Valverde case delayed AGAIN!

[this_is_edie]

Is this the end of Operation Puerto? Will the books be closed on all the other names at this point or is it the gift that keeps on giving?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

this thread is all over the place.

my focus is validity of evidence against valverde not what if, why not others, is it fair....etc etc

but i have one 'why' question im still struggling with: why did coni go after valverde specifically ?

because they could ?
because that was their strongest evidence based case ?
because of some nationalistic resentment ?
because they had abstract noble goals ?

why ?

No, not really.

The main reason is that there was more evidenece against certain riders - while others were merely linked to the blood bags by initials or their pets names.

CONI had more evidence on 3 riders (Basso, Scarponi, Valverde) than just initials and the blood bags.

Basso: .."The [blood bag] comparison is useful, but not deciding," Torri said. "We have enough material out of Madrid to draw our conclusions." Torri has been working doggedly on the case for a while. "We will go forward all the same."

Scarponi: After initially denying any involvement signed a 10 page confession prepared by CONI on the 1st day of his hearing!

Valverde: Ettore Torri of CONI said "We have documents referring to Valverde both for sums paid to [Doctor Eufemiano] Fuentes and for the substances [purchased]."

 

[RTMcFadden]

From 14th April 2008: Judge Antonio Serrano said that the CAS was "a private association and was therefore not subject to agreements allowing the sharing of legal evidence in the European Union." ..

What's most telling here is that Serrano did'n say that CAS did have competent jurisdiction. It's that he didn't even recognize it as a court.

 

[RTMcFadden]

Seriously, the guy isn't worth the effort. He doesn't see anything wrong in cheating, but has a major issue with authority.

It's not that I have an issue with authority, it's that I can spot the posers from the real deal. CAS are posers, Serrano is the real deal.

 

[luckyboy]

What's most telling here is that Serrano did'n say that CAS did have competent jurisdiction. It's that he didn't even recognize it as a court.

clue's in the name..

 

[RTMcFadden]

clue's in the name..

That's correct. Court of Arbitration v Court of Law.

 

[Race Radio]

It's not that I have an issue with authority, it's that I can spot the posers from the real deal. CAS are posers, Serrano is the real deal.

Again, you are wrong.

CAS is the real deal. They were set up to judge sporting disputes, which the Valverde case clearly is. They are the experts in this field, not Serrano.

 

[Race Radio]

What's most telling here is that Serrano did'n say that CAS did have competent jurisdiction. It's that he didn't even recognize it as a court.

He may not recognize it but every international sporting federation does.

Serrano is just trying to cover his A$$.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Again, you are wrong.

CAS is the real deal. They were set up to judge sporting disputes, which the Valverde case clearly is. They are the experts in this field, not Serrano.

So your saying RTM would have a point only if Valverde were on trial for rape or something like that.

 

[Ripper]

It's not that I have an issue with authority, it's that I can spot the posers from the real deal. CAS are posers, Serrano is the real deal.

This has nothing to do with being a real deal. This is standard lawyering 101. Of course if you state you are the only court that has the right to address something, it makes for an easier argument ... if you are right. The problemo for Serrano is that the CONI and the CAS are not talking about a criminal case here. This is sporting law ... and generally the CAS has the final word.

 

[RTMcFadden]

Again, you are wrong.

CAS is the real deal. They were set up to judge sporting disputes, which the Valverde case clearly is. They are the experts in this field, not Serrano.

The Belgian court held in the Kashechkin case.

"that a rider's application for a license was the equivalent of a contract, and in accepting the license, the rider also accepted the UCI's terms and conditions..."

Courts of arbitration ajudicate contract disuptes. This is not a contract dispute, as the contract exists between the Spanish Federation and Valverde, and the Spanish Federation refused to initiate proceedings.

 

[Hugh Januss]

The Belgian court held in the Kashechkin case.

"that a rider's application for a license was the equivalent of a contract, and in accepting the license, the rider also accepted the UCI's terms and conditions..."

Courts of arbitration ajudicate contract disuptes. This is not a contract dispute, as the contract exists between the Spanish Federation and Valverde, and the Spanish Federation refused to initiate proceedings.

Wow, everybody has had the wrong idea of what CAS is for for an awfully long time......even CAS themselves. How did the mistake happen, and why has it been allowed to go on for so long?

 

[Race Radio]

The Belgian court held in the Kashechkin case.

"that a rider's application for a license was the equivalent of a contract, and in accepting the license, the rider also accepted the UCI's terms and conditions..."

Courts of arbitration ajudicate contract disuptes. This is not a contract dispute, as the contract exists between the Spanish Federation and Valverde, and the Spanish Federation refused to initiate proceedings.

You do not appear to understand the issue.

This is not a criminal case. This is a jurisdictional dispute between sporting federations. Each Fed is a signatory of the IOC and WADA code and authorize CAS as the sole escalation for disputes. Serrano's words are just noise.

 

[Race Radio]

So your saying RTM would have a point only if Valverde were on trial for rape or something like that.

Correct. Nobody is going to jail here. No matter how much the apologists wish it was not for this case CAS is the final word.

 

[RTMcFadden]

This is not a criminal case.

If the UCI implements a global ban, I think it will become one. Not certain how the laws in EU work, specifically with regards to the human rights thing. But, in Spain, if he's prevented from getting his license and racing there, the Spanish courts are going to have a real problem with it.

I think this was the whole strategy of Valverde's legal team.

 

[Ripper]

If the UCI implements a global ban, I think it will become one. Not certain how the laws in EU work, specifically with regards to the human rights thing. But, in Spain, if he's prevented from getting his license and racing there, the Spanish courts are going to have a real problem with it.

I think this was the whole strategy of Valverde's legal team.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

F*cking hilarious. This would be what every doper should say then, as they are all being deprived of their regular work. Oh, wait a minute, they cheated and this is the repercussion. That is too bad, me sad that they cannot work for a while as a cyclist.

 

[RTMcFadden]

Hilarious and brilliant.

 

[Race Radio]

If the UCI implements a global ban, I think it will become one. Not certain how the laws in EU work, specifically with regards to the human rights thing. But, in Spain, if he's prevented from getting his license and racing there, the Spanish courts are going to have a real problem with it.

I think this was the whole strategy of Valverde's legal team.

Human rights! that is a good one.

It is ok, the Spaniards can always take their case to CAS

 

[RTMcFadden]

Human rights! that is a good one.

It is ok, the Spaniards can always take their case to CAS

Since the Spaniards are not contractually bound, the CAS has no jurisdiction.

 

[Race Radio]

Since the Spaniards are not contractually bound, the CAS has no jurisdiction.

What? The Spanish Fed can ignore the UCI? If they want to do that they will have to take their dispute to CAS

 

[RTMcFadden]

What? The Spanish Fed can ignore the UCI? If they want to do that they will have to take their dispute to CAS

I meant the Spanish courts. The situation that's been created is the the Spanish Federation now has to decide who to follow. The UCI or the Spanish Courts. My money is on the Spanish Courts.

 

[Race Radio]

I meant the Spanish courts. The situation that's been created is the the Spanish Federation now has to decide who to follow. The UCI or the Spanish Courts. My money is on the Spanish Courts.

Nope, there is no way to appeal a CAS decision in the Spanish courts.

Valverde knows this so his legal has said that they will challenge the CAS decision in the Swiss courts. They say one of the Arbs was biased because he had done WADA work in the past. This is nothing more then a media stunt and they will most likely give up before they pursue it.

You don't appear to get it. If the UCI issues a world wide ban there is nothing the Spanish courts can do.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I meant the Spanish courts. The situation that's been created is the the Spanish Federation now has to decide who to follow. The UCI or the Spanish Courts. My money is on the Spanish Courts.

Just supposing the Spanish fed ignore a worldwide ban from the UCI, what do you think the implication would be for ALL Spanish riders wishing to compete in UCI sanctioned events?
(i.e ride a bike to make that living you are so fond of)

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The Belgian court held in the Kashechkin case.

"that a rider's application for a license was the equivalent of a contract, and in accepting the license, the rider also accepted the UCI's terms and conditions..."

Courts of arbitration adjudicate contract disuptes. This is not a contract dispute, as the contract exists between the Spanish Federation and Valverde, and the Spanish Federation refused to initiate proceedings.

Interesting quote - its strange you didn't provide a link to the original story.

But its ok, I will post it here: it is from Kaschechkin case which of course had nothing to do with CAS.

Kaschechkin had taken a case against the UCI for violation of his "Human Rights', the Belgian Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction on the case and that the case should be heard in Switzerland as that is where the UCI are based...... CAS are also Swiss based.

 

[ChrisE]

Nope, there is no way to appeal a CAS decision in the Spanish courts.

Valverde knows this so his legal has said that they will challenge the CAS decision in the Swiss courts. They say one of the Arbs was biased because he had done WADA work in the past. This is nothing more then a media stunt and they will most likely give up before they pursue it.

You don't appear to get it. If the UCI issues a world wide ban there is nothing the Spanish courts can do.

RT has you guys stirred up like BPC or his/her latest incarnation.

He is talking about how the Spanish fed will not sanction Valverde because the Spanish courts ruled real time the evidence could not be used to sanction athletes. So, the Spanish fed still either cannot get the evidence or would be violating Spanish court ruling in sanctioning Valverde. UCI can do what they want, but their basis seems shaky and assinine to me in light of this fact (the Spanish fed should sanction).

I'm hesitant to bash you guys but this seems fairly straightforward.

So, now the UCI wishes to uphold a ban by a foreign fed, when their rules say only the fed of the rider can dole out the discipline. This is where I check out of the bloodlust in here, and has nothing to do with whether I think Valverde doped or not (I do). If the rules suck, change them. Don't make them up as you go along. Somebody upthread said have an overall governing body investigating and ruling on punishment. That is the answer, not this pile of shyt being discussed. Especially letting bans by foreign feds rule. That is wrong if you think about it.

Somehow I got some of you to admit the other week LA shouldn't have been sanctioned from the 99 samples. This may be an uphill battle as well but I have alot of beer tonight.