I'm not making a judgment nor speaking from a position of ignorance. I'm saying that a court is very careful about admitting hearsay evidence and that does not seem to have been the case here (where the record shows that the Panel accepted the bits that they thought were ok.)
That is exactly what you are doing. You've made repeated comments about how unjust was the judgement and the actions of the CAS panel. Without seeing the evidence you simply cannot state they acted incorrectly or that the judgement was unjust.
As for your comments about what was accepted, I've read the judgement document a number of times and the references to much of the evidence was that it was considered and weighed according to differing criteria based on circumstances. I dont recall anywhere where its says they accepted the bits they thought were ok. You might want to try reading that document again