Key Issues

Dispute with Coach Jae Su Chun

• Jae Su Chun's statement to the question when/how he acknowledged the incident

        Boycott skaters’ attorney, Edward Williams, gave a question when/how Coach Jae Su Chun acknowledged the tampering incident. (See attached “Ed Williams letter to investigator”)  

“Immediately after the race, Mr. Jean approached Coach Chun and showed him his  

             damaged skate, while the U.S. skaters were watching another race.  Coach Chun  

              said that “right away” he asked each U.S. male skater individually and privately if

              he had done it.” (Report p15)

However, there was no another race.   The issued race was a final race of the competition.   This is the main contraction of Jae Su’s statement.   Also It is against all witnesses, especially it is not only against the detail statement of Olivier Jean but also not physically possible as far as the time.  (See Simon Cho’s Allegation page 18 – 21 and Exhibit page 41 – 44: Olivier’s Affidavit)

•     Suspicious Email Manipulation

Even though this is nothing to do with the tampering incident, this is very serious fabrication of evidence if this is true, so that we can prove how much Mr. Chun and Mr. Hoch Cho is dishonesty and dirty.   (See Simon Cho’s Allegation page 18 – 21)

It is very simple to prove it.   If we confirm whether Jae Su and Charles Ryan Leville had ever talked on the phone Sep 14 – 15, 2012, it can be clarified.   I emailed Charles to confirm it but he did not respond. 

•      Blocking Simon doing Long Track

Read Exhibit page 13 – 18 about this story.    This is serious infringement of an athlete’s rights caused by the wrongful power.   

Dispute with Jeff Simon

•    Jeff Simon’s position during the race. 

There are many circumstantial evidences that Jeff Simon’s statement is not true as described on the “Simon Cho’s Allegation”.   Among them, the position where Jeff Simon was watching the issued race can be a clear evidence to clarify the dispute.

Simon Cho stated “Mr. Cho also states that during the race in question he communicated via body language to Mr. Simon that he, Mr. Cho, had damaged the skate. Mr. Simon denies that this communication took place.” (Final report page 21)

And Jeff Simon stated at the ISU hearing, “I was up in the stands. I was directly opposite of the finish line in the stands.” 

The position, Jeff Simon and Simon Cho stated, while they were watching the race is very different.     If we can see the video, it will be clarified.   This is clear evidence whether Jeff Simon’s statement is true or not, in order to clarify the dispute between Simon Cho and Jeff Simon.    

ISU keeps the video of this competition.   So I requested to provide the video material of 5,000m men’s final race of 2011 World Short Track Team Championships in Poland.   But the ISU DC refuse with the reason it is irrelevant with the incident.  However, it is apparently relevant with the incident that can be a obvious evidence that Jeff Simon's statement is false.     I requested to ISU Disciplinary Committee to provide this recording but they do not do any effort to provide it.

•   Email of Siobhan O’rourke

She clearly wrote that “Two skaters were approached by Coach Chun and directed to tamper”.     See “Simon Cho’s Allegation page 10 – 13 for details.   No one investigated for this in depth even though I requested to the investigators.

Dispute with Levi Kirkpatrick

The dispute with Levi Kirkpatrick who revealed the secret of tampering incident is if Simon confessed it voluntarily as Levi alleges or Simon told it by being caught into trap by Levi, and also if Simon Cho told that Jeff Simon was ordered together by Coach Chun when he told Levi his secret, as Simon Cho alleges     Levi denied that Simon Cho told about Jeff Simon.

The reason that this dispute is important is that if the allegation of Simon Cho is true, Levi’s false allegation proves that Jeff Simon’s allegation is also not true.   If Simon told about Jeff from the beginning when he admitted his tampering to Levi, it indicates that Simon Cho did not lie to make a witness later when he was investigated.

 There are also many circumstantial evidences that we cannot trust Levi’s allegation as mentioned  on the “Simon Cho’s Allegation”.    There is inexcusable physical evidence.    It is the very possible fabrication of evidence.   See “Simon Cho’s Allegation” page 7 -8.

The voice conversation began at 2:57 AM and ended at 5:06 AM in the morning on 7/8 (Sun) (France time 9:57 AM – 12:06 PM), text conversation began at 6:23 AM (France time 1:23 PM, Sun), ended at 7:10 AM.   This is very clearly shown on the Levi’s Skype phone history and Simon vs Levi Text Conversation..

Levi said he ended the voice conversation “2 minutes before” he switched to text conversation.  However, calculating the interval between the end of voice conversation and the beginning of text conversation is 1 hour and 17 minutes.    1 hour 15 min text conversation is disappeared. 

It indicates that Levi manipulate the WhatsApp text conversation by deleting the front conversation.   I believe the deleted text conversation includes critical content that is not favorable to Jeff Simon’s allegation.   It is also possible that Levi could have edited the content of submitted PDF file.

Note that Levi used WhatApp application and he submitted PDF file, not the original WhatsApp file.

Looking at the page 11 of “Evidence documents on the boycott skaters' grievance”, Levi sent this file to Siobhan O’rourke on July 11, 2012.   We cannot know if it is WhatsApp original file or edited PDF file.  I believe we could verify if Levi or Siobhan forward that email.   Therefore I requested to the attorney of Levi, Ed Williams, to provide the original WhatsApp file to confirm.   However, Ed just threatened me that I slander Levi.