MCFC v UEFA | Verdict 13 Jul 20

[Nick]

Not sure Mase the PL will stick the boot in!

Both of the red shite's will already have lobbied the PL to rescind titles make no mistake.

"I'm taking my ball home " cunts

[sheblue]

Apparently the verdict wont be known for several months. Why I have no idea.

If we are banned it will be out.

And reported with absolute glee

Oh the glee and joy will be abso immense.

[BlueinBosnia]

We MAY have been creative with the rules (any Business / accountant) but any evidence they have on this was obtained illegally therefore cant be evidence?

Add to that the process has been unjust?

I may be wrong on this, but I think illegally obtained evidence is only automatically excluded in criminal cases. In civil cases, it can be admitted at the discretion of a judge/tribunal.

There are so many different legal systems at play here (Portugal, where the hack was initiated from, Germany, where the hacked information was published, Swiss, as per the CAS, or any other law that both parties may agree upon, as well as UEFA's own rules and interpretations of them) that a qualified person would have to sit down for hours to pick everything apart.

The crux of our argument, as I see it, is that the evidence shouldn't have been used by UEFA as justification for a ban as it was incomplete, we don't trust UEFA with the complete documentation, and there are no legal grounds for us to hand over confidential internal communications to supplement documents that they shouldn't have in the first place, or verify the authenticity of those that they already have.

[carl_feedthegoat]

We MAY have been creative with the rules (any Business / accountant) but any evidence they have on this was obtained illegally therefore cant be evidence?

Add to that the process has been unjust?

I may be wrong on this, but I think illegally obtained evidence is only automatically excluded in criminal cases. In civil cases, it can be admitted at the discretion of a judge/tribunal.
.

https://www.thelawyer.com/illegally-obt ... e-lawyers/

[dazby]

Is there any coverage of this?

[BlueinBosnia]

We MAY have been creative with the rules (any Business / accountant) but any evidence they have on this was obtained illegally therefore cant be evidence?

Add to that the process has been unjust?

I may be wrong on this, but I think illegally obtained evidence is only automatically excluded in criminal cases. In civil cases, it can be admitted at the discretion of a judge/tribunal.
.

https://www.thelawyer.com/illegally-obt ... e-lawyers/

Wrong country. Try the Swiss criminal code:

Art. 141 Admissibility of unlawfully obtained evidence
[...]
2 Evidence that criminal justice authorities have obtained by criminal methods or by violating regulations on admissibility is inadmissible unless it is essential that it be admitted in order to secure a conviction for a serious offence.

So it could be admissible in a serious offence (I think that's one that carries a 5+ year jail sentence).

While double-checking that, I came across a CAS case that went before the Swiss Supreme Court, which confirms that illegally obtained evidence can be considered by the CAS:

http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitratio ... 8447265625

[Nigels Tackle]

Is there any coverage of this?

city64 is providing live updates from twitter

[dazby]

But no mainstream coverage?

[patrickblue]

We MAY have been creative with the rules (any Business / accountant) but any evidence they have on this was obtained illegally therefore cant be evidence?

Add to that the process has been unjust?

I may be wrong on this, but I think illegally obtained evidence is only automatically excluded in criminal cases. In civil cases, it can be admitted at the discretion of a judge/tribunal.
.

https://www.thelawyer.com/illegally-obt ... e-lawyers/

I seem to remember reading somewhere amongst all the media "opinions" regarding the case, that what BiB is saying is correct.

[carl_feedthegoat]

We MAY have been creative with the rules (any Business / accountant) but any evidence they have on this was obtained illegally therefore cant be evidence?

Add to that the process has been unjust?

I may be wrong on this, but I think illegally obtained evidence is only automatically excluded in criminal cases. In civil cases, it can be admitted at the discretion of a judge/tribunal.
.

https://www.thelawyer.com/illegally-obt ... e-lawyers/

I seem to remember reading somewhere amongst all the media "opinions" regarding the case, that what BiB is saying is correct.

Well , unless we have shit on them, and if this is allowed,then we will be banned.

[City64]

MCFC twitter hacks saying the case is over and nothing will be made public until August . I’m guessing if any bad news affecting MCFC will be leaked because that what the bent cunts at UEFA do .

[City64]

Simon Stone now reporting CAS will publish findings as early as early July ? Is this good or bad ?

[blues2win]

Date for publication of decision first half of July. Both sides expressed themselves as happy with the process, claims CAS. Hmm.


https://twitter.com/city_chief/status/1 ... 15329?s=21

[City64]

Date for publication of decision first half of July. Both sides expressed themselves as happy with the process, claims CAS. Hmm.


https://twitter.com/city_chief/status/1 ... 15329?s=21

Many seem to think we have accepted a one year ban or cleared of all charges . Significant statement in the circumstances.

[blues2win]

Neither side would have wanted to piss off the three man panel by saying otherwise I suppose. City chose one, UEFA another and CAS chose the third, I think. All from a standing list available. Don’t know on what basis the two sides would have made their respective choices.

[blues2win]

This link seems to suggest that all decisions are by consensus so no vote and could result in compromise between viewpoints as a result.

http://www.swissarbitrationdecisions.co ... itrator-in

[BlueinBosnia]

I seem to remember reading somewhere amongst all the media "opinions" regarding the case, that what BiB is saying is correct.

Well , unless we have shit on them, and if this is allowed,then we will be banned.

Not really. As I said above, our arguments in press releases etc., have implied we're peeved with UEFA using incomplete evidence to convict us, and asking us to fill in the gaps for them by supplying the rest of the information that they shouldn't have been privy to in the first place.

It may well be the case that we've handed it over to CAS, and they've seen there's no case to answer to, but we didn't want to hand it over to UEFA in the first place because they were using bullying tactics, and we didn't want to set a precedent whereby clubs have to bend over to UEFA's requests on the basis of them receiving partial information via leaks/hacking. Once UEFA started coming out with statements, there was no way we'd hand over information that would either a) incriminate us or b) help UEFA get out of the hole it had dug itself. Neither outcome would have been in our interest.

[Pretty Boy Lee]

I’m not at all optimistic, to be honest my main hope is we go down fighting if we can’t get off. I want us to burn the cunts to the ground.

[City64]

Interestingly no media leaks as of yet and the silence from UEFA is truly deafening ..........

[Beefymcfc]

Interestingly no media leaks as of yet and the silence from UEFA is truly deafening ..........

I’m taking it as a good sign.