Mysterious bottle from Mexico sets off alarm - Baker and McKenzie

[Farmer2Goggin]

You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried.

There's got to be a cartel from Colombia coming up next ?

 

[The Falcon Strike]

A few points:
- club recklessly injected random drugs (sourced from media)
- club kept no records (sourced from media)
- cant explain what substances were (sourced from media).

The afl, asada, nor efc - ie official sources, have not really commented on this at all.

Dank who's not restrained in talking has denied that records were not kept.

If there was sufficient evidence that a violation had occurred - they wouldn't wait - they'd issue notices.

Agree - which is why if the club is innocent, they'll put up a strong argument in the hearing, they'll be able to detail what drugs were taken by which player on what day. They'll also be able to explain every substance and the purpose for it being administered.

At which point the commission will surely only be able to sustain that there is no evidence of anything untoward happening and as such no guilty finding can be reached. Essendon is currently innocent and as such evidence needs to be mounted to disprove this.

However if the assertions are proved to the required legal standard, then if Essendon can not provide the detailed history of drugs injected - then they are in the shit.

 

[Albert Ross]

I know people who've ordered all manner of supplements from the US that are banned here and they've come straight through customs with the declaration of "health supplement".

Package not even opened.

But the day they open your package? Wade Lees got an 18 month ban for doing it even though he never received his package

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/vf...-enhancing-drugs/story-fnelctok-1226541380732

 

[robbieando]

Dank who's not restrained in talking has denied that records were not kept.

Dank and his public statements at this time are on the level of media reports because he hasn't fronted ASADA or the AFL yet. So basically his pubic statements might not be as truthful as you might think or hope.

ASADA will only take his words into account once he fronts them and not before

 

[theGav56]

Which is ironic, hypocritical and an oxymoron all in one sense. On one hand you're perpetuating this facade as to "caring" about the players which would include wishing for the best, yet you hope for them to have actually been in danger in order to see Essendon fall as a result of actually doing anything wrong.

Again, I ask, who are you trying to fool?

I agree totally. There really is no excusing the players from what I can see. The guidelines seem very clear and are deliberately worded to ensure individual responsibility, and only allow for exceptions in the most unusual of circumstances.

 

[Remon Tea]

James Hird and the Hyperbaric Chamber of Secrets.

Rated M - may contain drug references.

 

[royals1922]

I don't know if this has been posted before but here goes

 

[Joe Johnson]

Read the article.

The IOC and the funding governments take turns at picking the WADA President, the IOC picked Reedie and thus when WADA meet to pick there will be only one person to choose from. The decision has been made.

Yes the vote in November will be formality to install Reedie as WADA head.

Reedie is already on the WADA executive committee and was preferred over Edwin Moses and Patrick Schamanch

Probably a good move as Reedie is up to speed on all the major cases in the world at the moment.

 

[Baldur]

A few points:
- club recklessly injected random drugs (sourced from media)
- club kept no records (sourced from media)
- cant explain what substances were (sourced from media).

The afl, asada, nor efc - ie official sources, have not really commented on this at all.

Dank who's not restrained in talking has denied that records were not kept.

If there was sufficient evidence that a violation had occurred - they wouldn't wait - they'd issue notices.

Wrong

 

[moses]

Now, this technology is new to me, but I'm pretty sure that's James Hird in the oven, rotating slowly.

His body temperature has risen to over 400 degrees - he's literally stewing in his own juices.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

A few points:
- club recklessly injected random drugs (sourced from media)
- club kept no records (sourced from media)
- cant explain what substances were (sourced from media).

The afl, asada, nor efc - ie official sources, have not really commented on this at all.

Dank who's not restrained in talking has denied that records were not kept.

If there was sufficient evidence that a violation had occurred - they wouldn't wait - they'd issue notices.

And if there was sufficient evidence no violation had occurred, this would all have been sorted out well before any of us heard about it at the February press conference and we would have missed all this hot topic fun.

 

[Joe Johnson]

But apparently EFC do know what the substances were .

And yet the players seem to have been uncertain about answering questions by ASADA officials. Especially in relation to thymosin

 

[SwampRat]

Absolutely not. If you got cleared under those circumstances it would completely remove any barrier to drug use forever, in every sport. It is too easy to set up a scenario where it appears the athlete has been mislead. It is the first choice defence of nearly every athlete caught with PEDs. If you let off athletes who said "Hey they told me it was vitamin B" then you would never punish anyone ever again.

As tough as it is, it is the athlete's responsibility to only ingest what they know to be safe. The test for that is not testimony about a meeting, it is not a letter, it is not an email... the test is whether or not you took something banned. If you took something banned then that by itself is evidence that you were not diligent enough and must bear the brunt of it.

If that's the case, any supplement program run by any club anywhere in the world should become prima facie illegal under WADA standards in the interests of player safety. There is no possible way for a player to validate what is actually in the injection beyond asking what it is and determining whether that is an acceptable substance to take.

There are clauses for no fault, but they are hard to prove. Depending on what was said, it might or might not apply here. If a player is administered something while unconscious, it applies for instance. I see lying about a supplement being a similar case.

I do see your point though.

 

[go_nodders]

Agree - which is why if the club is innocent, they'll put up a strong argument in the hearing, they'll be able to detail what drugs were taken by which player on what day. They'll also be able to explain every substance and the purpose for it being administered.

At which point the commission will surely only be able to sustain that there is no evidence of anything untoward happening and as such no guilty finding can be reached. Essendon is currently innocent and as such evidence needs to be mounted to disprove this.

However if the assertions are proved to the required legal standard, then if Essendon can not provide the detailed history of drugs injected - then they are in the shit.

If this was the case, they would have told ASADA.

 

[lysp]

Agree - which is why if the club is innocent, they'll put up a strong argument in the hearing, they'll be able to detail what drugs were taken by which player on what day. They'll also be able to explain every substance and the purpose for it being administered.

At which point the commission will surely only be able to sustain that there is no evidence of anything untoward happening and as such no guilty finding can be reached. Essendon is currently innocent and as such evidence needs to be mounted to disprove this.

However if the assertions are proved to the required legal standard, then if Essendon can not provide the detailed history of drugs injected - then they are in the shit.

Definitely. The club will be well aware that if things went to court, the standards are suddenly raised. Need to provide greater proof as well as be under the threat of perjury.

Dank and his public statements at this time are on the level of media reports because he hasn't fronted ASADA or the AFL yet. So basically his pubic statements might not be as truthful as you might think or hope.

ASADA will only take his words into account once he fronts them and not before

Remember Dank is also considering/threatening legal action against reporters. All his public statements will be considered in his case against them. I doubt he'd flat out lie, when if caught out this will lessen/throw out his case for slander once legally tested.

 

[SwampRat]

Now, this technology is new to me, but I'm pretty sure that's James Hird in the oven, rotating slowly.

His body temperature has risen to over 400 degrees - he's literally stewing in his own juices.

Breaking news: James Hird sleeps in an oxygen tent which he believes gives him Super Powers.

 

[Daytripper]

So it seems like B1, B2 and Caro have been caught out telling pork pies again.

One more additional law suit for everyone I guess.

 

[lysp]

Wrong

Thank you for your insightful clarification.

And if there was sufficient evidence no violation had occurred, this would all have been sorted out well before any of us heard about it at the February press conference and we would have missed all this hot topic fun.

In Feb nothing was investigated or tested. The past 7 months have been asada and afl gathering evidence/interviewing people to see if a violation has occurred or not. They would not have known this in Feb pre-investigation.

And you can guarantee, if asada thought it had enough evidence to support it's case it wouldn't wait on it.

 

[SwampRat]

Exactly right. As they don't know what was in it - how can they charge the players involved.

There is no WADA rule about injecting unknown substances.

However - do you think a club recklessly injecting drugs (randomly and without records) into players that are used for MD, dementia and obesity is a good thing for the code? That is why the club is being charged.

Infractions require specific information as to whom got what.

This whole "The players haven't been charged therefore the club is innocent" line is horseshit.

The club well may be innocent, it may have very good reasons for injecting unknown substances into their players. That is what the hearing is for.

And if they can't explain what the substances are, then what the hell were they putting into their players bodies for?

That is wrong on so many levels.

But yeah, Essendon are the victims in this.

FWIW - I don't think Hird, Reid or anyone else (still at the club) is responsible for the Mexican drug. I would suggest it is highly unlikely they knew anything about it.

However Hird at least did know about thymosin, AOD and ubiquonone.

I'm not so sure about that. They might be able to get them under S0. Since they cannot identify the drug, they cannot show that it is approved for use. A court might very likely agree that it is reasonable to conclude the drug(s) is not approved and therefore breaches S0.

 

[BlueWorld]

Of course this is Hirds fault. After all, we have the leaked email showing he directly asked Dank to use banned, unsafe and useless substances on players, and ensure they were never passed by Dr Reid.

"I take full responsibility for the football department". (OH why did I ever say that).

 

[FuManchu]

Wrong

Indeed.

They finalise investigations, just in case they can find more breaches or mitigating circumstances, so they arent blindsided when it reaches tribunal stage. They dont charge on the run, firing off a charge anytime they might find they have a prima facie case, and then a some time later fire off another charge to the same person.

 

[Argy]

I'm not so sure about that. They might be able to get them under S0. Since they cannot identify the drug, they cannot show that it is approved for use. A court might very likely agree that it is reasonable to conclude the drug(s) is not approved and therefore breaches S0.

I think you're on to something. An unknown drug cannot be approved. Therefore it is banned under S0.

 

[Daytripper]

I'm not so sure about that. They might be able to get them under S0. Since they cannot identify the drug, they cannot show that it is approved for use. A court might very likely agree that it is reasonable to conclude the drug(s) is not approved and therefore breaches S0.

Hilarious.

 

[GarnerSmash]

And you can guarantee, if asada thought it had enough evidence to support it's case it wouldn't wait on it.

http://www.asada.gov.au/rules_and_violations/process.html

Upon the completion of an investigation, all relevant evidence and material for potential ADRVs are referred to ASADA’s Legal team for review.

Note the first six words.

 

[Daytripper]

I think you're on to something. An unknown drug cannot be approved. Therefore it is banned under S0.

Look out everyone - there's a lawyer in the house.

Never heard anything so ridiculous in my life.

FFS - its not even true anyway. Total fiction and another lawsuit set in motion by Fairfax.