The decision outraged U.S. Olympic and gymnastics officials, and led to a torrent of online abuse against both Chiles and Ana Barbosu, the Romanian athlete who ended up with the bronze.
Nope. Not a chance in hell this isn’t fought as far as possible. I’m curious if there any legal or international legal minds on here who can comment/explain their thoughts on how the Swiss Court might look at this conflict of interest. My understanding is that the Swiss Court can only rule on the procedure of CAS, not the result of the appeal. If that’s the case, CAS should be forced to have a new panel look at all available evidence. Who the hell knows what happens next, but some of my agency friends are straight up giddy to try and represent Jordan as she’s going to get massive, massive deals after this - regardless of outcome. She’s handled herself exceptionally well.
American law has a very long dick when it comes to fraud and misrepresentation. Just ask FIFA. Here it looks like there is an obvious conflict that should have been disclosed tot he parties and CAS. was it? Who knows, but if you didn’t and have also ever handled a dollar bill, the FBI will at least take a run at it. The FBI agent and DoJ lawyer who hauls a corrupt international personality into an American courtroom gets to leave their boring $150k/yr government job in northern Virginia for a new hotness $2m/yr corporate lawyer job in lower Manhattan. That’s why they don’t let up.
I think it’s going to depend on whether USA entities had the chance to object. Supposedly “none of the parties involved in the hearing had objected to his appointment as the panel’s chair”. However, it’s unclear whether USAG/USOPC would be included because they were only on the case as interested parties, and the rights of interested parties are unclear (as well as exactly what parts of the trial USAG/USOPC was included in). So, it’s possible that the only people who were given an opportunity to object were the Romanian fed and FIG, because those were the actual parties the case was between (Federation Romanian Gymnastics and Ana Bărbosu v. Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique (FIG) and Donatella Sacchi)
Adding to the mess, there’s some chatter (unconfirmed, but from a reputable journalist) that CAS reached out to the wrong US officials while they were preparing for the case, but unknown how long it took to get the right ones. And going back to the interested parties thing, how much info they were given in order to prepare or how much they were able to participate in the case is unknown. The video evidence they have was denied because it came after the conclusion of the case. But did they have sufficient opportunity to uncover that evidence prior to the hearing?
Nope. Not a chance in hell this isn’t fought as far as possible. I’m curious if there any legal or international legal minds on here who can comment/explain their thoughts on how the Swiss Court might look at this conflict of interest. My understanding is that the Swiss Court can only rule on the procedure of CAS, not the result of the appeal. If that’s the case, CAS should be forced to have a new panel look at all available evidence. Who the hell knows what happens next, but some of my agency friends are straight up giddy to try and represent Jordan as she’s going to get massive, massive deals after this - regardless of outcome. She’s handled herself exceptionally well.
I feel like not revealing possible conflict of interest is pretty big procedural issue but I’m not a lawyer, much less a lawyer of this type of stuff.
American law has a very long dick when it comes to fraud and misrepresentation. Just ask FIFA. Here it looks like there is an obvious conflict that should have been disclosed tot he parties and CAS. was it? Who knows, but if you didn’t and have also ever handled a dollar bill, the FBI will at least take a run at it. The FBI agent and DoJ lawyer who hauls a corrupt international personality into an American courtroom gets to leave their boring $150k/yr government job in northern Virginia for a new hotness $2m/yr corporate lawyer job in lower Manhattan. That’s why they don’t let up.
I think it’s going to depend on whether USA entities had the chance to object. Supposedly “none of the parties involved in the hearing had objected to his appointment as the panel’s chair”. However, it’s unclear whether USAG/USOPC would be included because they were only on the case as interested parties, and the rights of interested parties are unclear (as well as exactly what parts of the trial USAG/USOPC was included in). So, it’s possible that the only people who were given an opportunity to object were the Romanian fed and FIG, because those were the actual parties the case was between (Federation Romanian Gymnastics and Ana Bărbosu v. Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique (FIG) and Donatella Sacchi)
Adding to the mess, there’s some chatter (unconfirmed, but from a reputable journalist) that CAS reached out to the wrong US officials while they were preparing for the case, but unknown how long it took to get the right ones. And going back to the interested parties thing, how much info they were given in order to prepare or how much they were able to participate in the case is unknown. The video evidence they have was denied because it came after the conclusion of the case. But did they have sufficient opportunity to uncover that evidence prior to the hearing?
Basically, there’s still a ton that’s unknown.