7 total posts
Don't know if he's guilty or not but
but I have to wonder what percentage of law and rule breakers go free due to a questionable fact finding process. All it takes is for some slick lawyer to find a minor misstep and there can be no finding of guilt. I believe the mindset of "Make 'em prove it....never admit to any wrongdoing" is present in even young children these days. Honesty is no longer the best policy. It's considered to be a weakness and a vulnerability....and I'll add...thanks to what's become of our legal system.
or it couldnt be that the french
Here's how the story reads
"The most critical mistake: the laboratory allowed two technicians to analyze both Landis' initial and validating urine analyses ? a violation of international standards, the Los Angeles Times reported. The same technicians cannot analyze both tests."
As such, there's no indication that the testing, itself, was done improperly. The quibble was with the redundancy process that requires different handlers. I presume that great pains are taken to insure the integrity of the samples and the way they are tested in order to prevent both cheating by the race participants and tainting of the samples later in some sort of espionage attempt by other parties interested in the outcome.
Now, if both tests came back negative and this discovery was made, it would be difficult to disqualify Landis. If both came back positive, evidence would be strong otherwise and a case could be made to require he forfeit his prize. As I see it, the implication is being made that the technicians could have been in on a plan to taint the samples because the same ones handled both....slim possibility, I would think. Now do you think if Landis could keep his prize even if he was doped but could get off on a technicality, that he would admit to cheating out of a sense of honesty? Well, maybe yes or maybe know. Do you know of any other criminal cases where someone might have gotten away with murder because of a mistake in the way evidence was gathered?
every time the french lost
and landis won they cried boo hoo he was doped
to me its sour grapes
Story also stated
The lab possessed documents clearly linking Landis to his sample, a possible violation of anti-doping rules requiring that all samples handled by a testing lab be anonymous.
In looking over the list of other "errors"
..... that's the one that appears to be most troublesome. Not good to know whose samples are being tested.
There was a lot of disbelief that an American could win again. I recall that Armstrong was always under suspicion.
In light of that, it is unpleasant for me to accept that Landis would be so foolish as to taking something to enhance his performance as a win would bring extra scrutiny.
If he is guilty, then he has damaged the American team and the sport.
click here to email