CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

ManCityX said:
Projectriver always gives off the vibe he would have been more excited if we didn’t get off. Maybe the podcast would have got more views then I dunno.
Click to expand...

That's pretty unfair that pal, he's one of the few people on here who understands the legalities of it all and has always given his honest opinion as far as I'm concerned, good or bad.
 
TheThirdDeano said:
You've been nothing but negative this entire thing.

The fact they changed it is the issue not what they changed it to. How can you give them the credibility you are knowing the past DS has, including having to fire staff for making up stories and now editing and cherry picking emails.
Click to expand...

I've been balanced in fact. And generally and broadly correct in my reading. Denying the veracity of the emails is head in the sands stuff. I mean that is fine if you like but I think people generally prefer to deal with this head on. I've commented where Der Spiegel's spin is misleading and where the emails are not damaging but that is not the full answer.
 
ayrshire_blue said:
I'm sensing quite a change of tone from @projectriver in both his tweets and posts on here..
Click to expand...

I am shocked City don't now control the documents and EIC still have the database. Of course, they are going to be furiously looking to undermine the judgment. That is a potential issue for the club. Will probably come to nothing but it complicates things.
 
@projectriver How does this work with public interest. I accept that it was in public interest for UEFA to investigate the stolen emails, but if Der Spiegel keep drip feeding them like this at what point would CAS say they were no longer admissible. It seems like we've just got to the stage Der Spiegel are releasing them as and when they like to shift newspapers.
 
TheThirdDeano said:
Even so, what was agreed in CAS, was a news outlet who cherry picked evidence and distorded (read changed) emails to suit their narrative is an issue in itself, any leaks that come out there from here on out cannot and should not be taken at anything over than a pot shot at us.
Click to expand...

Oh, they are definitely partly trying to defend their allegations being binned by CAS, and partly to use City as a smokescreen and to keep others interested in them. If DS thought they were incriminating, they would have published them.

All the emails gave was the prima facie case for UEFA to investigate. They gave ideas to follow, but were not enough. As @Gremlin says above, this is now nearly 2 years on, meaning they are even more meaningless.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
I'm concerned enough to want City to shut this Der Spiegel stuff down ASAP, with whatever legal means necessary.

It's like a blackmailer who keeps coming back for more.

Our rivals don't need any invitation to call for more to be asked of Uefa.

It's entirely plausible they held on to this latest batch as a cynical insurance policy just in case we won?

We were daft enough to be caught with our pants down in the first place re being hacked, so forgive me being worried that someone is trying to now hang us by our own petard.

I've never been in any doubt we have sailed close to the wind, but FFS, make sure the trail is covered.
Click to expand...

Was it you that said Winterbach was in some trouble at der Spiegel over the 2018 world cup exposé that went nowhere, or was that @Prestwich_Blue ?
 
projectriver said:
I am shocked City don't now control the documents and EIC still have the database. Of course, they are going to be furiously looking to undermine the judgment. That is a potential issue for the club. Will probably come to nothing but it complicates things.
Click to expand...

would the other outstanding legal action have an impact on this?
 
dickie davies said:
But...... two emails from two different days patched together surely is deceiving readers, which is what that reporter admitted to
Click to expand...

Fair enough - I don't know the case. However there is a difference between creating a misleading thing and a distorted one. It's why so many demands on here about media articles being libellous are wrong - they've slanted things rather than invented things.
 
ManCityX said:
Projectriver always gives off the vibe he would have been more excited if we didn’t get off. Maybe the podcast would have got more views then I dunno.
Click to expand...
It's just nonsense. Idiotic in fact. Couldn't care less who listens to the podcast. I do it purely to assist fellow obsessives understand the situation better. And my analysis has been broadly correct, lacking in happy clappy nonsense but calling out situations where people try and mislead on minor points such as Der Spiegel's emails today.

BUT the concern is that we now have another round of Der Spiegel searching the database. It will probably come to nothing. But it does complicate the thing if they can still trawl 5.5m docs with a list of target statements to undermine from the CAS judgment.
 
mrbelfry said:
The failure to co-operate stuff seems to be mostly limited to City holding back information from the AC that we presented at CAS. I think we tried to argue about the leaks and due process and CAS weren't overly impressed that that demonstrated a bias - for example the leaks occurred after the IC had made the decisions - so whilst they were concerning didn't have an impact on decision making. I think CAS also argued that the AC represented a fresh start but CAS definitely did so what happened previously became irrelevant. I think they said UEFA's requests for information were reasonable and should have been adhered to or explanations offered as to why they couldn't be.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure that the IC leaking the findings did not necessarily have an impact on the decision making. The fact that decisions were leaked means that someone on the IC was secretly in touch with someone on the outside of the IC. That relationship probably existed before the investigation, and it is feasible that that member of the IC was influenced by that person. It is even possible that the IC member was being paid off by the person or persons they leaked the information to. It is quite possible that the IC was tainted, and with UEFA's history, even bribed.
 
projectriver said:
It's just nonsense. Idiotic in fact. Couldn't care less who listens to the podcast. I do it purely to assist fellow obsessives understand the situation better. And my analysis has been broadly correct, lacking in happy clappy nonsense but calling out situations where people try and mislead on minor points such as Der Spiegel's emails today.

BUT the concern is that we now have another round of Der Spiegel searching the database. It will probably come to nothing. But it does complicate the thing if they can still trawl 5.5m docs with a list of target statements to undermine from the CAS judgment.
Click to expand...
Is it fair to assume they’ll search this database and attempt to find something that contradicts points from the CAS judgement but it’s also unlikely they are going to find some new, earth shattering revelation? Just assuming if they had something major they would not have sat on it for 2 years...unless they are really vindictive.
 
blueyorkie said:
However it does show that they were intent on sticking the knife in by fair means or foul. In my limited knowledge I do know that tampering with evidence is a very serious matter!
Click to expand...
They are a magazine. They have no responsibility to us. They haven't "tampered" with evidence - they aren't the police.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
What I still can't get my head round is that CAS found we'd failed to co-operate with UEFA yet also found that we'd done nothing wrong concerning what they were investigating us for anyway.

I'd assume we refused to co-operate originally on the grounds that the emails were stolen, which isn't in dispute, therefore UEFA had no right to use them as evidence anyway. While CAS ultimately determined that they were allowed to rely on them, there was clearly a valid legal question as to their admissibility. CAS even said our lawyers were justified in vigorously defending our non-cooperation stance.

Had we refused to submit supporting evidence for our annual FFP return despite numerous requests, for example, then that would plainly justify a non-cooperation charge and significant fine. But we didn't.

In that case, I don't see how CAS were right to uphold the non co-operation charge and impose such a significant fine. I'd have expected CAS to say that while we certainly initially refused to co-operate, we genuinely felt we had a valid, legal right not to do so, on the grounds that the emails were stolen and presented out of context. Having produced the required evidence at CAS, which was agreed with UEFA, they should have dropped that charge in my view.
Click to expand...
Maybe that was part of some compromise deal we agreed to in order to soften the blow for UEFA at their request after being destroyed at the hearing?
 
projectriver said:
I am shocked City don't now control the documents and EIC still have the database. Of course, they are going to be furiously looking to undermine the judgment. That is a potential issue for the club. Will probably come to nothing but it complicates things.
Click to expand...

I asked this a little earlier in the thread

Do you reckon it's now time to get the lawyers involved with DS?
They have in their possession illegally obtained documents and emails of City's that will expressly state on them

" This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential and/or legally privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, copy, print or distribute this e-mail or attachments. If you have received it in error please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of the message and any attachments. The view of the author may not necessarily reflect those of the companies. The companies make no representation or warranty as to the absence of viruses in this e-mail or any attachments."

Plus DS deliberately altered emails and then printed the manipulated emails, so in fact "lied"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top