tjburk said "Show me how that means she KNOWINGLY took Clen?"
As I posted before--you do not need it. It is a strict liability rule. You test positive and thus violated the rule no matter how it got there, It matters not if she did it knowingly--this is not a "intent" based rule/law.
And btw, clen is not used in the US on people and it has to clear a horse's system before it races--so how in the world would it just so happen to end up in her urine and above the acceptable levels.
"Knowingly" is completely irrelevant here with respect to her guilt. The best she could have done, if she chose to continue with the appeal, is try to lower her fine/suspension somehow.
It is a strict liability rule. Who the heck cares how a substance that is not to be used on horses and the racing commission does not allow in horses on race day, got into her urine.
Yeah, I know, she was a at restaurant which was set up by a rival; there she ate pork which they spiked; touched the door handle when she went to the bathroom which was laced with clen and while away from the table, the waiter switched her water bottles. Got it.
I agree with scyfreestyler that dopers are likely not weighing the consequences too rationally. They're living in denial. Besides, depending on your age and ignoring the Dara anomaly, in some cases, 2 years could effectively be like a lifetime ban.
Why did she improve so much in freestyle and not breaststroke?
One thing is certain in Texas with respect to the murder rate dropping since they put in the fast lane to the needle---EVERYONE that got the needle--- has not killed anyone since! That is deterrent in my book---
And if an innocent person or two is hastily executed via the fast lane, hey, that's just all the more deterrence, right?
I promised myself I wouldn't get sucked back into this, but apparently I'm not getting an adequate dose of pain these days...
A person (say, Smith By Marriage) has a knife in her hand and she is standing over the dead body of a man (say, a Smith by Birth). When asked if she has killed SBB, SBM says yes. At this point, I think we can all agree that SBM is a murderer. Based on what I've read, I am sure that Lindsey and Tracy would agree as well, as would I. If SBM killed SBB because he made a snotty comment in a USMS forum about her getting her swimsuit on, she gets a ticket to terminal dreamland. If she was slicing tomatoes and SBB tripped over his own klutzy feet and fell into the knife, she gets a lesser sentence.
And that is, I think ,what some of us have been saying: Before we fry her completely, we'd like to KNOW what actually happened. Did JH test positive for clenbuterol: YES. But, is she just stupid (for, say, taking tainted supplements) or evil (for deliberately doping)? Until all the facts are in, I have the luxury of being able to wait to decide if she is worse than stupid and shall do so.
(I realize that if SBM knifed SBB because he said that her swimsuit made her butt look fat she'd get off scott-free if there were women on the jury, but we have to accept that the system isn't perfect. Even you, Geek, need to admit that some things are above the law.)
-LBJ
Let's get something straight, there are two SBB...one calls himself the Goodsmith (although I think everyone see's his true colors) and IS NOT married to the knife wielding SBM...and no we are not polygamists.
Second...you can wait as long as you want, say a few prayers, consult a psychic but you most likely will never know the truth regarding her intent.
I promised myself I wouldn't get sucked back into this, but apparently I'm not getting an adequate dose of pain these days...
A person (say, Smith By Marriage) has a knife in her hand and she is standing over the dead body of a man (say, a Smith by Birth). When asked if she has killed SBB, SBM says yes. At this point, I think we can all agree that SBM is a murderer. Based on what I've read, I am sure that Lindsey and Tracy would agree as well, as would I. If SBM killed SBB because he made a snotty comment in a USMS forum about her getting her swimsuit on, she gets a ticket to terminal dreamland. If she was slicing tomatoes and SBB tripped over his own klutzy feet and fell into the knife, she gets a lesser sentence.
And that is, I think ,what some of us have been saying: Before we fry her completely, we'd like to KNOW what actually happened. Did JH test positive for clenbuterol: YES. But, is she just stupid (for, say, taking tainted supplements) or evil (for deliberately doping)? Until all the facts are in, I have the luxury of being able to wait to decide if she is worse than stupid and shall do so.
(I realize that if SBM knifed SBB because he said that her swimsuit made her butt look fat she'd get off scott-free if there were women on the jury, but we have to accept that the system isn't perfect. Even you, Geek, need to admit that some things are above the law.)
-LBJ
without getting into a buch of legal minutia, murder is generally the the unlawful intentional killing of one human being by another.
While SBM may have killed SBB, SBM in not necessarily a murderer. It could have been accidental, self defense, or justifiable.
Which kind of like JH, she tested positive for a banned substance, thus her performance doesn't count, and she's not eligible for the Olympics.
Under the rules governing elite athletes, she's guilty of doping, and banned from competition (for two years for a first offense)
The point many seem to be overlooking, is that under the same rules, she is entitled to an appeal to USADA and CAS. And unlike major league baseball where a player is 'innocent' and can play until his appeal is resolved, JH is guilty until she can demonstrate that the positive test was somehow invalid, or there are some extenuating/mitigating circumstances that might reduce her ban.
(btw I voted that she knowingly used a banned substance in the poll)
JH's lawyer has made a few statements the he has a good lead on where it came from and plans to present evidence at her hearing, why not wait for him to put his cards on the table and then make a judgment?
Are we supposed to read this and not laugh out loud? Quick review - she tested positive for a banned substance.
No matter what, we can all count on a rich tale from her attorneys, complete with charts, graphs, somber music and pictures of Kicker V, the hero of all dopers. She's also out for 2 years despite all the whining about vicitmhood, which is a great first step towards getting rid of dopers in the sport.
Let us all face the facts--The little darling from Long Beach who swam for the Cal Bears is a cheater and her actions after testing + are sorry!
Hey now, your starting to sound like the "Stanford snob" from Tara Kirk's blog with your (perhaps inadvertent) dig at Cal: wcsnblogs.com/.../
I think she was representing the Trojans of USC, yes? :soapbox:
I like the Stanford "snob"'s suggestion though...
tjburk said "Show me how that means she KNOWINGLY took Clen?"
As I posted before--you do not need it. It is a strict liability rule. You test positive and thus violated the rule no matter how it got there, It matters not if she did it knowingly--this is not a "intent" based rule/law.
Everyone (including JH herself) has long since agreed on that she should be DQ'd from Olympics
