it is unjust to prosecute him on the grounds that so many other athletes have been protected. And that real justice is only served if all, not just a few persecuted ones, are brought to task for their involvment with OP. Well my response is simply that, fine, if that's how you feel, then you should find it equally unjust that riders like Basso and Scarponi have been sanctioned for their involvment but not everybody else. Naturally I can't be in accord with this rational, because even if it isn't fair that what is being applied here is two different measurments to the same weight, that does not excuse those guilty few who have been identified. If anything it is a partial and, in many ways, grotesque justice: however it is important in cases like these to not have sentimental feelings with respect to the unlucky rider who for whatever reasons (political vendetta or other) has been made to take the fall, while the others get away with murder.

In that same Italian film with Alberto Sordi I mentioned above, in another scene the pope says "justice is not of this world, but the next." And while I don't believe in the notion of a divine justice, I am quite sure that the justice of men is often hypocritical and even false. But even so I'm not willing to use such an imperfect and in many was inadequite state as an alibi to excuse the illicit actions of the guilty, because of sentimental and not rational reasoning. We must never be sentimental and allow our emotional selves to get a hold of us and cloud our judgment, when looking at a case like Valverde's. Amen.

well, clasical cop discourse