Anonymous (not verified)
3/14/2015 8:34am
3/14/2015 8:34am
Edited Date/Time
3/30/2015 11:16pm
Word is (According to a few guys in the know) apparently the FIM appeal process is supposed to take 2 months to come to a decision but they have filed an extension so they can take more time to come to a decision on the JS7 appeal.
The Shop
He's a marquee rider and a major draw for a series that they sanction.
Don't kid yourselves.
What is that about?
This is AMERICAN SUPERCROSS. We don't NEED the FIM involved in any way.
If MP says it then it is law.
This is bull riding, and the first rule is just to stay alive.
Headquartered in Colo., the Professional Bull Riders, Inc. was created in 1992 when a group of 20 visionary bull riders broke away from the traditional rodeo scene seeking mainstream attention for the sport of professional bull riding. They felt that, as the most popular event at a rodeo, bull riding deserved to be in the limelight and could easily stand alone. Each rider invested a hard-earned $1,000, a few of them borrowing from family and friends, to start the PBR.
In early 2007, Spire Capital Partners finalized a deal with the PBR Board of Directors to acquire the interests of many of the retired founding riders and invest in the growth of the organization. Those first 20 bull riders had turned their $1,000 into millions. Owned today by 44 cowboys, management and Spire Capital, the PBR continues to establish milestones in organizational revenue, bull rider earnings, record breaking performances, and media attention.
http://www.vitalmx.com/features/The-AMA-Comes-to-James-Stewarts-Defense…
Pit Row
The default penalty period is 2 years for a first violation.
There are CAS decisions holding that getting a TUE after the fact of a a positive test does not excuse the violation because doing so would penalize athletes that comply with the TUE requirements. "The Panel underscores the position taken by USADA regarding R.’s attempt to obtain a retroactive TUE. The use of an anti-doping appeals procedure to obtain a retroactive TUE in order to eliminate penalties for past use which also has prospective effect permitting future use would undermine the TUE process and disadvantage those competitors who abide by established TUE rules. TUE procedures remain open to R. and the rules governing the granting of a TUE for ADD/ADHD disorders are set down in the 2007 USADA Guide. These, however, can have only prospective effect." http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/sites/CaseLaw/Shared%20Documents/1577.pdf
In the case of the substance Stew admits using (classified as amphetamine), the minimum penalty is one year without possibility of reduction. The only way to avoid the penalty is for the athlete to establish she had no idea she took the substance and her ignorance was justifiable.
To get any reduction toward that one year floor from the default 2 year ban for a first violation, a person must establish under the Code some mitigating factor. Things that apply here are whether the person complied with any provisional discipline, took affirmative steps to educate other athletes, and, probably most importantly, whether the athlete can establish that he was taking the substance therapeutically and not to gain a performance advantage. (Stew goes 1-3 on this; the TUE for future competition only affects the decision regarding the violation as it concerns whether a competitive advantage was sought).
All of this information has been clearly available to riders and teams and the AMA since PED testing was incorporated into SX.
CAS updates its releases on appeals filed, hearing results, settlements, fairly regularly. The site does not reflect any appeal with regard to Stewart's penalty. http://www.tas-cas.org/en/media/latest-news.html I wondered for awhile if there was some internal FIM appeal, but the Dec 2014 press release from the FIM acknowledged that the next step was appeal to the CAS within 21 days of the release of the decision. It also said that the full reasoned decision was sent to Stewart then and would be published in the FIM website in "due course." Haven't found it there yet, though it's not the easiest site to navigate. http://www.fim-live.com/en/library/
[End of facts]
What is curious is the lack of an appeal registered with CAS, which was Stewart's action, when the FIM PR says that the full reasoned decision for that appeal was sent to him triggering the time within which he had to file or lose the right to appeal. It's possible the parties are negotiating something, but that is sheer speculation.
I don't think he has a chance at a reduction based on reading CAS decisions regarding the penalty unless he can establish some actual bias based on hard evidence (some kind of smoking gun document or testimony), and I don't think there's time for that as far as reducing the penalty. And in any event, there's nothing exceptional about how he's being handled if you read other cases and penalties. There are no special FIM rules being applied to hammer him, and a completely different part of the FIM handles these decisions, not the MX division in GL's pocket.
Big Stew fan, but I think he carved the short end of the stick for himself here.
Post a reply to: JS7 Appeal, FIM Extension