What if they're innocent?

Unfortunately, I think the best they can do is sue the race organizers
after the fact.

The problem is once accused, you're never really exonerated..

This feels like another McCarthy era..

C.H. Luu said:

Hi Guys:

What happens if a ride is barred from participating a race and is later
exhonerated? Does the rider have any recourse or the entity that
accused him?

Thanks,
Claude

"C.H. Luu" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...
| Hi Guys:
|
| What happens if a ride is barred from participating a race and is later
| exhonerated? Does the rider have any recourse or the entity that
| accused him?

Not really. Riders do not have a "right" to participate in any event. They
are there by invitation.

Ask Danilo DiLuca he was excluded from the tour because his name came up in
an investigation.

Quoted message said:

Not really. Riders do not have a "right" to participate in any event. They
are there by invitation.

I thought teams were invited?

But still, the individual's rights have been infringed by supposition and
innuendo. If it is proven false, surely libel laws come into effect as the
UCI / ASO/ l'Equipe etc. have published their names as having been involved
in a drug ring.

This libel has led to their being banned from a sporting event at which
Ulrich as favorite stood to win 400.000 euro. Surely they have recourse to
the law, even if only to force ASO / UCI to follow standard laws and
presumptions i.e innocent till PROVEN guilty.

Jean

C.H. Luu said:

Hi Guys:

What happens if a ride is barred from participating a race and is later
exhonerated? Does the rider have any recourse or the entity that
accused him?

Thanks,
Claude

Wasn't this a decision by the teams themselves? If so, I doubt it.

news.absamail.co.za says...

Quoted message said:

I thought teams were invited?

But still, the individual's rights have been infringed by supposition and
innuendo. If it is proven false, surely libel laws come into effect as the
UCI / ASO/ l'Equipe etc. have published their names as having been involved
in a drug ring.

This libel has led to their being banned from a sporting event at which
Ulrich as favorite stood to win 400.000 euro. Surely they have recourse to
the law, even if only to force ASO / UCI to follow standard laws and
presumptions i.e innocent till PROVEN guilty.

But from everything I have heard is that it is the teams who are pulling
their riders, not the race organizers. Even the Astana team pulled
itself from the race in the end. I doubt that Ulrich and Basso will sue
their own teams.

C.H. Luu said:

What happens if a ride is barred from participating a race and is later
exhonerated? Does the rider have any recourse or the entity that
accused him?

Once the ban is lifted, they can start racing and make their point by
winning them with a vengeance. As simple as that.

MJ;

Quoted message said:

But from everything I have heard is that it is the teams who are pulling
their riders, not the race organizers. Even the Astana team pulled
itself from the race in the end. I doubt that Ulrich and Basso will sue
their own teams.

If I was innocent, I would trash them, they took it upon themselves to end
my career, y'all going with me, including the stupid system that presumes
guilt and does not allow me to defend myself. Hell being found guilty 'cos
a name the same as my dog is on the back of a business card, that puppy
would not stand up in any court and the WADA / UCI / ASO know it that is why
there is no arbitration available, only months later when it is too late.
Heck ASO didn't even respect court decisions.

Jean - feeling particularly vindictive today.

In article <[email hidden]>, Barnard

Frederick said:

news.absamail.co.za says...

Quoted message said:

I thought teams were invited?

But still, the individual's rights have been infringed by supposition and
innuendo. If it is proven false, surely libel laws come into effect as the
UCI / ASO/ l'Equipe etc. have published their names as having been involved
in a drug ring.

This libel has led to their being banned from a sporting event at which
Ulrich as favorite stood to win 400.000 euro. Surely they have recourse to
the law, even if only to force ASO / UCI to follow standard laws and
presumptions i.e innocent till PROVEN guilty.

But from everything I have heard is that it is the teams who are pulling
their riders, not the race organizers. Even the Astana team pulled
itself from the race in the end. I doubt that Ulrich and Basso will sue
their own teams.

The teams are complying with the protocol they ALL endorsed prior to
participating.

[From:http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/news/articles/10184.0.html]
<quote>
"The directors unanimously decided to uphold the code of ethics that
was signed by all teams on January 1, 2005 which stated that no team
would allow a rider to compete while under investigation in any doping
affair."
</quote>

I suspect there are contingencies in the cyclists' contracts that
preclude them from holding the teams liable in such cases. And don't
expect the riders to be recompensed by the Guardia Civil should its
investigation prove to be poorly conducted.

Luke

Quoted message said:

The problem is once accused, you're never really exonerated..

This feels like another McCarthy era..

True, but unlike the McCarthy era, the riders continue to be paid their
salaries during the investigations. Not their bonuses for what they might
have accomplished, of course, but it's not quite as if they're thrown out on
the streets. Plus, they knew what they were signing up for when they took
the job. And finally, so far there have been darned few accused who later
appeared to be innocent.

It is most definitely a different way of looking at "justice" than we're
used to though.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"shane" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Unfortunately, I think the best they can do is sue the race organizers
after the fact.

The problem is once accused, you're never really exonerated..

This feels like another McCarthy era..

C.H. Luu said:

Hi Guys:

What happens if a ride is barred from participating a race and is later
exhonerated? Does the rider have any recourse or the entity that
accused him?

Thanks,
Claude

news.absamail.co.za said:

Quoted message said:

But from everything I have heard is that it is the teams who are pulling
their riders, not the race organizers. Even the Astana team pulled
itself from the race in the end. I doubt that Ulrich and Basso will sue
their own teams.

If I was innocent, I would trash them, they took it upon themselves to end
my career, y'all going with me, including the stupid system that presumes
guilt and does not allow me to defend myself. Hell being found guilty 'cos
a name the same as my dog is on the back of a business card, that puppy
would not stand up in any court [...]

Maybe if you offered him a dog biscuit?

Mark

In article <[email hidden]>,

Mark said:

news.absamail.co.za said:

Quoted message said:

But from everything I have heard is that it is the teams who are pulling
their riders, not the race organizers. Even the Astana team pulled
itself from the race in the end. I doubt that Ulrich and Basso will sue
their own teams.

If I was innocent, I would trash them, they took it upon themselves to end
my career, y'all going with me, including the stupid system that presumes
guilt and does not allow me to defend myself. Hell being found guilty 'cos
a name the same as my dog is on the back of a business card, that puppy
would not stand up in any court [...]

Maybe if you offered him a dog biscuit?

Mark

I believe the standard test is to get the rider to swear on the life of
his dog.

If the dog dies, the rider is guilty,

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

It is most definitely a different way of looking at "justice" than we're
used to though.

You might call it Lafferty Justice.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Hi Guys:

What happens if a ride is barred from participating a race and is later
exhonerated? Does the rider have any recourse or the entity that
accused him?

They will say 'oops. Sorry. You can race next year.'.
----------------
Alex

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Wasn't this a decision by the teams themselves?

Yes, it was a team decision. But ASO put pressure on them to make that
decision. You can be sure that without the ASO pressure, they would have
made different decisions.
-------------
Alex

Mikko J Virtanen said:

C.H. Luu said:

What happens if a ride is barred from participating a race and is later
exhonerated? Does the rider have any recourse or the entity that
accused him?

Once the ban is lifted, they can start racing and make their point by
winning them with a vengeance. As simple as that.

MJ;

"As simple as that?" They won't be allowed to race in THIS TdF, and
there is no possible compensation for such a penalty.

And not as simple as that for, say, Vinokourov, who is not even accused
of an ethical violation but is nowhere to be found.

The complicated part of the situation to me is, who and what benefits
from these expulsions? The sponsors? The UCI? ASO? WADA? Certainly
not the riders, who must be rethinking whether a union with concerns
for individual rights and due process can be a worthwhile organization.
Counting on the cycling groups to protect the riders, or "cycling"
itself, in any way is to lean on a very shaky reed.

Wayne

in message <[email hidden]>, Wayne

(') said:

The complicated part of the situation to me is, who and what benefits
from these expulsions?  The sponsors?  The UCI?  ASO?  WADA? Â

Seriously, the betting industry benefits from these expulsions. A lot of
people had cumulatively bet a lot of money on Basso or Ullrich or
Vinokourov or Mancebo winning the Tour. Definitely enough to make it
worth faking evidence. Not that I'm saying the evidence /is/ faked, but
it's a plausible explanation.

These straws are getting more tenuous as the days go on, I admit.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; when in the [censored], the wise man plants courgettes

Wayne said:

And not as simple as that for, say, Vinokourov, who is not even accused
of an ethical violation but is nowhere to be found.

Well, it's like that penalty shot given to Italy against Australia
that decided the match. No foul was committed. Only compensation the
Australians are ever going to get is the fact that that particular
referee will not be used in matches of that importance any more.

Vino will probably be able to utilize his misfortune while seeking new
sponsors for his new team.

MJ;

--
..signature necesse est