He's doesn't own a Fiat Punto

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

asterix

Comrade Member
Location
Limoges or York
It's great the Italian judiciary are going for this - there seems to be stronger laws in play here rather than Spain.

I wouldn't mess with any judiciary that can pin Silvio Berlusconi to the wall..
 
OP
OP
thom

thom

____
Location
The Borough
The Padua investigation is shedding light into other dark corners of cycling, in particular a story about Vino paying Kolobnev to let/help him win Liege/Bastogne/Liege in 2010:
Through the google translator:

The first € 100,000 dated July 12, 2010, the second of 50 000 of 28 December. For the prosecution of Padua there is enough to conclude that "the task has gathered conclusive evidence - written power of attorney in the attached document to the file sent to the Belgian and Swiss -, Vinokourov to Kolobnev has promised and paid 150 000 euro to to ensure victory in the competition, so as to reach a different result from the proper and fair conduct of the competition. "
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
What are the rules regarding deals struck on the road?
I don't know what the rules say about it, but it is bad enough having dopers cheating clean riders of wins, without having dopers bribing other riders to let them win!

If they get away with this kind of thing, we might as well say that the races are redundant and the winner will be the person willing to risk injecting the most toxic cocktail of drugs and in the case of a tie, the winner will be the person with the most money!
 

rich p

ridiculous old lush
Location
Brighton
Well, that's always gone on to a certain extent, albeit with smaller amounts, but I'm interested to know what the rules are and whether they were broken.
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
Well, that's always gone on to a certain extent, albeit with smaller amounts, but I'm interested to know what the rules are and whether they were broken.
UCI rules:

12.1.004 (1) Anyone who behaves in an incorrect or dishonest fashion with regard to any other, or who fails
to keep a promise or to meet contractual or other obligations in the domain of cycling shall be
penalised by a suspension of up to three months and/or a fine of between CHF 100 and CHF
10,000.

12.1.005 Anyone subject to UCI Regulations shall be suspended for a minimum of one and a maximum of six
months, who:
1. behaves in a violent manner or uses defamatory or abusive language to or about a commis-
saire, a UCI body or its members or, in general, anyone performing a function provided for in
the UCI Constitution or Regulations, or
2. behaves in such a way as to blemish the image, the reputation or the interests of cycling or the
UCI, or
3. without valid reason, fails to respond when convened or summoned by a UCI authority or disci-
plinary body.
 
OP
OP
thom

thom

____
Location
The Borough
2133168 said:
Taking a wild guess here, I'd suggest waiting till he is not in it, break in and plant the listening devices.
Great insight. Do the police need a warrant in the UK if they want to break into a vehicle (as opposed to a house) ? Might just be an external bug - who knows ?
 

rich p

ridiculous old lush
Location
Brighton
That's the best I could find in hundreds of pages of waffle, without spending hours reading every word of it! :thumbsup:
Thanks for your efforts Col! More legwork than I could be bothered to do. CyclingNews or inrng will have a précis soon enough!^_^
 
I think the main thing about the Liege-Bastogne-Liege fix is the sum involved. It takes it out of the realm of deals on the road and into the realm of criminal activity. The payment schedule involved perhaps indicates a sophisticated system of premeditated race-fixing (unless those people on the motorbikes are accountants and lawyers of course).. This could be the cycling equivalent of Italian football scandals.

Anone know if there are betting syndicates covering cycling in the same way?
 
OP
OP
thom

thom

____
Location
The Borough
2133290 said:
My understanding is that, in this country, putting a device into a person's vehicle is intrusive surveillance in the same way as if it were their house, they are both environments where a person has a reasonable expectation of a high degree of privacy. The property interference requires a Police Act authority. The resultant surveillance requires a RIPA authorisation.Putting a device externally is not considered intrusive and would only require a RIPA authority. Other countries would have different laws but within the EU it all stems from Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, so should be similar. Monkey is the expert on this stuff though.
Wow, 6 sentences, I feel like this is a record for an @User reply ;-)
 
Top Bottom