No Oppo Supporters CAS hands down guilty verdict - Players appealing - Dank shot - no opposition - (cont in pt.2)

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

All we need now is Asada to be butt ****d next week at the hearing and we can then finally put this sorry saga behind us for good.

 

[yaco55]

If they allow it I dont think they will ignore it, but they would have to weigh what importance they give it considering the players cannot challenge it by cross examination. The Trib would have to discount their evidence to some extent, depends to what extent.

Alavi and Charters have failed to sign affidavits - It's like they've had a fireside chat - This is not evidence.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Mixed feelings.

On one hand a farce is a farce.

On the other hand, the rejection of honest testimony has odour.

Assuming the testimony was honest....

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

ASADA have come so far and wasted so many people's time and money surely they will at least attempt to go in and bat on Monday? But the players pleading they have no case to answer must be a very real possibility.

Massive kudos to the players for sticking fat and not being bullied by Asadas dirty tricks.

 

[lysp]

Correct.

Alavi and Charter have not signed affidavits - There evidence means NOTHING.

Problem is this is a tribunal not a court. No rules of evidence.

Reason for the affidavits was probably to strengthen it, but still they could rely on anything and it most likely would be allowed at a tribunal.

 

[Dan Cooper]

Massive kudos to the players for sticking fat and not being bullied by Asadas dirty tricks.

Exactly.

"Here little fella. Just plead guiltly and we will back-date your penalty and you'll only miss a few games."

...and be known as a bloody drug cheat for the rest of your f****ing life!!

(but they oh so conveniently left the second part out didn't they)

 

[expires]

Do we know the testimony is honest ?

We don't. The tribunal's duty is to ascertain the veracity of testimony.

In principle the denial of testimony seems wrong. In practice I'm happy, though. The sooner the farce is over the better.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

Great day to be a Bomber.

 

[Dan Cooper]

Great day to be a Bomber.

It's always a great day to be a Bomber

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Asada reminds me of that douche bag Walter Peck from Ghostbusters.

 

[LocalBomber]

I wanna be happy, and what I'm reading is sounding positive, but I just can't and won't relax until I hear that the players are officially cleared and the club I love so dearly, no longer has a case to answer!

Go Hirdy Go Bombers Go Us!

 

[cymarak]

In principle the denial of testimony seems wrong.

ASADA can still present Charters and Alavi's testimony - no-one's denying them that ability.

 

[yaco55]

Problem is this is a tribunal not a court. No rules of evidence.

Reason for the affidavits was probably to strengthen it, but still they could rely on anything and it most likely would be allowed at a tribunal.

An anti-doping tribunal is close to a court - You end up at CAS and its 99% a court - The rules of evidence are so much higher at CAS.

 

[Dan Cooper]

Almost Doc Martin @MartinHardieUni · 6m6 minutes ago

I've worn the james hird party shirt for the news interviews

 

[Old Campaigner]

Problem is this is a tribunal not a court. No rules of evidence.

Reason for the affidavits was probably to strengthen it, but still they could rely on anything and it most likely would be allowed at a tribunal.

They can rely on anything but regardless of what they are technically allowed to produce, all evidence will be ranked according to how strong it is. Sad to say for ASADA, unsigned interview transcripts are much much weaker than a key witness available for cross examination and the tribunal will recognize as such.

Funny thing is, the three can still make statements I believe. So they might be unavailable for ASADA to question but still provide a sworn statement in support of the players.

 

[expires]

ASADA can still present Charters and Alavi's testimony - no-one's denying them that ability.

Wasn't Charters problem the fact that honest spoken testimony would incriminate him on other matters? As he has been objecting to signing a manipulated affidavit, I would have thought him answering questions honestly would have been useful.

Haven't been following it closely but from a distance it seems that ASADA wanted him to be less than honest at the tribunal.

 

[BomberFan355]

Why did Alavi and Charters even bother speaking to ASADA at all? Personally I think Charters only wanted his name is the papers.

 

[jmoo wan]

ASADA will go ahead and tender "written and recorded evidence from those witnesses"

 

[byronstjames]

ASADA will go ahead and tender "written and recorded evidence from those witnesses"

I guess their intentions are obvious now.

The transcripts are all they have and they needed to show that they made 'every effort' to get Charters and Alavi to testify so that the tribunal would accept them.

I tend to think this might be over on Monday. If they are going to this kind of effort so that their dodgy transcripts, that aren't worth the paper they're printed on, have to be used to prove that the players took banned substances.

 

[rumply]

Hardie's comments on 3AW fwiw

http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-football-blog/case-could-collapse-by-christmas/20141212-3menp.html

 

[DonsRule]

 

[rumply]

^think there might be a few more vacancies very shortly

 

[baz_machine]

$120 k p.a. to do SFA for 2 years..... yes please

 

[boncer34]

Awesome.

HTB are now arguing ASADA didn't want to win the case and it was all a strategy to stop the two turning up.

We are through the looking glass people.

 

[BrunoV]

Mixed feelings.

On one hand a farce is a farce.

On the other hand, the rejection of honest testimony has odour.

Honest but incomplete (because that is what ASADA wants) is not honest.