Why doesnt Antonio Margarito hire a lawyer and some private detectives to clear his name

What people thought could have affected future earnings.(future as in after the mosley fight)

 

thought you meant now.

 

Have you got a link that would prove that please. I seriously doubt it

 

ROFL What happened to those " hardened illegal pads" or "plaster inserts" them. All the CSAC sent for testing was a camp used soft gauze pad. To crown it all they claim they "mislaid " them ROFLMAO

 

He had a Lawyer and was still found to be guilty as Hell !!!

The prosecutor was actually trying to get him some jail time !!!

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/13/sports/sp-cotto-margarito13


Cotto cites photo to dispute loss : He says it's evidence against Margarito, who later lost his license.
November 13, 2009|Lance Pugmire

LAS VEGAS — Boxer Miguel Cotto glanced at the photo. He'd already seen it and had drawn a conclusion about what it indicates.

Cotto and his advisors say that a photograph recently obtained by The Times represents what his father, Miguel Cotto Sr., calls "overwhelming" evidence that his son's 2008 opponent Antonio Margarito used illegally hardened hand wraps to help him score a technical knockout over the previously unbeaten Cotto.

Six months after Margarito battered Cotto, a California State Athletic Commission inspector confiscated hardened inserts caked with plaster of Paris in Margarito's hand wraps before a welterweight title fight against Shane Mosley. Margarito's wraps were changed before he lost the fight to Mosley.

Margarito and his trainer, Javier Capetillo, had their licenses revoked in February by the California commission for using illegal hand wraps, and both can apply for reinstatement early next year. Margarito has since fired Capetillo.

The photo in question was allegedly taken of a jubilant Margarito moments after he bloodied Cotto in an 11th-round TKO triumph in July 2008 at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas.

On Saturday, Cotto will be in the same ring against Manny Pacquiao, amid questions about any lingering effects from his loss to Margarito.

In the photo, Margarito holds his left fist forward and a portion in the hand wrap above his left-hand pinkie knuckle reveals a discolored section. Karen Chappelle, the deputy attorney general who argued that the California State Athletic Commission should revoke Margarito's boxing license, believed the photo was incriminating and she planned to present it at the hearing.

That request was denied, but the state did present photos of the plaster-covered inserts taken from Margarito before the Mosley bout. One photo showed a red-stained section that would've lined up in the same discolored hand-wrap area as in the post-fight Margarito-Cotto photo.

Cotto was the unbeaten (32-0) World Boxing Assn. welterweight champion when he fought Margarito.

But the challenger so thoroughly beat Cotto that he was bleeding from his nose, mouth and ears. "The only people who can tell you for sure if those [inserts] were in there is Margarito and his trainer, but you have the picture now, so people know," Cotto said.

Margarito's co-manager, Sergio Diaz, reviewed the photo obtained by The Times and said the discolored portion probably came from red dye in Margarito's gloves bleeding onto the wraps.

"That color is like the color from the gloves that are on his wrists after a fight," Diaz said.

Diaz said Margarito denies any wrongdoing in the Cotto fight or the Mosley pre-fight incident.

Diaz believes representatives of the Nevada State Athletic Commission took custody of Margarito's hand wraps after the Cotto fight.

But Keith Kizer, executive officer of that commission, said Margarito never turned over his hand wraps to Nevada authorities, and wasn't asked to.

Asked if he believes Margarito beat Cotto with loaded gloves, Cotto's trainer Joe Santiago said, "There's no doubt. Look at Miguel's face after that fight."

At the California commission hearing, Capetillo testified his fighters use plaster inserts in training to protect their hands and inserts must have accidentally been tossed into his training bag, and wound up in Margarito's gloves without the fighter's knowledge.

Margarito testified he merely held up his hands for his trainer to wrap before the Mosley fight.

Dean Lohuis, the former California inspector who pulled the hardened inserts from Margarito's wraps before the Mosley bout, said: "Those pads were used in more than one fight. . . . The pad was dirty, used and looked like it had been around several times before. I'm convinced it was there against Miguel [Cotto]. . . . You can say it's circumstantial but in my view . . . it was more likely than not."

Margarito is working out lightly in Mexico, and Diaz said, "We're taking steps to getting our license back."

Bob Arum, who promotes both Cotto and Margarito, said, "The fight everyone would want to see is a Cotto-Margarito rematch."

But Cotto wants Margarito suspended for life.

"I know Cotto says Antonio won't make another penny off [him], but if he's offered a lot of pennies to take the fight, I think he will," Diaz said.

 

Transcript from the hearing:

http://www.dca.ca.gov/csac/about_us/meetings/20100818_agenda.pdf

B. The Commission timely produced all available evidence. Petitioner contends the Commission withheld "three key pieces of evidence" from him 21 leading up to the hearing ofFebruary 10,2009. (Pet'r.'s Mem. P. & A. p. 14: 14-15.) The claim .22 is without merit because the Commission did not withhold any of the evidence in question, and 23 because two ofthe pieces of evidence are wholly irrelevant to the Commission's decision to 24 revoke Petitioner's license to box. First, Petitioner contends the Commission did not disclose that two inspectors disputed 26 "key factual statements" in the post-incident report of one ofthe Commission's inspectors.
27
28 12 OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR WRIT OF ADMINISTRATIVE MANDATE (BS120436) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

(Pet'r.'s Mem. P. & A. p. 14: 16-22, Exh. B, C, Dl Petitioner claims he was prejudiced because
without this information he could not adequately cross-examine that particular inspector about his
"truthfulness, biases, and motives." (Pet'r.'s Mem. P. & A. p. 15: 1-2.) However, all three of the
inspectors in question were made available and were cross examined by Petitioner's counsel at
the February 10, 2009, hearing. Moreover, Petitioner admits the disputes in question concerned
immaterial matters such as which inspector directed Capetillo to remove Petitioner's right hand-
wrap after an illegal insert was found in the left knuckle pad. (Pet'r.'s Mem. P. & A. p. 14: 19
22.) In any situation with a large number ofeyewitnesses, post-incident accounts are going to
have minor variances. Counsel for the Commission exercised her prosecutorial discretion by
deciding not to involve an immaterial personnel matter in the factual record of the case. The
material, undisputed facts remain that on January 24,2009, Commission inspectors removed an
illegal insert from Petitioner's left hand-wrap, and thereafter found a similarly illegal insert in the
wrappings on his right hand. (AR Exh. X, Factual Finding Nos. 3,4, and 6.)

This content is protected

Petitioner provides no basis for his contention that the use ofthe photographs violated
his right to due process. Accordingly, the Court should discard Petitioner's argument. Lastly, Petitioner contends that because the Commission did not produce the laboratory
testing results for the right hand-wrap until months after the hearing, the Commission's
revocation ofhis license violated his due process rights. (Pet'r.'s Mem. P. & A., p. 11-18.)



So the wraps were not MISLAID, the were at the Department of Justice office for examination...!!!

 

Contrary to CJ's claims...he wasn't even in the Courtroom. At that time there were no restrooms for "Transgenders"!!!

 

This is a rather silly thread. Actually, suggesting the need for a PI is pretty damn stupid. What's the PI going to find out, that at the least, an accident happened with the pads?

Thread starter wrote this thread in crayon FFS....

 

OHHHHHH ****.
Since he knew the inserts they used in camp were plaster, THERE is no way he would've made the mistake of letting someone just throw them into the bag that has all the things for the fight in it, and he especially would not accidentally put those inserts on margarito's hands and not notice when he's wrapping. The inserts were visibly discolored and clearly looked and felt significantly different than normal, fight legal ones.
Case ****ing closed.

 

C.J. never has an explanation for this. NEVER!!!!

 

yup.
CJ pissed me off when he called cotto a cowardly wussy quitter, you can be a fan of any fighter oor not be a fan but calling anyone who fights for a living especially a future HOFer like cotto names like that is just immature. I dont believe that someone who has boxed for 15 years as he claims would say that, anyone who has boxed knows how hard this sport is and how tough you have to be to get to the top.

 

Yes and what was his conclusion ??? No proof there was plaster on the pad. just assumptions, He forgot to mention both sulpher & calcium are also ingredients of HUMAN SWEAT !! Bad boy Antonio for SWEATING !!!!!!
Absolutely no proof Tony knew that old pad was in there. The Insp & that POS both watched him taped & said nothing
Thomas told it as it was A case of a man convicted & punished by his accusers on SUSPICION ALONE!!
Have you ever wondered why the CSAC refused to let Margarito's reps EVER look at the wraps ??? After all most of the people in both dressing rooms had handled them. I think I know

 

Explain why no one in the ring congratulating Margarito never queried that? Tony was shaking hands with everyone nothing was ever said
Anyway PeeWee STOP TROLLING!!

 

A couple questions...!!!

1. If sulphur & calcium were what they found, and they along with potassium etc make up human sweat, why would other boxers not use that (loaded handwraps) defense if they suffer a knockout loss...???

2. Why were the other ingredients of sweat not found in the wraps...???