Sam Soliman vindicated of cheating by German court

[Like a Boss]

SAM SOLIMAN VINDICATED OF CHEATING CLAIM BY GERMAN COURT

http://www.boxingtalk.com/pag/article.php?aid=30699

Former IBF middleweight champion Sam Soliman has won a longstanding legal battle against one of Germany’s boxing commissions, the BDB. A German District Court in Kiel issued a ruling saying that the BDB's nine-month suspension, along with the disqualification of Soliman against Felix Sturm in 2013, was unlawful and ineffective.

Soliman won the 2013 bout via unanimous decision (in Sturm's home nation, no easy feat) but the result was changed froma Soliman win to a no contest after Soliman tested positive for a stimulant. Soliman consistently maintained his innocence and then won a 2014 rematch against Sturm which was not the subject of the lawsuit.

Soliman's American attorney, Kurt Emhoff, told Boxingtalk, “I’m so happy that Sam has been vindicated - it’s a great victory for him. All of Team Soliman is very proud of the tireless work that Sam’s German counsel Rainer Cherkeh put into this case and we’re very happy with the result.”

Soliman's legal situation highlights a key difference between the administration of boxing in the Uniteed States and Germany. In the United States, boxing commissions are run by state governments. In Germany, commissions are private federations hired by the local promoter, who pays the commission a fee. Because there are multiple private federations that promoters can choose to hire, a commission may be tempted to curry favor with its paying customers (the promoters) by issuing favorable rulings to the promoter's boxer. In this case, the promoter's boxer was Sturm, who was born in Bosnia and Herzegovina but has lived in Germany for many years and even adopted Sturm as his German stage name. Soliman is Australian.

The BDB has one month to appeal the German District Court decision.

“The German court agreed that I was punished without judicial basis for something that I was not guilty of,” Soliman said. “The unlawful decision by the German Boxing Commission cost me a shot at a world title and immense reputational damage. The decision by the German court has lifted a weight from my shoulders that I’ve had to live with for nearly four years. I was never going to give up seeking to right the injustice,” Soliman said.

“I’ve spent my whole career committed to clean and healthy living, and the German Boxing Commission’s unlawful decision hit hard.”

Commenting on the BDB’s handling of the 2013 dispute, Soliman’s manager, David Stanley said: “It is obvious that a sport association whose President, Thomas Putz, has a commercial involvement with one participant of a boxing match is not objective. There was and is a deep conflict of interest for the BDB.”

Soliman’s German lawyer, Rainer Cherkeh said:

“Sports associations have a large responsibility to act in accordance with the main principles and rules of law. The court decision made clear that the BDB failed in this central point. Above all this is an important judgment for our client Sam Soliman and his reputation," Cherkeh said.

[bogan whisperer]

Great news. But not that surprising. Sam strikes me as about the least likely drug cheat in boxing.

[Pureist]

Sensational news for Sam, the BDB is as shifty as, now he can sue for damages

[DA GOOSE]

Great news. But not that surprising. Sam strikes me as about the least likely drug cheat in boxing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GImFt8UkQeQ

[Like a Boss]

Sensational news for Sam, the BDB is as shifty as, now he can sue for damages

What David Stanley said there is pertinent:

“It is obvious that a sport association whose President, Thomas Putz, has a commercial involvement with one participant of a boxing match is not objective. There was and is a deep conflict of interest for the BDB.”

[bogan whisperer]

Sensational news for Sam, the BDB is as shifty as, now he can sue for damages

It will be interesting to see whether Sam has the scope to sue now that the court judgement has vindicated him.

[Perseus]

So is the original UD win for Soliman restored?

There IS a difference between cheating and having a banned substance in your system.
The article just says the court has concluded that Soliman was not cheating it does not say the failed drug test was invalid or that they ordered the original result restored.
It also conveniently omits the fact that Soliman admitted the oxilofrine came from an energy drink.

The main thing I get from that court ruling is that in Germany drug testing and more specifically what they will test for actually is up for negotiation.
NOT how they test and who will do the testing.............what they will be allowed to test for.

[Taansend]

I hope he sues the bastards for millions. They shafted him.

[Cutman Scabbers]

Sensational news for Sam, the BDB is as shifty as, now he can sue for damages

What David Stanley said there is pertinent:

“It is obvious that a sport association whose President, Thomas Putz, has a commercial involvement with one participant of a boxing match is not objective. There was and is a deep conflict of interest for the BDB.”

Thomas Putz.

[Like a Boss]

The altering of the result of a bout seems to rest with the organization sanctioning it, and there seems to be little consistency.

Two recent conflicting examples being Browne vs Chagaev (where the initial result, a win to Browne, has stood) and Soliman vs Sturm (where the initial result, a win to Soliman, was changed).

[Perseus]

The altering of the result of a bout seems to rest with the organization sanctioning it, and there seems to be little consistency.

Two recent conflicting examples being Browne vs Chagaev (where the initial result, a win to Browne, has stood) and Soliman vs Sturm (where the initial result, a win to Soliman, was changed).

Seems like a court could order the result be reversed if they think it's appropriate.

The Browne situation was different, he failed a VADA drug test not a commission drug test.
VADA is voluntary, they have no authority.

[Like a Boss]

The altering of the result of a bout seems to rest with the organization sanctioning it, and there seems to be little consistency.

Two recent conflicting examples being Browne vs Chagaev (where the initial result, a win to Browne, has stood) and Soliman vs Sturm (where the initial result, a win to Soliman, was changed).

Seems like a court could order the result be reversed if they think it's appropriate.

The Browne situation was different, he failed a VADA drug test not a commission drug test.
VADA is voluntary, they have no authority.

The 'one month to appeal the decision' provision would be standard practice.

VADA's authority is as a registered test laboratory. Their involvement ends with the provision of the test results to their client - in Browne's case, the WBA.

What the WBA then do with the result is up to them.

In Browne's case, even though the WBA found him guilty (via the positive result provided by VADA), suspended him, and stripped him of the title, they didn't deprive him of the win. Browne's win over Chagaev still stands.

In Soliman's case, he was stripped of the win as well - the bout result reads NC.

[Perseus]

WBA, WBC, WBO, IBF.
Not one of them have the authority to overturn official results and their suspensions only apply to fights involving the belt and rankings of the body that issued the suspension.
Commissions have the authority to suspend boxing licenses, overturn results, withhold purses and so forth regardless of which sanctioning body(if any) is part of the event.

Based on what courts have done in the past concerning boxing it just seems like they should be able to order the original result restored.

[Like a Boss]

Unfortunately there are gross inconsistencies in the penalties handed down for boxing drug offenses. The length of penalties and whether the result is changed or not has varied from case to case.

In Soliman's case it will be interesting to see what recourse he has now that the court verdict has seen his way.

[Perseus]

Unfortunately there are gross inconsistencies in the penalties handed down for boxing drug offenses. The length of penalties and whether the result is changed or not has varied from case to case.

True.
Multiple jurisdictions make some of that unavoidable though.

[DA GOOSE]

WBA, WBC, WBO, IBF.
Not one of them have the authority to overturn official results and their suspensions only apply to fights involving the belt and rankings of the body that issued the suspension.
Commissions have the authority to suspend boxing licenses, overturn results, withhold purses and so forth regardless of which sanctioning body(if any) is part of the event.

Based on what courts have done in the past concerning boxing it just seems like they should be able to order the original result restored.

Then why was Francisco Vargas not punished in any way for his positive test?

[bogan whisperer]

WBA, WBC, WBO, IBF.
Not one of them have the authority to overturn official results and their suspensions only apply to fights involving the belt and rankings of the body that issued the suspension.
Commissions have the authority to suspend boxing licenses, overturn results, withhold purses and so forth regardless of which sanctioning body(if any) is part of the event.

Based on what courts have done in the past concerning boxing it just seems like they should be able to order the original result restored.

Then why was Francisco Vargas not punished in any way for his positive test?

Vargas tested positive to clenbuterol and claimed it came from contaminated meat in Mexico and Oscar who is a dear friend of the WBC was able to convince them of that.