Dara Torres-Amazing

I am sure they will investigate the whole thing then decide what is going to happen. Who knows until it is completed. They may fulfill all of your desires they may let her off with a scolding and they may ban her for 1 year or two years or lifetime whatever they wish. None of us will determine anything no matter what anyone here thinks. It seems most of you want a lifetime ban no matter what really happened. I don't think that last statement is true. In the ridiculously unlikely event that the ingestion was truly accidental, no one will want her "lynched." George, I'm having a hard time understanding your posts. You seemed to suggest that most people would have done what Hardy did, i.e., cheat. Hardly. And frankly, I think that, once an athlete has cheated, it's probably an easy step to lie about that cheating. The moral compass has already gone awry.

Why can't people believe in the tests and levels we set, which are high to test +, rather then the fact that everyone caught always says, "Oh no, not me, I am innocent?" Then everyone gets sucked in to this ridicules argument of, "spiked, the coach gave it to them without knowledge, it was in my supplements, the dog ate my homework, and the checks in the mail." You test + these days on BOTH the A & B splits, then save your RAP, you did it, face the medicine and admit you are a simple cheating butt head! I watched JH on the TV with her nonsense about spelling it and her total shock and all the BS and she was not credible then, and she will never be credible again until she admits she did it, got caught and should move on from there to find real redemption in the truth.

Lindsay, Correct me if I'm wrong, but Rick Demont was partially screwed by the team physician at the time who refused to admit any wrong doing on the part of Rick or himself. Yes, this was exactly the aspect that I was thinking about, that it is possible for someone other than the athlete to screw up, and while medals or spots on the team may have to be forfeited the athlete isn't necessarily worthy of extreme moral condemnation or, as some have suggested, jail time. In one of these threads George brought up the case of a Canadian rower who took a cold medication that the team doctor said was ok, but turned out not to be. She and her teammates lost their medals, which I support, but she was not banned from competition, which I also support. Some posters are unwilling to draw any distinction based on the circumstances when making moral judgements, that runs counter to my personal sense of justice.

You've really made some very good points here. Has anyone here ever heard of Ockham's Razor - I love it... it says all things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the right one. From all we have heard up to this point, it does sound like she has cheated. I'm not sure Occam's razor applies in this case. Part of the idea is that the most simple/straightforward conclusion based on the available evidence is the most likely one, but it also asserts that incremental evidence beyond what is necessary to prove a point should be avoided. We have the piece of evidence we need to assert that JH had drugs in her system--the positive test. To then add that she's had significant time drops over three years (as many 2008 olympians did) does not change the the outcome based on the evidence we already had. (Keep in mind that her 100 BR has not improved at all over the same period of time in question since her breakout swim in 2005.) To assert malicious intent on JH's part by saying she's a "cheater" and has been throughout those years of improvement arguably voilates Occam's razor, as it is a) ultimately speculative, rather than fact-based; and b) implies that she's been actively deceiving a ton of people, including her family, teammates, coaches, and friends for an extended period of time. Making this slightly more, rather than less complicated goes agains Occam. Is it possible that this is what happened? Of course, although I hope not. But if we're going to hang our hat on Occam's razor, we have two pieces of evidence: a positive test and a claim of innocence. My own sense at this point is that the real story lies within some gray area between freak unintentional contamination and premeditated, overt plan to cheat, that may or may not ever come to light.

Lynch mentality. She stole the horse hang her high. Good old western justice. Hang em first ask the questions later. I would hate to have you as my Defence Lawyer. George, what more do you want? The test showed that she had a banned stimulant in her system. The test wasn't wrong...if anything, those tests err on the other side (not catching cheaters). The only time that the circumstances should come into play are to determine whether she gets a lifetime ban or just a two year ban.

I posted last week, maybe on the "Crap.. someone pos." thread that we all need to get back to basics, like relying on the food we eat. Why the obsession over supplements and vitamins and this powder/that drink? Rely on your body to tell you how training is going, getting through more workouts and harder workouts because you ingested a chemical compound can't be healthy to the person overall. This was stupid when you posted it in the other thread, and it's still stupid. You're kidding yourself if you think that the food you buy in a grocery store is less of a "manufactured chemical compound" than something in a supplement bottle. You mentioned V8, a chicken sandwich, and ice cream. Do you have any idea how many artificial systems and substances are involved the production of those things? Ice cream, for example. The cows that produced the milk were likely fed a diet of primarily corn, which cows don't naturally eat. The diet would have to be supplemented (oh no!) with isolated fats, proteins and vitamins (chemical substances!), and of course the cows also got antibiotics and artificial growth hormones. The resulting milk was pasteurized and homogenized before being frozen and sweetened with processed sugar. Then things like guar gum, cellulose, "mono and diglycerides" and dextrose were added to hold the whole contraption together. Or were you thinking of one of those ice creams with Oreos in it?

Lynch mentality. She stole the horse hang her high. Good old western justice. Hang em first ask the questions later. I would hate to have you as my Defence Lawyer. Um, she tested positive on both samples, George. She's not accused of a crime, George. Are you off your meds, George?

Some of the arguments here are pretty comical. A couple interesting facts. 5/26/2006 at the age of 19 Jessica hardy swam 26.97, the first time under 27 seconds in her career that I could find on usa swimming. All swims prior to this were 27's and 28's. From that swim, she makes dramatic improvements from 26.97 all the way to 24.48 in the olympic trials at age 21 (where she test positive for a banned substance). Nearly a 2.5 second drop. That is going from not even being an olympic trials qualifier to world class in a pretty short time. And the substance she tested positive for is known for its ability to clear the body quickly and has benefits for sprinters. Anything is possible, tainted meat or supplements, fellow team mate spiking her water bottle, or even a dirty coach. But how likely are those scenarios? On a side note, is being tested 3 times at the trials normal? Are all of the olympic qualifiers tested after each race? Could she have thought she was in the clear after the first test? You've really made some very good points here. Has anyone here ever heard of Ockham's Razor - I love it... it says all things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the right one. From all we have heard up to this point, it does sound like she has cheated. For a bit, I really didn't want to believe that Hardy is cheating... I found myself leaning towards the conspiracy theories because I didn't want to accept that there is cheating in our sport, but the above information really sounds very reasonable. The positive in the middle of two negatives does look like she may have thought she wasn't going to get tested again at Trials and "juiced" herself up again for the rest of the meet. Being tested 3 times at OT does sound like a lot to me, but I've never been involved in a meet like that or even know anybody who has. I absolutely hate that this has happened... I can only imagine what it's like for all the US swimmers (and families) that have been impacted by this.

I am not supporting her I am pointing out the fact that most people in her shoes would have done what she did. She was stupid and should have known better. She should have had better judgement and a better Lawyer. Huh? I don't understand the notion of "support" at all. She cheated two people out of their opportunity to compete in the Olympics. She tested positive. Legal standards, such as beyond a reasonable doubt, are irrelevant. As usual these days, I agree with Geek. It's very simple. No sideshow required.

Except as was pointed out to me, there are no US laws controlling the possesion and/or human consumption of Clenbuterol. Still not kosher with USADA or WADA rules but not a criminal offense with regards to US Code.