Article - ISU Refuses Request to Delay Judge's Hearing

[adrianchew]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-000022633mar29.story

[Jim D]

Adrian, thanks for posting the link.

[quote:ce300b0205]I think she is a target and a scapegoat, and if there is misconduct, there is misconduct by a lot of people, and it's unfair for the ISU to single her out."[/quote:ce300b0205]

There might be a minuscule portion of truth in this :roll:, but personally I think that they want and need a bit more time to devise yet another version of [i:ce300b0205]"The Story"[/i:ce300b0205]. … At this point in time I have begun to believe that the constantly changing stories are intended to further muddy the waters and make it impossible to clearly discern what actually occurred and who else was involved.

Jim

[Dustin]

If the judge doesnt get banned for life (which she won't, I am sure) I will be extremely mad at the ISU (well I already am ;)).

[blue111moon]

The ISU has already taken heat from the media and from fans for delaying the hearing until the end of April. If they yield to this request and delay it another two months, those same media and fans will see it as an attempt to smother the hearing until it fades from public attention.

All the legal wrangling is ridiculous, IMO. It's figure skating, for petes sake! It's not like she's going to prison for life.

Regardless of whether she was pressured or not, the woman's obviously proven herself unable to make a decision and defend it. For that alone, she should be banned from judging. Hopefully, the ISU hearing committee will see that she's just too big a liability to the rest of the judges and boot her out.

[loveskating]

In a court of law, no trial can ever be held until BOTH sides have deposed everyone they want to and are entitled to depose...so certainly, this issue of being able to take the depositions, which are sworn statements by principals in the conflict, has some justice, IMHO.

Basically, depositions were designed to (1) make sure both sides and the court knew what all the available evidence is, (2) find the issues of fact that are in conflict and (3) save time at trials. After depositions, courts often grant "summary judgment" on a motion for that because there are no facts to consider at trial.

...but the ISU is not a court of law.

I suspect that this will wind up in real courts at some point. Just imagine if this had happened to an American judge, and you can see that no one is going to back off or just take it all without a fight of some kind. Certainly, the French Federation and the Russian Federation, and their respective publics are not going to just "accept" the media charges that they are corrupt.

loveskating