I think this is more BS created by Margarito fanboys just looking for anything they can cling onto. However, Margarito and Capetillo’s attorneys did point to chain of custody issues with the pads in their defense after they were recovered from Margarito’s hands, drawing testimony that three people in Mosley’s dressing room touched the pads. However the problem with that argument is that the pads had already been ruled illegal by chief inspector Dean Lohuis. Further, as referenced from this website - http://thecomeback.com/queensberryr...of_their_licenses_in_dark_day_for_boxing.html Deputy attorney general, Karen B. Chappelle attempted to introduce a claim that the pads were worn by Margarito in his July TKO victory over Miguel Cotto in Las Vegas, but the commission said that point lacked relevance. So I just found this relevant as an interesting tidbit since you brought up the possibility of CSAC inspectors trying to cover their ass with the media narrative. But here this Tim Starks guy from 2009 who wrote this article suspects that Keith Kizer the NSAC was trying to cover his ass when he denied that there was any possibility that Margarito had illegal hand wraps against Cotto. But after what happened vs Mosley, Chappelle had reason to believe that she suspected these hardened training pads were also used by Margarito vs Cotto but just went unnoticed. Kizer would have plenty of reason to deny the possibility that Margarito used illegal wraps vs Cotto for obvious reasons. But from what it sounds like, the statement from Kizer was before he learned about what happened in California vs Mosley. And if that was the case, now I'm wondering why Kizer was even asked about it before anyone knew Margarito was fighting with loaded gloves. If Kizer was asked about it after Margarito fought Mosley, then he'd probably still be inclined to not want to admit it was possible that Margarito had loaded gloves vs Cotto since if he did, he would have to basically say that him and his team didn't do his job property when Margarito fought Cotto in Vegas to even speculate that possibly these illegal pads were used then too. See, everyone always has a tendency to try to protect their own interests and not to look bad. But I suspect that Kizer and his team of inspectors probably just didn't think they have any reason to inspect the pad the night he fought Cotto to the extent that the inspector in the CSAC did. And remember that the first CSAC inspector who was overseeing Margarito vs Mosley didn't initially see anything wrong with Margarito's wraps even after Brother Nazim first objected, and it wasn't until Brother Nazim went and got the chief inspector in to get an second opinion before the illegal pads were properly inspected and revealed to be illegal. So Keith Kizer or his team probably didn't have any reason to inspect Margarito's hand wraps vs Cotto at the time probably because there were no objections and they wouldn't think to inspect the pad. And he would have every incentive to shoot down Chapelle's claim that Margarito's wraps were also loaded vs Cotto because admitting that would make Kizer and the NSAC look bad since it would make it seem like they didn't catch what the CSAC did, but even then that was only after objections by Richardson and the first inspector not seeing anything wrong and getting the chief in there for a second opinion.
i dont read your long paragraphs. after a couple of times, i noticed its mostly mental gymnastics to avoid having to amend your erroneous beliefs. i dont know if its an insecurity about being wrong, or a mental condition that prevents new information from being introduced into what youve already decided is reality. either way, its not important to me what you choose to believe. i personally did not have much trouble figuring out what happened, and im sure those with enough interest can do the same...or they can keep believing what makes them feel comfortable, idc..
Its pretty simple. A hard substance was found in his wraps that was determined to be illegal. That should be that but posters keep raising the bar and Shadow111 keeps hitting them with facts that no ones wants to read or even consider. Its really pitiful.
The evidence was overwhelming that Margarito had loaded wraps. Capetillo admitted to putting those hardened training wraps in. You claimed that the official inspectors didn't allege plaster but I hit you with that quote from Inspector Mike Bray who in fact noted a plaster like substance on the wraps in his testimony. I didn't have much trouble figuring out what happened either. Margarito had loaded wraps, his trainer cheated and was caught red-handed. I don't know why you would try and deny this when the evidence is so overwhelming.
yeah, sure. i suppose you can mind **** yourself about anything with the least bit of effort, cause reality is scary.
its kids that never grew out of the kid stage. they aint hard to spot. when describing facts, they often turn the sky green and the grass blue, cause thats what feels safe to them.
Sorry for the delayed reply. I tried typing this out on a smartphone, and having paragraphs repeatedly deleted killed my motivation. Better to sit at a keyboard for this. I’ll split this across two posts. No I don't think it can be blamed on websites being deleted over time. Newspapers (online) are very good at maintaining their articles. I assume for academic and historical record. The fan sites are doing the same as us, and using the LA Times as their source. From my understanding the LA Times had a reporter present at the original hearing. Which again causes issues as to why they wouldn't have access to a quote from Capetillo. I think it is indeed possible that they had issues of interpreting any testimony in Spanish. However (and I am making some assumptions based on limited knowledge of America) I would expect The LA Times being in California would have bi-lingual staff in attendance at the hearing to be able to transcribe the original quotation. So again the problem is the only record we have connecting Capetillo with admission of using plaster inserts is in that one article of the LA Times which is not a direct quotation. I do not disagree that the wraps were harder than normal, but without physically having the wraps in my hands myself, I would say much of the testimony lines up with a fabric that is dirty and contained dry sweat and blood. Regarding Mike Bray’s description it comes across a little hyperbolic given what we know of the wraps. CSACphoto.jpg (386×365) (boxrec.com) There are just so many contradicting statements. It just kind of feels like they were circling the waggons on this one. Again I don’t disagree that using old wraps is an infringement of the rules, but it really looks to me like the talk of plaster was a form of rail roading, making what may have been a genuine error into a supposed pre-planned crime. I looked into this in greater detail, as I think this is something we need understand. Hopefully another poster can put us right if needed. Gypsum is CaSO4.2H2O, when it is heated it loses some of its water molecules and becomes Plaster of Paris CaSO4.(1/2)H2O. When water (sweat) is combined it then takes the form of gypsum again CaSO4.2H20. Plaster of Paris is the “dehydrated” version of gypsum in powder form which is then added to water to make hardened casts. Again, I’m coming from a layman’s understanding of the science, but further testing beyond the presence of Calcium and Sulphur seems quite necessary. Especially given the implications of what was possibly on the wrap. I do not disagree that old, dirty, bloody, gauze that had been sweated through previously would indeed be harder than fresh gauze from the roll. And I agree it is illegal in the sense that old wraps are against the rules. I also acknowledge that Capetillo admitted had the fight gone ahead Mosley could have been injured. But I still take issue with a dark cloud hanging over Margarito as someone who was repeatedly loading his gloves (especially this notion of plaster). That’s the sticking point for me.
As mentioned, I've split my response into two parts, as there was a lot to read through. Correct me if I’m wrong, but one inspector signed off on the wraps. One inspector also said he transferred the offending article into the plastic bag (i.e. no chance of contamination). But this contradicts Nazim’s claim that he picked them up and refused to hand them over at first and walked off to a different inspector. Also there are reports that the pads were being handled in the opposition locker room. We also know that the chief inspector doctored the initial report, and left out information that showed they had messed up in their handling of the situation. Now this is again the problem for me. Whilst I agree the 6x microscope shows a substance within the interlacing threads of gauze. It also shows that some of the statements made by the inspectors were indeed hyperbolic, as what they claimed would have been detectable by the naked eye. But I have to admit, we needed to know what that substance was. That exactly right. We have no idea, and neither it seems did the inspectors. The only thing the lab said was that Ca and Sulphur was present, nothing more. To call it plaster is reaching and pure speculation. No you are correct, but the media focussed and continue to do so on the idea that plaster was involved, when the most that can be said was its presence is/was speculative. Yes, they were not up to standard. But actually tape on the skin is allowed, the quantity is the issue, and really it seems like a minor infringement. Which would put this in line with the claims that Nazim was known for routinely trying to unsettle opponents by being by the book, and being difficult (note Nazim is within his rights to do so). Again, I’d still like to see the admission of this. Until we can prove this admission, it’s wrong to keep stating it as a fact that is still open to debate. From the links you previously provided it could be read just as easily as Capetillo saying he used the gauze in training to protect a previous fighters’ hands. And not that he had used deliberately hardened wraps to protect a fighter’s hands in training. So it is not evidence of anything – yet. I’m not arguing that the wraps were legal in terms of the rules, but there needs to be more for me than a series of conflicting quotations and non-quotations that it was a deliberate attempt to load the gloves. I apologise but I’m struggling to get past that CSAC proceedings have the faint whiff of a kangaroo court, and this resulted in trial by media.
Dean Louis was the one that it was claimed was trying to alter the record though. Also I believe Deputy attorney general, Karen B. Chappelle was in fact the chief prosecutor. It's her job to try to build the strongest possible case against the defendant. Knowing that, it kind of changes things.
MARGARITO v. STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION | FindLaw It is probably worth while giving this a read if you haven't already. Note they are only ruling on the commission ability revoke Margarito's license, not whether he was a knowing participant in any deception. Also in the notes they state that they were not ruling on the validity of the evidence at the initial hearing. It explains that the decision by the CASC was based on testimony and the 6x photo. Something interesting though is that it does state that there were indeed discussions about what went into the inspectors' reports. Also it shows us that the initial hearing took place before the forensic analysis of the white substance.
He didn't "sign off" on the wraps. This first inspector basically shot down Nazim's initial objections about the PAD being too hard. This initial inspector passively looked at it and thought everything looked OK. See Nazim's detailed account here : https://www.boxingnews24.com/2009/02/loaded-gloves/ So it sounds like the first inspector didn't take Nazim's objections seriously enough or didn't even examine the pad himself, perhaps he was only focused on the wrap and not the pad. So Nazim then got the Chief inspector Dean Lohuis to come in and look at it and then the chief saw and felt what Nazim said, that the pad was too hard, and eventually decided to make him re-wrap and uncover the pads revealing the hardened gauze in the pad that fell out. It's a little confusing to try and piece it all together from the report, but from Richardson's detailed account is available here - https://www.boxingnews24.com/2009/02/loaded-gloves/ So according to Nazim, he took the two pieces of gauze that fell out of each pad and took them back to Shane's locker room, and the commission followed him back there. Anotherwords he didn't just hand them back to Margarito's people. And in front of Shane's lawyer and the commissioner, Shane's doctor scratched one of the pieces and it chalked up. So Nazim only took the two pieces of hardened gauze that fell out of the pad, to test it, then handed it over to Dean Lohuis. While presumably the other inspector, the initial inspector who was still in the dressing room with Margarito, confiscated the rest of the pad (minus the blocks that fell out) and the wraps once Margarito was forced to re-wrap. So we have 3 sets of items - the overall hand wraps that were taken into evidence after he was forced to re-wrap, the pad and then the hardened gauze that fell out of the pad. Apparently Nazim only took the hardened gauze "blocks" that fell out of the pad to examine them, with the commissioner there watching, then immediately turned them over to the commissioner for evidence. We know that Dean Lohuis doctored the initial report and left out information? Where did you hear about that? Link? Sorry I'm not following you here. Mike Bray stated he saw a plaster-like substance on the pad. Shane's lawyer scratched the piece of hardened gauze that fell out of the pad and it chalked up like would happen if you scratched a cast. Under the microcope you can see that there's a thick substance that looks like how I would envision the gauze to look like from a plaster cast under a microscope, with a thick, white plaster-like substance visible connecting the interlacing threads of gauze which would make the gauze hard. They said it was a plaster-like substance. All they saw is that there was something on the gauze that made it harder that chalked up when scratched. I don't know why their testimony of what they saw isn't enough for you. You for some reason seem to want to believe that the CSAC insepctors aren't trustworthy or have some reason to try and embellish what happened. They saw what they saw, multiple inspectors testified to it. To conclude that they have reason to lie or embellish the story, I just don't understand what's making you say that. Healthy sketpicism over a story is one thing, but in this case the evidence and testimony is overwhelming that the pad was loaded by a plaster-like substance that made the pad harder. If it wasn't plaster, and was just sweat and dried blood, still that could make it harder as well. But there seems to be indicators that it was a plaster-like substance. The lab said they found Calcium and Sulphur in the wraps. These just so happen to be the ingredients in the white powder of plaster of paris. The natural form of this compound is the mineral bassanite. Given that calcium and sulphur also happen to be in human sweat sounds to me like it's a cop out. This doesn't change that they found the ingredients of the white powder of plaster of paris in the gauze. Obviously human sweat is fundamentally different than plaster of paris, you'd agree with that right? "But both human sweat and plaster of paris consist of the same ingredients so it had to be just human sweat". lmao This is like saying that a car and bike are the same thing because both are moving forward through air. Obviously plaster of paris is different than sweat. Just because human sweat also contains sulphur or calcium doesn't mean that you would find these ingredients abundantly in the gauze. If someone examined human sweat on a piece of dried gauze I doubt you would be able to actually find and isolate calcium or sulphur. I'd imagine those substances would be so minute in human sweat you wouldn't be able to determine that those specific were in there. And if you did find them, they wouldn't be abundant. It would be like trying to find a needle in a haystack vs finding a needle in a pile of needles as was the case with a plaster-like substance on the gauze which would be very easy to locate and find since it was in such abdundance. Personally I find the argument that it wasn't plaster of paris powder because calcium and sulphur is also found in human sweat to be complete nonsense as a desperate attempt from Margarito defenders to claim it had to be just sweat. I don't think it's speculation to conclude there was a plaster-like substance when you have the eyewitness testimony of the inspectors + Shane's doctor scratching the cause and it chalking + the lab finding the ingredients of plaster of paris + the 6x microscope showing a thick, white, hardened like substance between the interlacing threads of gauze + Capetillo admitting to putting training inserts into the wrap accidently, etc, etc, etc. And confirmed by the findings, 6x microscope, Capetillo's apparent admissons, etc. I would ask you what would you expect the lab to find besides calcium and sulphur if there were in fact the ingredients of plaster of paris powder found?
Rules Vary from state to state. See this NY times article from 2010 - https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/13/sports/13boxing.html So this indicates that in Nevada, only gauze, not tape can be applied directly to the skin. But of course Margarito Mosley was in California, and in California you may be right that some tape is allowed near the wrist area. However, this BoxingForum24 article - https://www.boxingnews24.com/2009/02/loaded-gloves/ claims that - "Putting tape directly on the skin is against the rules according to the California Athletic Commission." So I guess Sam Gregory, the writer of that article, had some reason to believe that it was illegal to apply tape directly on to the skin in California at that time. And apparently the CSAC amended their rules in 2010 allowing tape applied directly to the skin to be slightly wider than before, which indicates that it may well have been allowed before then in 2009 when Margarito Mosley happened. See here - https://www.dca.ca.gov/csac/stats_regs/20101129_original.pdf So maybe you're right that tape applied directly to the skin, near the wrist area, was allowed in California, but apparently it isn't allowed at all in other states like Nevada, which is curious since I was under the impression that California had more strict handwrap rules than California, not the other way around but perhaps it is at least as it relates to tape being applied directly to the skin. This of course begs the question why did Nazim protest the tape being applied directly to the skin in California if it was allowed? Maybe Margarito had too much tape on the skin? Who knows. Perhaps this whole situation prompted an amendment to California's rules regarding tape in 2010 allowing wider tape to applied directly to the skin in California? You can't expect Capetillo to come out and say he used plaster in his training wraps. Capetillo is only going to admit the minimum possible to avoid being percieved as a cheater to the best extent that he can. And combined with the language barrier, and only the snippets of translated testimony coming out, you can't expect to get a full detailed admission from him. I think the closest thing we're going to get is that ringtv interview. But maybe there's an interview with Capetillo out there somewhere that we haven't found, likely in español where maybe he provides more detail. I too would like to know for sure if he admitted to using plaster in the training pads. From the NY Times article though- I've seen plenty of media-inspired proceedings that have more than a whiff of a kangaroo court, more like a gale force wind in some cases. So I understand your reason to be skeptical. But in this case, we have what appears to be an admission and apology from Capetillo himself, even though we don't have the full detailed testimony with him explicitly specifying plaster as it was in the training wraps that we'd like, in the ringtv interview that he did in fact use hardened pads to protect his fighters hands in training and that according to him he "accidently" had them in his gym bag and "accidently" put them into his training wraps. While many of us find this hard to believe that it was all an accident, the story itself and his apparent admissoin that the did put those in there is more than enough for me to conclude that the inspectors were not embellishing anything and were just giving their honest account of what happened. While you are free to remain suspicious about any or all of this, I don't have any reason to doubt the account of the inspectors or of Nazim himself, and in my view the only things left to really debate are : 1) Was it an intentional deliberate act to load Margarito's wraps with hardened pads? (Roach, Barrera, Steward and many others seemed to think so) 2) What extent did Margarito himself know about his wraps having hardened training pads in them? 3) How long had this cheating been going on for prior to Mosley? Margarito's whole career up until they were caught? Which would make sense since he was with Captetillo for so long, and we have apparent testimony from Margarito that he only let Capetillo do his wraps all that time and that Margarito watched the wrapping very closely.
A lot of that was covered in the link I provided (official court documents) https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1541145.html It covers the CASCs allowance of tape on the skin. It also lays out a basic order of events. It also included reference to emails between inspectors in regards to omissions in the report. Just a point about Roach's case study. It seems he is working on the idea that the wrap was a hard piece of plaster inserted within the knuckle padding. One inspector said it was harder in some parts, softer in others. Another said it was soaked and damp. Another referred to there being bricks. Another that chalked up when scratched (I.e. dry). These reports seem to constantly contradict each other... Regarding testing. They could have tested for Sulphate ions using a barium chloride solution. Second depending on how much was present. If it was gypsum. Reheat it to get Plaster of Paris, then see if it can be used to harden a fresh gauze through the application of water. Heat would also potentially change the colour of the compound if it was gypsum. But I'm sure experts have more sophisticated methods of testing than I can suggest. But you shouldn't claim they found the ingredients of Plaster of Paris, when the tester would only go as far as to say Calcium and Sulphur were present which are elements found in plaster among other things. Such as blackboard chalk. Regarding your three questions at the end. I suspect we will never know the answers to those. But at the end of the day. The wraps were illegal, and Margarito was held liable for the actions of his coach
