What I would like to see: Jim Spigelman , a former NSW judge , agreeing to an interview with Tracey Holmes why he signed off on a report which misreresented Australian administrative law ( as found by the Federal Court) - that ASADA legislated powers of the ADRVP and the AAT under its Commonwealth legal powers - Is prevented from make findings other than possibility - which does not meet the comfortable satisfaction standard of more than mere probability.
Following the Federal Court ruling, Attorney General’s was required to introduce amending regulations that the ADRVP and the AAT were limited to possible findings. Yet, Spigelemann , knowing this, signed off on a CAS report that the AAT EXPRESSLY found that Dank had a history of TB4 use (contrary to the NRL finding, based on the comfortable satisfaction standard that Sandor Earl did not use TB4 supplied by Dank)…
Seems that, when he sits as a CAS arbitrator he can ignore the basics of Australian law, yet he was selected to provide that dimension.
He never will agree to such interview.