BoxRec

ldlamb wrote: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.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:That coming from a thoroughly unbiased observer.

boxing_rocks wrote: So, WADA can't determine when Povetkin took meldonium, but random jurors can ??? They FOUND NO FACTS, just stated their biased opinion.

ldlamb wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote: So, WADA can't determine when Povetkin took meldonium, but random jurors can ??? They FOUND NO FACTS, just stated their biased opinion.

The jury only needs to be 51% sure of what happened. That is called a finding of fact in civil litigation

boxing_rocks wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:That coming from a thoroughly unbiased observer.

I am trying to not be biased. I am not saying that Povetkin didn't take meldonium in 2016. I am just saying that there is no proof that he did.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:That coming from a thoroughly unbiased observer.

I am trying to not be biased. I am not saying that Povetkin didn't take meldonium in 2016. I am just saying that there is no proof that he did.

You're doing a poor job.

boxing_rocks wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:
I am trying to not be biased. I am not saying that Povetkin didn't take meldonium in 2016. I am just saying that there is no proof that he did.

You're doing a poor job.

And how are you qualified to make such conclusions? You can be biased too.

Impractical Poster wrote:Free Povetkin!!!

Kalan wrote:You have less than half a brain... Since the final ruling by every drug testing agency and Boxing authority that studied this case was that Povetkin is innocent, how does Wilder deserve to get millions of dollars from the man he refused to fight???

montrealsuper wrote:Drug testing never catches A side house fighters - drug testing is a weapon to protect and preserve lucrative in house fighters - Floyd was caught using an ILLEGAL IV the day before Pac fight and it was covered up - Floyd was protected A side house fighter - Povetkin is getting railroaded by the corrupt estab and it's kangaroo court -

BitPlayer wrote:

Kalan wrote:You have less than half a brain... Since the final ruling by every drug testing agency and Boxing authority that studied this case was that Povetkin is innocent, how does Wilder deserve to get millions of dollars from the man he refused to fight???

No it wasn't. Find one that concluded that. Not that they didn't have enough to conclude guilt, but he was actually innocent.

Kalan wrote: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

greg wrote:

BitPlayer wrote:

Kalan wrote:You have less than half a brain... Since the final ruling by every drug testing agency and Boxing authority that studied this case was that Povetkin is innocent, how does Wilder deserve to get millions of dollars from the man he refused to fight???

No it wasn't. Find one that concluded that. Not that they didn't have enough to conclude guilt, but he was actually innocent.

WBC ruling: "If during the course of the pending litigation between Povetkin and WBC champion Deontay Wilder, the Court makes a final ruling that differs from the findings set forth herein, the WBC shall have the right to review this ruling and take any course of action it may deem appropriate...."

BitPlayer wrote:

Kalan wrote: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

http://www.worldboxingnews.net/2017/02/ ... k-positive

greg wrote:

BitPlayer wrote: No it wasn't. Find one that concluded that. Not that they didn't have enough to conclude guilt, but he was actually innocent.

WBC ruling: "If during the course of the pending litigation between Povetkin and WBC champion Deontay Wilder, the Court makes a final ruling that differs from the findings set forth herein, the WBC shall have the right to review this ruling and take any course of action it may deem appropriate...."

That doesn't imply he's innocent.

We lack the evidence to prove guilt =/= He's innocent

ldlamb wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote: So, WADA can't determine when Povetkin took meldonium, but random jurors can ??? They FOUND NO FACTS, just stated their biased opinion.

The jury only needs to be 51% sure of what happened. That is called a finding of fact in civil litigation

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:And anyone with half a brain is qualified to shoot down those of you whom have a dozen or so corrupt rulings against poor Povetkin. It's as pathetic as any postings in Internet history.

boxing_rocks wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:And anyone with half a brain is qualified to shoot down those of you whom have a dozen or so corrupt rulings against poor Povetkin. It's as pathetic as any postings in Internet history.

Really ??? A US Congresswoman believed that Russians organized a coup in inexisting African country Limpopo,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yiu7eSSM_4Q

but twelve jurors can figure something WADA experts couldn't ?

BitPlayer wrote:

montrealsuper wrote:Drug testing never catches A side house fighters - drug testing is a weapon to protect and preserve lucrative in house fighters - Floyd was caught using an ILLEGAL IV the day before Pac fight and it was covered up - Floyd was protected A side house fighter - Povetkin is getting railroaded by the corrupt estab and it's kangaroo court -

Surely such a grand conspiracy theory requires more evidence than "Povetkin can't be guilty!". Like leaked documents, whistleblowers, certain movements of money, that sort of thing.