ASADA seeks evidence from Fairfax

[Dave]

Show me the evidence then. Show me where an Atheltes response to a SCN is used by the ADRVP to make their decision?

From ASADA's website:

"In accordance with its legislative framework, ASADA puts formal allegations of a possible ADRV to the athlete or support person in anticipation of the matter being considered by the independent Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel (ADRVP).

The athlete or support person has the opportunity to make a submission to the ADRVP prior to their consideration of a matter.

The ADRVP reviews ASADA’s processes and all relevant evidence in a matter and makes decisions as to whether to enter an athlete or support person’s details onto the Register of Findings if it believes that a person has possibly committed an ADRV."

Why does the athlete have "the opportunity to make a submission to the ADRVP prior to their consideration of a matter" if the ADRVP isn't going to consider it?

And before you bother wasting your time trying to find something that doesn't exist, the ADRVP are there to make a decision based on evidence only.

An athletes response isn't evidence? Strange world you live in.

They don't use what players say in a SCN to make a determination of punishment (eg 6 months or 2 years).

I never said they did.

The AFL hands out the punishment.

No, the AFL tribunal hands out any punishment, should it determine that is appropriate.

 

[Dave]

I never said it was after the interview.

How did he hack Alavi's email?

 

[interestedoz1]

The Essendon folk will try and convince you though that ASADA are just bluffing and have nothing, and are committing a criminal offense by wasting millions of dollars of taxpayer money on nothing but a "bluff".

IMO there is no bluff about it.

Why are EFC going through current court action if they believe ASADA are bluffing?

 

[Dave]

Which is entirely appropriate in that Dank is not a "legit, well regarded source from the scientific community"

OK how about the US National Library of Medicine National Institute of Health?

"Furthermore, if multiple ligands bind to thymosin beta 4, then it is possible that thymosin beta 4 has a unique integrative function that links the actin cytoskeleton to important immune and cell growth-signaling cascades."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12852258

Bombers fans using the he can't be talking about TB4 because he says immune system - are just spreading wishful misinformation.

That's it? That's ""very good data – that supports Thymosin Beta 4 in the immune system"?

"it's possible" = "very good data"

Keep trying.

I notice no-one has addressed the question of why he would bother lying to the ACC. I guess that's a little inconvenient to the narrative.

 

[van peebles]

I notice no-one has addressed the question of why he would bother lying to the ACC. I guess that's a little inconvenient to the narrative.

Was interviewed 3 times.
Good chance he bullchitted his way through the 1st one.
Gave a touch more at the 2nd,with legal rep and some stern advice.
By the 3rd,he knew what cards the ACC dealt with and wouldve gone all in, with a promise of 'get outta goal free card" in the mix.
I could be wrong.

 

[ziad]

That's it? That's ""very good data – that supports Thymosin Beta 4 in the immune system"?

"it's possible" = "very good data"

Keep trying.

I notice no-one has addressed the question of why he would bother lying to the ACC. I guess that's a little inconvenient to the narrative.

I think most people are beyond responding to assertions from the cult. But why lie- many possibilities including dishonest, cheat, etc

 

[Dave]

Rather than beat around the bush let's get to the bottom line. Danks admitted using TB4,

Why did he lie to the ACC and risk 5 years jail?

there's huge circumstantial evidence ASADA have got that Danks used it, and ASADA, or any other anti-doping organisation, don't come up with show cause notices unless they feel what they have is very, very strong. Hence the percentage of show cause notices to infractions is in the high 90s.

The list of violations on ASADA's website (which I know is no exhaustive) is made up almost exclusively of presence violations (ie failed doping tests). In those cases it's no surprise the conviction rate is so high. Not sure how relevant that is to a non presence use case.

That's why the EFC and Hird are trying to beat the charges on technicalities rather than fighting the charges.

Couldn't be that the legitamately believe the process was unlawful?

Lose that, as they probably will, then your club is probably stuffed.

They probably will lose (and as I've said elsewhere I hope they do), but the club will survive. Be nice to be on the other end of handouts for a change.

No amount of argument or spin will change the above. Scary isn't it?!!!

Nah, not scary at all.

 

[Dave]

Was interviewed 3 times.
Good chance he bullchitted his way through the 1st one.
Gave a touch more at the 2nd,with legal rep and some stern advice.
By the 3rd,he knew what cards the ACC dealt with and wouldve gone all in, with a promise of 'get outta goal free card" in the mix.
I could be wrong.

Why would he lie about using TB4 when the ACC couldn't give two shits about PED use?

If he "came clean", why have only details of the interview where he said he used thymomodulin been released?

 

[andrewb]

My conclusions from 13 pages of bullshit.

1. There is a possibility that Dank gave Essendon players TB4.

2. There is a possibility that Dank didn't give Essendon players TB4.

Oooh. We're exactly where we started.

 

[Dave]

I think most people are beyond responding to assertions from the cult. But why lie- many possibilities including dishonest, cheat, etc

C'mon, you can do better than that. You could at least work in one of the following

koolaid
jamestown
hirdist
paid shill
ian hanke
delusion

Lift your game!!

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Is this Scientific enough for you?

http://www.peptidesciences.com/tb-500

I especially like this little warning about what you can actually do legally with Thymosin Beta-4.

"Bodily introduction of any kind into humans or animals is strictly forbidden by law".

Can't see anywhere in there about "Safe to start injecting it into your athlete's veins!"

Not getting into the discussion on the material in question, but the "this item is for research purposes only" is a stock standard clause for any lab chemicals supply company. This is because the rules about how and what can be used for research can be very different for pharma, therapeutic, or food uses.

This doesn't mean it cannot be used, just that the seller hasn't validated it for commercial use. Often they can be used commercially, and they handle those inquiries by exception. This is because the seller cannot predict every use/application their material may be used for (and therefore the requirements for that particular use)

 

[van peebles]

Q1/Why would he lie about using TB4 when the ACC couldn't give two shits about PED use?

Q2/If he "came clean", why have only details of the interview where he said he used thymomodulin been released?

1/Maybe 1st interview was a bit of dancing with your sister.Which led to,"we will see you next week".
He{dank}gets legal advice and realises he can sprout about most things.
Then its ok Mr Dank,we will have you in for an official interview friday.
He presents with legal eagle and goes through the whole shebang.

2/ACC can and have, only at times passed onto local authorities what they deem relevant.

Dave lets not get into a chitfight like others,we only opining.

 

[JakeandFatman]

Why did he lie to the ACC and risk 5 years jail?

Why did Marion Jones lie under the same circumstances?
Why was Marion Jones later found to lie and sent to prison?

Because people lie to cover their ass and hope they can get away with it, because the other side of the coin is not that much more palatable. If Dank admits pumping players full of not safe for human consumption drugs, what do you think will come of his life? Do you think he will end up working again? Will he go to prison regardless? Will he be financially ruined from the impending law suits from the players?

What's ironic is you can ask the exact same thing about Alavi and Charter. Does Charter really want to go back to prison? Their incentive to not lie to ACC is just as bad.

In fact in Charter's case (and here is where Hirdy and Danky could be really fu#ked) if Charter is being interviewed by the ACC and he has already been to prison once, he may be offered immunity from further prosecution for "dobbing in" those involved. How much of ASADA's evidence that we do not know about yet, is as a direct result of Charter coming clean and busting the whole thing open?

 

[Dave]

Why did Marion Jones lie under the same circumstances?

She lied to avoid the consequences of telling the truth. In her case, a life ban from sport.
There was no downside to Dank telling the ACC the truth.

Why was Marion Jones later found to lie and sent to prison? Because people lie to cover their ass and hope they can get away with it, because the other side of the coin is not that much more palatable. If Dank admits pumping players full of not safe for human consumption drugs, what do you think will come of his life?

To the ACC? Nothing at all. They don't care about peds in sport.

Do you think he will end up working again?

Runs his own business. Is he going to sack himself?

Will he go to prison regardless?

For what?

Will he be financially ruined from the impending law suits from the players?

Which lawsuits? How will the players find out? The ACC cannot tell anyone and Dank would have known that.

Edit: If he had all these concerns when he was being interview in 2012, where did they go in 2013? Did he just forget about them? No longer worried about jail, unemployment or lawsuits?

You can't have it both ways, either he cared enough to lie to the ACC, in which case he'd certainly have cared enough to lie to a journalist, or he didn't. People have been known to make mistakes, as shocking a concept as that may be in these parts.

What's ironic is you can ask the exact same thing about Alavi and Charter. Does Charter really want to go back to prison? Their incentive to not lie to ACC is just as bad.

When was Charter interviewed by the ACC?

In fact in Charter's case (and here is where Hirdy and Danky could be really fu#ked) if Charter is being interviewed by the ACC and he has already been to prison once, he may be offered immunity from further prosecution for "dobbing in" those involved.

Assuming he's interviewed and assuming they take the word of, as you say, a convicted criminal.

How much of ASADA's evidence that we do not know about yet, is as a direct result of Charter coming clean and busting the whole thing open?

No one outside of the investigation knows

 

[Dave]

Dave lets not get into a chitfight like others,we only opining.

Fair nuf. All good!

 

[Jimthegreat]

Why did he lie to the ACC and risk 5 years jail?



The list of violations on ASADA's website (which I know is no exhaustive) is made up almost exclusively of presence violations (ie failed doping tests). In those cases it's no surprise the conviction rate is so high. Not sure how relevant that is to a non presence use case.



Couldn't be that the legitamately believe the process was unlawful?



They probably will lose (and as I've said elsewhere I hope they do), but the club will survive. Be nice to be on the other end of handouts for a change.



Nah, not scary at all.

Bet it is scary.lol!

I'd assume, with the percentage of show cause notices to infractions being in the high 90s there's a fair chance non-presence use cases are amongst that. At high 90's% not alot of margin for error there to hang your hopes on.

As I said, Danks admitted to TB4, and banned substance. We know that because it's documented in an interview. straight out of his own mouth in quotes. No amount of spin can change that. ASADA, amongst it's 300 interviews and 150,000 documents, would obviously be water tight enough in it's case to hand out show cause notices without fear. They wouldn't be handed out unless they were sure of of what they had. Not unlike USADA and Lance, so watertight he didn't even bother to waste the money challenging. As I said, they're not handed out on a whim. Even if it was unlawful, which is desperate, most of the evidence was collected after the joint aspect of the investigation finished, hence can be still used, so that's not going to help you much either.

It's all that needs to be said in this thread. The rest is spin, diversion and BS. Just have to stick to the bottom line.

In other words Essendon's in more sh1t than the early settlers.

 

[Jimthegreat]

My conclusions from 13 pages of bullshit.

1. There is a possibility that Dank gave Essendon players TB4.

2. There is a possibility that Dank didn't give Essendon players TB4.

Oooh. We're exactly where we started.

Given it was quoted from Danks own mouth the odds are very high on option no.1. That part is quoted hence not BS. Doesn't give much hope for option 2.

Don't like your chances. Best be pinning your hopes on the court case. Don't like your chances there either.

Best be looking at the type of side you'll have next year. If you get 'done" before the November Draft the AFL might be nice enough to give you a few picks from the state and local leagues to fill the empty spaces.

 

[Argy]

Why did he lie to the ACC and risk 5 years jail?

How do you know what he said to the ACC?

 

[andrewb]

Given it was quoted from Danks own mouth the odds are very high on option no.1. That part is quoted hence not BS. Doesn't give much hope for option 2.

Don't like your chances. Best be pinning your hopes on the court case. Don't like your chances there either.

Best be looking at the type of side you'll have next year. If you get 'done" before the November Draft the AFL might be nice enough to give you a few picks from the state and local leagues to fill the empty spaces.

There is physical evidence of thymomodulin.
There is circumstantial evidence of both TB4 and thymomodulin.
I know which horse I'm backing.

 

[JakeandFatman]

There is physical evidence of thymomodulin.
There is circumstantial evidence of both TB4 and thymomodulin.
I know which horse I'm backing.

LOL WTF? Where is the physical evidence of Thymomodulin being found on Essendon's premises?

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Why would Dank undertake the actions in the first bolded text if he was of the belief attributed to him in the second bolded text? If he's "so arrogant that he thinks he can confess to players receiving TB4 because he believes he can get away with it ", why would he bother to "cover his tracks anyway"? You can't have it both ways.

If he was discussing TB4, why would he make the statement that there is "very good data – that supports Thymosin Beta 4 in the immune system”" when TB4 is not known for this whereas thymomodulin is?

If he was so arrogant in his belief that it is onlt banned under S0 why would he risk a 5 year jail term by lying to the ACC? Why wouldn't he tell them he used TB4 instead of Thymomodulin? The ACC don't care about ped's in sport, they care about crimes. They also don't prosecute based on compelled testimony, so he had no reason to lie to them. Why risk jail time?

Thymosin.

He could have told them he used Thymosin. Or, maybe even he doesn't get 5 years for getting mixed up between TB4 or Thymomodulin? Like you said, the stuff is not illegal.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

LOL WTF? Where is the physical evidence of Thymomodulin being found on Essendon's premises?

I think they have a pic of a vial.

 

[jenny61_99]

Do you know what tb4 does? does it have an affect on the immune system? Can you answer my question from earlier post chump.

Yes it does.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Yes it does.

It does.

But Dank would more likely highlight that aspect of tb4 in an interview than the fact it has benefits which make it look a lot like a performance enhancing drug. Which it is. JMO

 

[andrewb]

It does.

But Dank would more likely highlight that aspect of tb4 in an interview than the fact it has benefits which make it look a lot like a performance enhancing drug. Which it is. JMO

A question for you...

If, as everyone says, Dank went back and changed all the invoices and documents to say Thymomodulin (or thymodulin sic) instead of TB4 in mid 2012.... THEN...

Why would he deliberately talk about the (marginal) immunity benefits TB4 in an interview with Fairfax in Apr 2013?

He is CLEARLY talking about thymomodulin in that interview but was mixed up by the interviewer. The interview is a furphy.

There is circumstantial evidence that TB4 was used but there is physical evidence that thymomodulin was used cooberated by photographic records.

Furthermore, if TB4 was used, knowing the cost of TB4 as we do from the invoice that Essendon sent back, simple financial analysis should show that Essendon was spending enough money to pay for a TB4 program. Which it doesn't.

So either Dank was supplying TB4 out of the goodness of his heart, or Dank was using thymomodulin.

I don't think that Dank was supplying TB4 out of the goodness of his heart.