Tricky_Trev
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 33,247
Seems quite worrying this. I guess it’s going to drag on even longer. Never dull is it!?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)
- Thread starter jimharri
- Start date
LongsightM13
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately the law in this area is weak and very opaque. A very basic summary is that effectively, until it’s challenged and new case law and precedent is set, the media can pretty much hold onto stuff for as long as they like as long as they can reasonably claim they might need it for future storiesThis was what I was alluding to earlier in the thread. Its one thing a newspaper publishing a set of documents they argue is in the public interest, but surely it's another thing to drip feed them with a view to maximising sales?
cleavers
Moderator
Not strong enough for me, there should be something in there suggesting we'll take action if it continues.Statement from City:
“The questions and matters raised by Der Spiegel appear to be a cynical attempt to publicly re-litigate and undermine a case that has been fully adjudicated, after detailed proceedings and due process, by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
“Manchester City’s policy remains not to comment on out of context materials purported to have been criminally obtained from City Football Group and Manchester City personnel.”
LongsightM13
Well-Known Member
Assumption is BayernWho is pulling the strings with DS?
I thought the judge in Portugal issued an order that nobody anywhere could use the hacked emails? Did I not read that in the CAS verdict?
Obviously, Der Spiegel are based in Germany and not Portugal but does anyone know if that order might have a bearing on how these latest allegations might be pursued?
Obviously, Der Spiegel are based in Germany and not Portugal but does anyone know if that order might have a bearing on how these latest allegations might be pursued?
Centurions
Well-Known Member
Only 5,499,992 documents to go(give or take), then we can all rest easy.Honestly, I really hoped this would fuck off forever. For fans like myself who really just want to talk about football, it's incredibly fucking tedious having to pretend to have any interest in litigation or finance. Guess it's gonna roll on and on and on...sigh.
LongsightM13
Well-Known Member
I wouldn’t worry. I doubt very much UEFA would have the appetite to take us on againOnly 5,499,992 documents to go(give or take), then we can all rest easy.
Centurions
Well-Known Member
I think they said no one could access what the Portuguese authorities had. The DS stuff is separate and on hard drives DS have access to. This is presuming that none of them are copies.I thought the judge in Portugal issued an order that nobody anywhere could use the hacked emails? Did I not read that in the CAS verdict?
Obviously, Der Spiegel are based in Germany and not Portugal but does anyone know if that order might have a bearing on how these latest allegations might be pursued?
Tricky_Trev
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 33,247
Yes it did. But if you go to page 38-41 of the report, CAS explain why that judgement does not apply to this case, and state the emails are admissible as evidence.I thought the judge in Portugal issued an order that nobody anywhere could use the hacked emails? Did I not read that in the CAS verdict?
Obviously, Der Spiegel are based in Germany and not Portugal but does anyone know if that order might have a bearing on how these latest allegations might be pursued?
Now our official explanation is out in the open it is concerning the bastards have over 5 million emails to go through to try and disprove anything we said at cas. The very fact city have felt the need to send out a statement so swiftly shows this is potentially serious.
I deleted it due to the reaction but it is this sort of ongoing crap that was the reason I think we have been crazy to play this out in public. Personally really can’t be arsed with hearing this crap about 2013 and ADUG, Aabar, Etisalat, the royal family, the politics of the Middle East for another 12 months. Der Spiegel still have the keys - that is a problem.Ok my comment was extreme but on the opposite side of ‘happy clapping’ you stated on Twitter how we should have settled. I just felt that was giving an overly false impression to those that might look up to your good knowledge.
dickie davies
Well-Known Member
This was what I was alluding to earlier in the thread. Its one thing a newspaper publishing a set of documents they argue is in the public interest, but surely it's another thing to drip feed them with a view to maximising sales?
That's exactly what the Telegraph did with the MP expenses information
dannybcity
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately the law in this area is weak and very opaque. A very basic summary is that effectively, until it’s challenged and new case law and precedent is set, the media can pretty much hold onto stuff for as long as they like as long as they can reasonably claim they might need it for future stories
Thanks for the reply. But in terms of UEFA hypothetically charging us every time Der Spiegel released something new, wouldn't CAS at some point just rule that any further evidence based on the stolen emails be inadmissible? Otherwise this could go on and on.
I don’t think that works for holding on to someone else’s document cacheThey'll reply that it's in the public interest and that Pinto is a whistle blower, not a criminal. It's the fallback line of every journalist.
citizen_maine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 May 2011
- Messages
- 18,296
He's going at the end of the season anyway KazCan we take DS down ?
@BluePhil8
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 13,425
Can’t see that statement on the app.