Posted on
of 359
  • I’ve attended hundreds of criminal trials and I think the GMC’s case is a) flimsy b) attempting to drag in these ‘sleepers’ by innuendo without offering any evidence.

    You wouldn’t get away with the latter in a criminal case.

    It all seems circumstancial to me but I don’t know whether the burden of proof is the same as a criminal case i.e. beyond reasonable doubt or simply on the balance of probability as in a civil case.

  • Surely given he's admitted 18 of 24 counts against him, there's enough to have him struck off. By everything in the press, he's a fairly broken human so you'd have to assume for his sake the GMC would be better off just ignoring the last 6 and taking his license to practice medicine away for a good amount of time.

  • The verdict on the remaining charges are quite important for the reputation of Sky/Ineos, British cycling, Brailsford, Ellingworth and quite a few riders.

  • As far as I know the tribunal works on the basis of the civil standard of proof - so the GMC would have to prove on a balance of probabilities any allegation that it makes. I suppose they might be saying that, in circumstances where the testosterone was ordered, if you exclude other possible explanations (e.g. that it was ordered for Sutton to treat erectile dysfunction, that it was ordered by accident and that it was ordered for any other legitimate purpose) the only conclusion left open to the tribunal is that it was ordered for the purpose of doping a rider.

    Not saying that would work - it seems like an extraordinary leap and one that bearing in mind the implications a court would not be likely to make without evidence that specifically supports it...

  • balance of probabilities

    Thanks for confirming.

    The whole thing absolutely stinks when you put these parts together with the Jiffy bag, missing laptops etc.

  • Freeman case adjourned again due to unforeseen circumstances.

  • Aderlass case information has NADA looking into German GCN commentator Björn Thurau doping when a pro.­olitik/doping/doping-ermittlungen-gegen-­thurau-belastende-post-von-den-fahndern-­17178145.html

  • Asking a question that is central to every doping case: Among other things, the Nada investigation against Thurau is based on the descriptions of the Swiss. Did he buy fabric from the German?

  • I'm guessing that's a overly literal translation of Stoff.

  • Maybe he's trying to say that Armstrong would've won if no one doped? Either way, why not just leave it

  • clicks & evidently it works

  • I seem to recall him saying that he'd retire from commentary if it was proven Lance had doped. Sadly he didn't keep that promise.

  • Mores the shame. He’s no Carlton Kirby.

  • I knew the squeaky clean Aussies were robbed! Robbed, I tells ya!

  • So I guess the inference is Wiggo liked a bit of Testogel in a jiffy bag, but there isn't enough evidence to name him as the recipient?

  • I wonder where this goes next.

    Judge led inquiry into British Cycling?

    Are the typesetters getting asterisks ready for the cycling knights?

  • I'd it were as simple as BC and sky systematically doping, why doesn't the good doctor just come clean and throw them under the bus? He seems to have been basically ruined by the ensuing mess, it all seems so odd.

  • team sky doctor guilty of doping
    who was it for ?

  • If only Sutton had swallowed his pride and taken the fall by admitting it was for his “domestic” use.

  • Thread is unusually quiet given the verdict. @andyp, @dubtap help us make sense of it all.

  • Thread is unusually quiet

    No-one here plays game of biek anymore.

  • Thread is unusually quiet given the verdict

    They're going to read and analyse the full text of the verdict before commenting. LOL.

  • The whole thing fucking stinks. Freeman and Sutton hung out to dry to cover up a culture of cheating.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview


Posted by Avatar for rpm @rpm