POVETKIN RULING

[dickbelden]

http://www.BS.com/dibella-we-w ... er--113576

[Badhusker]

I suppose the dipshits will chime in soon and tell us how corrupt the courts system is now too. Al Haymon's fault....

[flem1]

I suppose the dipshits will chime in soon and tell us how corrupt the courts system is now too. Al Haymon's fault....

Any minute now

[Kalan]

You guys are the dipshlts...

This verdict is BS... Wilder doesn't have a legal leg to stand on when this goes to appeal.. It's the dumbest damned decision in the world but one you might expect from an American jury in the age of "America First"... However when it goes to appeal the judges have to rule on the merits of the case and not on personal bias... the merits of the case all favor Povetkin..

The WBC and VADA both admitted Povetkin didn't take Meldonium when it was a banned drug... Lawyers can demagogue a case and finagle a verdict out of a biased jury of Americans... Povetkin is entitled to a jury of his peers under our system... Something tells me that’s not a jury box loaded with Americans.

The appellate judges will have to rule on the legal merits and there's nothing there supporting Wilder.. VADA falsely accused Povetkikn.. The WBC wrongly withdrew recognition from the fight.. And Wilder pulled out of the fight..

Plus we know it took Hurricane Carter's team 20 years to get the truth out.. They kept going after he was ready to give up because they knew he was innocent.. That's what Judgment Day is all about.. To clean up all the mistakes humans make convicting the innocent and letting the guilty go free.

[ldlamb]

You are the one who doesn't seem to understand what is required to sit on federal jury or what the standard of review is for appellate courses in a case like this.

[Kalan]

YOU don't understand FACTS... ALL the legal facts are on Povetkin's side... HIs appellate case will be heard and he should eventually win if there's any justice.

And his case against Wilder and DiBella hasn't hit the courts yet... He's suing them for 34 million and his case looks damned solid.

[jockpunk]

YOU don't understand FACTS... ALL the legal facts are on Povetkin's side... HIs appellate case will be heard and he should eventually win if there's any justice.

And his case against Wilder and DiBella hasn't hit the courts yet... He's suing them for 34 million and his case looks damned solid.

Lol no it doesn't. At this point they should just ban all Russians from boxing like they have in other sports.

[Kalan]

You're so biased and full of hate you're insane. That's like saying the only good Indian is a dead Indian. That way you're free to take their land.

[ldlamb]

I'll post this here too.

I'll take the points one by one, then discuss the standard of review.

1) There can't be prosecutorial misconduct. That is about overreach on the part of the government. This is a civil verdict, there is no prosecutor.

2) If a defense is present and they fail to assert relevant evidence, that is the fault of the defendant. An appeals court only reviews what is already in the record, they do not take in any new extrinsic evidence when they review on appeal.

3) No authorities sais that Povetkin didn't take Meldonium when it was banned. They said they could not make a determination of when he took it. That is not the same thing.

4) Finally, an appeals court only reviews the record presented at trial. They do not in any sense redo the trial and take new evidence. They can review the trial court completely for errors of law. But that means things like, did the judge allow an expert witness to testify that hadn't provided sufficient foundation that they were an expert or did the judge allow in a document that couldn't be verified as authentic. Even when that is the case, the worst thing that could happen would be the ordering of a new trial, certainly not a directed verdict for Povetkin's team.

5) But the problem for Povetkin is that they dispute the FACTS that were found by the jury. The Appeals court is VERY limited in what review it gives to jury found facts. The standard of review in the 2nd Circuit is sufficient evidence/ Clearly erroneous. What that means in laymens terms is that the jury verdict based on the facts found will be sustained if: 1) there is SUFFICIENT (not substantial) evidence, 2) when construing every legitimately disputed fact in favor of the party that won the verdict, 3) for ANY reasonable person to have found for the litigant that won.

Whatever you think of the evidence......that is a huge burden for Povetkin to overcome on appeal. You always have a right to appeal, but in civil verdicts it is tough to get a verdict overturned based on a dispute of facts. The best that you can usually hope for is a diminution of the damages awarded.

[jockpunk]

You're so biased and full of hate you're insane. That's like saying the only good Indian is a dead Indian. That way you're free to take their land.

That isn't a remotely reasonable comparison.

[Enlightened-One]

Let's not forget the WBC's threat to Povetkin's promoter, Andrei Ryabinsky, last year when he filed his lawsuit against Deontay Wilder:

"The litigation pending between Wilder and Povetkin is going to trial in February of 2017. If Mr. Wilder prevails at that trial, the WBC shall afford Mr. Povetkin the opportunity to show that the trial’s result was not based on a finding that Mr. Povetkin ingested Meldonium after January 1, 2016. If Mr. Povetkin fails to make that showing the WBC shall: (a) withdraw recognition of Povetkin as Interim World Champion (if he wins that title); (b) withdraw any mandatory challenger status he might have; and (c) impose any penalties upon Mr. Povetkin as per the WBC Clean Boxing Program Protocol, which includes suspensions and fines."

[Impractical Poster]

Kalan mad.

[Kalan]

The case should be easily won by Povetkin on appeal.. The head of Wilder and Dibella's legal team, Judd Berstein, misrepresented the facts by telling the jury that the positive urine test came after three negative ones earlier in April, which he said meant that Povetkin took the drug after passing the earlier tests, and said "The only rational explanation for what transpired here is that Mr. Povetkin took meldonium in 2016,"

That statement is demonstrably FALSE... As both WADA and VADA showed when they agreed that there was NO finding of guilt by Povetkin… Just how Povetkin’s legal team messed this up is beyond belief – as any expert witness could have testified that Burstein was giving the jury false information which he must have known to be false. It's up to the defense to destroy false statements made by lying accusers.

No expert witness with any credibility is going to say that the only rational explanation for having a trace amount of Meldonium in one test—when that PED PASSED because the trace amount of Meldonium was so minute, being 1/14th the allowable amount—is that Povetkin took Meldonium when it was banned... Tests can easily vary 70 nanograms due to hydration levels.. One thing you have to do is make sure the jury understands the evidence... If it's not presented properly -- and Berstein who's a very commanding figure gets to promulgate falsehoods -- the jury could be impressed by the man and believe him instead of the truth.

[asdfjkl]

YOU don't understand FACTS... ALL the legal facts are on Povetkin's side... HIs appellate case will be heard and he should eventually win if there's any justice.

And his case against Wilder and DiBella hasn't hit the courts yet... He's suing them for 34 million and his case looks damned solid.

Lol no it doesn't. At this point they should just ban all Russians from boxing like they have in other sports.

Tipical American racist reaction.

[flem1]

The case should be easily won by Povetkin on appeal.. The head of Wilder and Dibella's legal team, Judd Berstein, misrepresented the facts by telling the jury that the positive urine test came after three negative ones earlier in April, which he said meant that Povetkin took the drug after passing the earlier tests, and said "The only rational explanation for what transpired here is that Mr. Povetkin took meldonium in 2016,"

That statement is demonstrably FALSE... As both WADA and VADA showed when they agreed that there was NO finding of guilt by Povetkin… Just how Povetkin’s legal team messed this up is beyond belief – as any expert witness could have testified that Burstein was giving the jury false information which he must have known to be false. It's up to the defense to destroy false statements made by lying accusers.

No expert witness with any credibility is going to say that the only rational explanation for having a trace amount of Meldonium in one test—when that PED PASSED because the trace amount of Meldonium was so minute, being 1/14th the allowable amount—is that Povetkin took Meldonium when it was banned... Tests can easily vary 70 nanograms due to hydration levels.. One thing you have to do is make sure the jury understands the evidence... If it's not presented properly -- and Berstein who's a very commanding figure gets to promulgate falsehoods -- the jury could be impressed by the man and believe him instead of the truth.

Appeals have little to no chance of overturning a decision

[ldlamb]

Nothing in Kalan's first paragraph above is a misrepresentation of facts. It may be only one of many plausible explanations, but that is the opposing counsel's job to rebut. once it goes to the jury, they are the finder of fact and absent extreme circumstances their decision will stand.

Paragraph 2, the testing organizations did not say there was no finding of guilt, they said that the findings were ambiguous. When the facts are ambiguous, the jury is credited with sorting it out.....they did.

Paragraph 3, the jury does not have to be convinced it is the only rational explanation....they only have to be 51 percent sure that it is the most likely explanation.

[jockpunk]

YOU don't understand FACTS... ALL the legal facts are on Povetkin's side... HIs appellate case will be heard and he should eventually win if there's any justice.

And his case against Wilder and DiBella hasn't hit the courts yet... He's suing them for 34 million and his case looks damned solid.

Lol no it doesn't. At this point they should just ban all Russians from boxing like they have in other sports.

Tipical American racist reaction.

Typical dumb euro who doesn't know what racist means.

[asdfjkl]

Lol no it doesn't. At this point they should just ban all Russians from boxing like they have in other sports.

Tipical American racist reaction.

Typical dumb euro who doesn't know what racist means.

Well tell me what racism is and how isn't racism?

[tiny_acres]

Tipical American racist reaction.

Typical dumb euro who doesn't know what racist means.

Well tell me what racism is and how isn't racism?

Racism is hating a race of people.
Xenophobia is hating a culture or society

Russia is a nation not a race.
Hating Russian's or hating American's as you do is xenophobic.
But I do not expect someone of your intelligence to understand this.

[Enlightened-One]

Racism is hating a race of people.

Russia is a nation not a race.

But I do not expect someone of your intelligence to understand this.

The British legal system defines the term "racial group" as:

‪“Racial group – this means any group of people who are defined by reference to their race, colour, nationality(including citizenship) or ethnic or national origin.”‬

Indeed, the UK-based official BBC website defines the term “racism” accordingly:

‪“Racism is when someone is discriminated against(singled out) because of their race, the colour of their skin, their nationality, their accent or first language, or their ethnic or national origin. Racism is a hate crime, and is illegal.”‬

In the UK, if you are derogatory about a group of people who share a common bond, such as nationality or citizenship, then you're committing a crime, since racism is illegal and can lead to imprisonment.

Other countries have similar legislation to outlaw racial discrimination, which includes predjudism against national origin.

[asdfjkl]

Typical dumb euro who doesn't know what racist means.

Well tell me what racism is and how isn't racism?

Racism is hating a race of people.
Xenophobia is hating a culture or society

Russia is a nation not a race.
Hating Russian's or hating American's as you do is xenophobic.
But I do not expect someone of your intelligence to understand this.

This is tipical racism, Russia and eastern Europe are in fact seen as one by these tipical racists and people all the way till the North Pacific Ocean suffer from these comments. Black guys, like Izuagbe Ugonoh for example are usually not seen as part of this by these tipical racists. It's allways white men or woman coming from Russia, or eastern Europe.

Rofl on your latest comment, oh and it's not 's, but just s (twice). But, read back your own latest comment.

Please realise that I do understand that there do exist exceptions, Americans that are not like these tipical racists. But at the same time I expect you to know that most Americans are known for their racism and are made fun of.

Https://coderanch.com/t/41770/Award-Winning-Joke


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-xxis7hDOE

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

[Badhusker]

Good thing the Povetkin nut huggers didn't bet the farm on the ruling, or they would commit suicide. We wouldn't want that now, would we.

[Kalan]

It has nothing to do with nut-hugging... It has nothing to do with Povetkin... It has to do with justice -- and whether their is any in this world.

As Ruben Carter asked the stone faced, conservative judge on his final appeal after 20 years in stir... "All I ask for is justice... Simple justice... That's all I ask."

[caldo2025]

The REAL point to make in this mess is that it might be a landmark case for the sport. This could be VERY good or VERY bad depending upon how you look at it. It's Good if more attention is now placed on testing and accountability. Prior to this, Boxers were postponing and cancelling fights at an alarming rate with hardly any ramifications. Now we have a boxer winning a judgement based on lost income as a result of another boxers inability to make it to fight night by passing all protocols agreed to in principal. Now, not only will boxers be less hesitant to take illegal substances but they will also think twice before postponing fights just because they had a bad camp.

The Bad is that I can see boxers being tied up in court for long periods of time instead of fighting and entertaining fans. It's an important case though, either way you look at it. Not sure how i feel about it yet but I'd like to see how it plays out and what the ripple effects will be.

[SFW]

YOU don't understand FACTS... ALL the legal facts are on Povetkin's side... HIs appellate case will be heard and he should eventually win if there's any justice.

And his case against Wilder and DiBella hasn't hit the courts yet... He's suing them for 34 million and his case looks damned solid.

Lol no it doesn't. At this point they should just ban all Russians from boxing like they have in other sports.

Tipical American racist reaction.

As you spew your own hate everyday lol. Just another hypocritical whiner. Enjoy the loss, must be used to being wrong by now.