ASADA seeks evidence from Fairfax

[BlueWorld]

Their expertise is amazing, you would swear that they were in the room when everything happened with their knowledge of the situation. Who would have thought they are really guessing like everyone else, or getting their info from newspaper hacks trying their best to sell papers

#standbyasada
#in asada we trust

 

[RegHickeyStand]

How do you know they haven't?

Because Essendon would be taking ASADA to court on different grounds.

 

[Bombers_Insider]

You should continue to edit your original post so it is at least readable.

Your the English teacher you fix it.

 

[JakeandFatman]

Your the English teacher you fix it.

"You're the English teacher, you fix it"

 

[Percel]

Your the English teacher you fix it.

Who's Bomber inside?

 

[chelseacarlton]

Your the English teacher you fix it.

I'm just another fool on an Internet forum,do your own homework.
It is more than likely your footy club crossed the line of what's legal concerning peptide/supplement use.
That's what keeps us here,what's your excuse?

 

[andrewb]

I'm still waiting for a credible answer as to why dank, who was interviewed about PEDs in 2012 and apparently changed all our records to represent thymomodulin at that stage would then go and say that he used TB4 on players in an interview in 2013.

But I'm willing to be convinced.... Unlike most on here.

 

[andrewb]

A) Dank doped the team in 2012 and deliberately changed the doco because he knew TB4 was far more serious/performance enhancing than AOD and didn't want it showing up on any records, even though he still believed he could work his way around the S0 rules

and

B) Dank discovers after the McKenzie interview that TB4 is on the S2 list, realises his little S0 work around is irrelevant and that he is in deep shit and shuts his mouth from then on

or a second possible scenario is

A) Dank doped the team in 2012 and changed the doco because he knew TB4 was prohibited and it was never meant to appear on any paper work

and

B) Dank got confused in the McKenzie interview and meant to say Thymomodulin, an easy mistake considering the cocktail of substances he had been mucking around with

If these are the best answers you can come up with you are seriously delusional.

If you're not willing to accept that we may not have doped then:

Either dank ran a performance enhancing program and tried to hide it, OR dank ran a performance enhancing program without realizing.

He's not going to change documentation in 2012 to hide TB4 and then admit TB4 use in 2013 in an interview unless he's as smart as you seem.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

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...

No-one says he did that. There aren't any Thymomodulin invoices, are there?

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.

The interviewer never mixed him up. Dank called it Thymosin beta-4 all by himself.

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

There are no records published about any invoices for thymomodulin. There is no record of Dank buying thymomodulin in the quantities.

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.

Once again, where is the simple financial analysis should show that Essendon was spending enough money to pay for a thymomodulin program?

You see the problem? There is no publicly acknowledged paper trail we know of for beta 4. But there isn't one for thymomodulin, either.

Let's find out what was bought on that credit card, eh?

 

[JakeandFatman]

I'm still waiting for a credible answer as to why dank, who was interviewed about PEDs in 2012 and apparently changed all our records to represent thymomodulin at that stage would then go and say that he used TB4 on players in an interview in 2013.

But I'm willing to be convinced.... Unlike most on here.

I already told you but you refuse to acknowledge or accept it.

• Dank change the records to hide TB4 being linked to the club.
• Dank then realises that ACC & ASADA are able to link TB4 anyway to the club via other sources.
• Dank knew at the interview that if he lied about TB4 with the evidence available at that stage he would lose all credibility, and in his mind he had nothing to fear by admitting TB4 use as he believed it was under S2 and not S0.... so he would get off on a technicality like AOD-9604.
• When he realised during the interview that it was now a banned drug he then changed his story to deny deny deny.

Simple isn't it? Almost as simple as Jobe Watson admitting he had taken AOD-9604 on national television which was a banned drug at the time. That made no sense either.

 

[andrewb]

No-one says he did that. There aren't any Thymomodulin invoices, are there?

The interviewer never mixed him up. Dank called it Thymosin beta-4 all by himself.

There are no records published about any invoices for thymomodulin. There is no record of Dank buying thymomodulin in the quantities.

Once again, where is the simple financial analysis should show that Essendon was spending enough money to pay for a thymomodulin program?

You see the problem? There is no publicly acknowledged paper trail we know of for beta 4. But there isn't one for thymomodulin, either.

Let's find out what was bought on that credit card, eh?

Thanks for taking the time to respond there mate.. Appreciate it. There are points that I'd disagree with but in essence we are on the same page.

I.e. That there is evidence to suggest that TB4 was administered but also evidence to suggest it wasn't.

I accept either the text messages or the McKenzie article as evidence but there is no way that any court would accept both.

There's no way that dank would spend a year hiding evidence of doping only to accidentally give it up on record

 

[blue harvest]

I already told you but you refuse to acknowledge or accept it.

• Dank change the records to hide TB4 being linked to the club.
• Dank then realises that ACC & ASADA are able to link TB4 anyway to the club via other sources.
• Dank knew at the interview that if he lied about TB4 with the evidence available at that stage he would lose all credibility, and in his mind he had nothing to fear by admitting TB4 use as he believed it was under S2 and not S0.... so he would get off on a technicality like AOD-9604.
• When he realised during the interview that it was now a banned drug he then changed his story to deny deny deny.

Simple isn't it? Almost as simple as Jobe Watson admitting he had taken AOD-9604 on national television which was a banned drug at the time. That made no sense either.

I think you mixed up S2 and S0

 

[andrewb]

I already told you but you refuse to acknowledge or accept it.

• Dank change the records to hide TB4 being linked to the club.
• Dank then realises that ACC & ASADA are able to link TB4 anyway to the club via other sources.
• Dank knew at the interview that if he lied about TB4 with the evidence available at that stage he would lose all credibility, and in his mind he had nothing to fear by admitting TB4 use as he believed it was under S2 and not S0.... so he would get off on a technicality like AOD-9604.
• When he realised during the interview that it was now a banned drug he then changed his story to deny deny deny.

Simple isn't it? Almost as simple as Jobe Watson admitting he had taken AOD-9604 on national television which was a banned drug at the time. That made no sense either.

And then he went on record to deny TB4 use with the ACC. You are a rare variety of simpleton.

Choose one or the other. I'm ok with either.

Both don't make sense.

 

[JakeandFatman]

I think you mixed up S2 and S0

Sorry yes I did.

 

[JakeandFatman]

And then he went on record to deny TB4 use with the ACC. You are a rare variety of simpleton.

Choose one or the other. I'm ok with either.

Both don't make sense.

Oh well if Dank said so then it must be true because a person being accused of committing a crime has never lied before to save their ass hahaha. Gullible fool.

The mere fact your brain cannot get around all of the other supporting evidence with the invoices, backdated forged letters, email and SMS trails showing Dank ordering TB4, the player consent forms matching up exactly with the injection frequency recommended for TB4.

You ignore all of this evidence because you believe "It doesn't make sense that Dank would lie to the ACC".

Amazing.

 

[andrewb]

Oh well if Dank said so then it must be true because a person being accused of committing a crime has never lied before to save their ass hahaha. Gullible fool.

The mere fact your brain cannot get around all of the other supporting evidence with the invoices, backdated forged letters, email and SMS trails showing Dank ordering TB4, the player consent forms matching up exactly with the injection frequency recommended for TB4.

You ignore all of this evidence because you believe "It doesn't make sense that Dank would lie to the ACC".

Amazing.

There are peanuts.
And then there are peanuts.
And then there is you.


In your delusional world:

A man ran an organized doping program in 2011/12.

In 2012 he spoke to ACC investigators who told him they were onto him.

He went back and changed all the computer records to thymodulin (sic) and told his boss (Hamilton) to return the $20k invoice for TB4 to cover his tracks. Plus he got his mate Robinson to create injection schedules stating Thymomodulin following that interview.

Tracks covered, eh?

Now 12 months later when everything has blown up he goes on record with a reporter.

Instead of trying to cover his tracks, he admits to TB4 use despite describing the immunity benefits of thymomodulin.

So basically he spent 12 months trying to cover up tb4 only to announce it in the papers.

And then he went back on what he'd said and retracted under oath

The smarter people on here have picked one or the other. Both don't make sense. You are an intellectual battler.

 

[JakeandFatman]

There are peanuts.
And then there are peanuts.
And then there is you.


In your delusional world:

A man ran an organized doping program in 2011/12.

In 2012 he spoke to ACC investigators who told him they were onto him.

He went back and changed all the computer records to thymodulin (sic) and told his boss (Hamilton) to return the $20k invoice for TB4 to cover his tracks. Plus he got his mate Robinson to create injection schedules stating Thymomodulin following that interview.

Tracks covered, eh?

Now 12 months later when everything has blown up he goes on record with a reporter.

Instead of trying to cover his tracks, he admits to TB4 use despite describing the immunity benefits of thymomodulin.

So basically he spent 12 months trying to cover up tb4 only to announce it in the papers.

And then he went back on what he'd said and retracted under oath

The smarter people on here have picked one or the other. Both don't make sense. You are an intellectual battler.

You are foaming so much at the mouth you are getting your facts completely wrong as usual.

The invoice that was returned was for Hexarelin not TB4. Hexarelin a banned steroid that was invoiced to Essendon by Como and then they reimbursed it to cover the trail. Of course whilst officially the money was "reimbursed", the drugs were not as they were found on site at Essendon's offices.

 

[andrewb]

You are foaming so much at the mouth you are getting your facts completely wrong as usual.

The invoice that was returned was for Hexarelin not TB4. Hexarelin a banned steroid that was invoiced to Essendon by Como and then they reimbursed it to cover the trail. Of course whilst officially the money was "reimbursed", the drugs were not as they were found on site at Essendon's offices.

Haha do some research peanut.

 

[JakeandFatman]

Haha do some research peanut.

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/EssendonFC-notice-of-charges.pdf

25. The Club was originally billed by Alavi for 7 vials of Hexarelin (in addition to those
supplied on 10 January 2012) and 26 vials of “peptide Thymosin” (at a combined cost of
$9860) which are listed on the invoice as having been delivered on 18 January 2012.

26. On 29 February 2012, Como issued an amended invoice to the Club which re-credited the
Club for the costs of the Hexarelin and “peptide Thymosin”.

27. In late May 2012 Dank discovered that the Thymosin he had been providing the players
(Thymosin Beta-4) was in fact prohibited.

You forgot to include the last bit, where it says Dank discovered that the Thymosin was prohibited.

Now explain to me again why the club was invoiced for banned drugs?

 

[andrewb]

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/EssendonFC-notice-of-charges.pdf



You forgot to include the last bit, where it says Dank discovered that the Thymosin was prohibited.

Now explain to me again why the club was invoiced for banned drugs?

Are you mentally challenged?

Did Dank discover that Tb4 was prohibited in 2012 when we were invoiced or in 2013 when Fauxfax interviewed him?

 

[tigerdan]

This is the part that sinks Dank's story:

“Well, that must have just only come in this year and I will get someone to speak to ASADA about that. That's just mind-blowing.”

You don't make that comment if you have got your drugs mixed up. You'd go... "hang on what are you asking me about TB4 for? we're talking about Thymomodulin!"

It's easy enough to have a slip of the tongue in idle chat (mind you I don't believe it happend in this case). But certainly you don't have detailed conversations about something and mention the wrong drug multiple times: “…There is good data – very good data – that supports Thymosin Beta 4 in the immune system.”

To suggest otherwise is simply clutching at straws.

 

[lones37]

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.

He has already fessed up to the ACC to avoid jail, we already know this.

ASADA can now use this according to Roy Masters. There are a lot of surprises coming.

 

[lones37]

Are you mentally challenged?

Did Dank discover that Tb4 was prohibited in 2012 when we were invoiced or in 2013 when Fauxfax interviewed him?

That would be about the time Hird slapped an injunction on dank from speaking. He knew it was banned a year earlier. He said it because Hird put all the blame on him.

That's why dank gave Danny Weildler 6 months of texts, to prove Hird knew everything.

Out came the injunction, and we haven't heard anything since from dank.

As usual, hiding the truth. But not for long.

 

[jenny61_99]

I'm still waiting for a credible answer as to why dank, who was interviewed about PEDs in 2012 and apparently changed all our records to represent thymomodulin at that stage would then go and say that he used TB4 on players in an interview in 2013.

But I'm willing to be convinced.... Unlike most on here.

Already answered. Liars have a terrible time in keeping up with their lies. Caught off guard and when your ego is being stroked (tell us all about your awesome and superior scientific knowledge) you make mistakes.

 

[Sir Hugh Percy]

Are you mentally challenged?

Did Dank discover that Tb4 was prohibited in 2012 when we were invoiced or in 2013 when Fauxfax interviewed him?

Please explain then, why it took Dank a day to get back to McKenzie with his correction on TB4.

I admit that it's difficult to explain how an alledgedly 'smart bloke' could make such a mistake, but we have guesses. You're clutching onto this as your big proof that TB4 wasn't used and yet you have the same problem with it. If Dank knew that TB4 was banned and that's why he didn't use it, was at pains to change 'incorrect' invoices to ensure that it didn't look like they'd used TB4, then how does he make this mistake and not correct it for a day?

Seems more like a guy had to go home and do a bit of research and think of an excuse, than just a slip of the toungue. What, he really didn't remember for a day that he had said TB4?