BoxRec

boxing_rocks wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

SteveO wrote: If that's true - I smell a rat.

It is true lol, how comes barely anyone knows this?

No, it is not true. Independent test(s) were taken at different time(s).

Same time frame... They're relevant... They're evidence

Kalan wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

asdfjkl wrote: It is true lol, how comes barely anyone knows this?

No, it is not true. Independent test(s) were taken at different time(s).

Same time frame... They're relevant... They're evidence

Do you have dates backed by reliable sources? I haven't seen any which likely means that independent test(s) were not close to the failed one.

This will all come out in the trial.. VADA and Margaret Goodwin actually harassed Povetkin with many more tests than they gave Wilder.. This is one reason Povetkin started getting other tests because his team thought something was not right..

They also believe his tests were manipulated and they can't understand why VADA would say Povetkin tested dirty when he didn't.. According to the WADA guidelines and concentrations, Povetkin easily passed all his tests, so why was VADA claiming he was dirty??? They wouldn't be lying unless they were deliberately trying to destroy the Moscow based Wilder-Povetkin fight and Ryabinsky's promotion.

VADA is not claiming anything. They are just reporting a concentration which they allegedly discovered. It was up to WBC to make conclusions which they did based on WADA guidelines.

The court is about the Wilder vs Povetkin situation, so it has nothing to do with the latest positive test.

VADA and the WBC are in cahoots... They worked together to destroy the Wilder-Povetin fight card in Russia..

They've worked out a deal where all of the WBC champions have to use VADA as their mandatory testing program... To get even more testing under their control they're almost forcing people onto their "Clean Boxer Program" taking year around testing at the boxer's expense.. Victor Conte at first denied that he paid for Nonito Donaire's year around testing program, until Donaire admitted it saying, "Conte paid for all the tests that I'm given" They used famous boxers to get others into the program and they're relationship with the WBC is a conflict of interest as well..

By the way Dr. Don Catlin, one of the foremost experts on PEDs in the world, and who's an adviser to VADA, says there is NO evidence that Maldonium is a PED.. It's an over-the-counter medication you can easily get without a prescription.. It was just fine to use under WADA and other Anti-doping agencies for over 30 years and was only added to the list in 2016.. The only reason it's banned is it's a product of Eastern Europe.

..the jury in New York has just ruled against Povetkin..

greg wrote:..the jury in New York has just ruled against Povetkin..

Ryabinsky and Povetkin will inevitably appeal and this entire saga will go on-and-on-and-on...

Ha who didn't see that coming. Povetkin guilty as all hell. Typical eastern euro scumbag.

Here's an interesting Tweet posted on Andrey Ryabinskiy's Twitter page:
https://twitter.com/MaxwellBear1/status ... 1721688064

Enlightened-One wrote:

greg wrote:..the jury in New York has just ruled against Povetkin..

Ryabinsky and Povetkin will inevitably appeal and this entire saga will go on-and-on-and-on...

Appeals have very little chances to succeed. Wilder won.

jockpunk wrote:Ha who didn't see that coming. Povetkin guilty as all hell. Typical eastern euro scumbag.

Those judges are probably as brain washed as this jock_itch_punk.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

greg wrote:..the jury in New York has just ruled against Povetkin..

Ryabinsky and Povetkin will inevitably appeal and this entire saga will go on-and-on-and-on...

Appeals have very little chances to succeed. Wilder won.

I have to admit, I’m a bit shocked at the speed of the jury’s judgement, not necessarily the decision itself.

It took them only 32 minutes to reach a conclusion that Povetkin used PED’s during the lead-up to his proposed title fight against Deontay Wilder, when the Russian was cleared by both WADA and the WBC, with the latter organisation going so far as to claim that it was "scientifically impossible to prove" that he’d taken meldonium after the specified deadline.

So I’d be intrigued to know what new evidence was presented that compelled the jury to draw such a hasty conclusion about Povetkin ingesting meldonium.

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: Ryabinsky and Povetkin will inevitably appeal and this entire saga will go on-and-on-and-on...

Appeals have very little chances to succeed. Wilder won.

I have to admit, I’m a bit shocked at the speed of the jury’s judgement, not necessarily the decision itself.

It took them only 32 minutes to reach a conclusion that Povetkin used PED’s during the lead-up to his title fight against Deontay Wilder, when the Russian was cleared by both WADA and the WBC, with the latter organisation going so far as to claim that it was "scientifically impossible to prove" that he’d taken meldonium after the specified deadline.

So I’d be intrigued to know what new evidence was presented that compelled the jury to draw such a hasty conclusion about Povetkin ingesting meldonium.

Based on that speed, they were clearly biased.

Disgusting, very unfair.

Perhaps the evidence so conclusive there was no need for thumb twiddling and bum scratching?

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

greg wrote:..the jury in New York has just ruled against Povetkin..

Ryabinsky and Povetkin will inevitably appeal and this entire saga will go on-and-on-and-on...

Appeals have very little chances to succeed. Wilder won.

Too bad you couldn't bet on it. Shocking anyone thought he wouldn't. Ryabinsky is just rich enough to waste money. He knows he's paying wilder. Christ, he set the precedent as a plaintiff!

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:
Appeals have very little chances to succeed. Wilder won.

I have to admit, I’m a bit shocked at the speed of the jury’s judgement, not necessarily the decision itself.

It took them only 32 minutes to reach a conclusion that Povetkin used PED’s during the lead-up to his title fight against Deontay Wilder, when the Russian was cleared by both WADA and the WBC, with the latter organisation going so far as to claim that it was "scientifically impossible to prove" that he’d taken meldonium after the specified deadline.

So I’d be intrigued to know what new evidence was presented that compelled the jury to draw such a hasty conclusion about Povetkin ingesting meldonium.

Based on that speed, they were clearly biased.

Or the evidence was obvious.

ldlamb wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: I have to admit, I’m a bit shocked at the speed of the jury’s judgement, not necessarily the decision itself.

It took them only 32 minutes to reach a conclusion that Povetkin used PED’s during the lead-up to his title fight against Deontay Wilder, when the Russian was cleared by both WADA and the WBC, with the latter organisation going so far as to claim that it was "scientifically impossible to prove" that he’d taken meldonium after the specified deadline.

So I’d be intrigued to know what new evidence was presented that compelled the jury to draw such a hasty conclusion about Povetkin ingesting meldonium.

Based on that speed, they were clearly biased.

Or the evidence was obvious.

Obviously this verdict is complete 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 the merits 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.

Obviously, this verdict was correct one.

And I'm not sure you understand what an appeals court does when reviewing a jury verdict. They certainly don't retry the case on the "merits" as you are suggesting.

If the evidence or case hasn't been presented fairly... and in this case the facts are all on Povetkin's side so the verdict makes no sense whatever... If there is prosecutorial misconduct...which there could easily be in this case... if evidence wasn't presented at all, which is often the case because it almost looks the the case was dumped by the defense...they had a fat pitch over the plate... the case is retired or the verdict dismissed

How does a case where there's a finding by authorities that Povetkin DID NOT take Meldonium when it was banned result in liability for him when the fight was postponed because of a misinterpreted PED test??? Povetkin did everything in his power to go through with the Wilder and Stiverne matches.. and the WBC, VADA, and Wilder did everything possible to kill the fight.

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.

The plantiff's lawyer acts as the prosecutor in a civil case... 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 was false.

Kalan wrote:The plantiff's lawyer acts as the prosecutor in a civil case... 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 was false.

Just accept it. Povetkin will now be suspended for 2 years by the WBC.
The other alphabet groups will follow this.
Ryabinsky will get Povetkin fights in Russia and be able to take any and all drugs he wants.
But Povetkin is done as a contender.

You're full of crap... Povetkin isn't done with Wilder, VADA, the WBC or his lawsuits... He knows he's innocent and never took PEDs and he'll prevail