You talk about a common sense conclusion. There was another common sense conclusion, that Mach Wiper was indeed presented to race with a prohibited substance. There was a period of time Luke McCarthy was found guilty. I for one, and others on and outside this forum held back on criticism of McCarthy until the guilty verdict was handed down. This was a common sense conclusion before possibly the worlds weirdest and non sensical sample became public knowledge. So, there was a time when both common sense and the law said McCarthy was guilty, where I and others said stuff that at the time made perfect sense. For you to catch us out for not foreseeing such a strange sample and infer me and others lacked common sense is, as I said before, humiliating, belittling and condescending.
Not a defence of prohibited substances in the legal definition, but rather the laymans definition of protection. I view what mightmo posted as making a point as to why boldenone had been found in some samples (is this right Harvey, you were asked in the thread but offered up no answer). This is a protection and in support/defence of those who have had boldenone positives come back from the lab. You let a pretty big possibly gamechanging statement that was made as absolute fact slip through to the keeper. You can't dispute that. It's a bit rough that you allow unsourced inaccuracies that favour one side of the argument but come down with the fury of a Barry Hall uppercut on the other side of the argument. It has nothing to do with your personal view, rather the moderating you do to others opinions on each side of the argument does not appear to be balanced as you say. We are only human so I understand you can't catch everything but please don't deny.
Yes Danno baited and I guess you were entitled a right of reply, but the consequences of baiting him are much more severe and two wrongs don't make a right. I don't think the spirit of this thread or forum is to see other members in trouble with the law. As for claiming knowledge vs publishing knowledge. If he just claims it, who is going to be offended to start civil action and then make it stick, and why are any cops going to waste time on a petty charge that probably wouldn't stick criminally? If he publishes it it is another story, there is a victim who can take offence. I am sure Danno can stick up for himself though without my help!
Reply With Quote