For those who would like to review the affidavit of Special Agent Jeff Novitsky in support of request for BALCO search warrants - which has nothing to do with whether Michael Johnson is correct in stating that Marion Jones should retire and find a patch of green grass somewhere:
Search, eldrick. I:ve been here long enough for people to trust that I am not making things up. If the CAS accounts are inaccurate, a correction would have occured, and an ammended, more accurate version would be on-line.
Last edited by EPelle on Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Full arsenal of "evidences"? Not in the least. These don:t even begin to scratch the surface.
USADA v Collins:
In USADA v. Michelle Collins, AAA No. 30 190 00658 04 (Dec. 10, 2004), the arbitration panel found that “USADA has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that sprinter Michelle Collins was guilty of doping through the use of prohibited substances and techniques for more than a year,” although she had not tested positive for any banned substances. IAAF rules state that doping occurs when “an athlete uses or takes advantage of a prohibited technique,” or “admits having used or taken advantage of a prohibited substance or a prohibited technique.” The panel relied on e-mail messages seized as a part of the BALCO investigation in which Collins admitted to using THG and a cream to mask its usage along with prior blood and urine tests from IOC-accredited labs confirming her admitted usage and proving a pattern of doping. Collins refused to testify at the hearing or provide any exculpatory explanation of her statements and other documents evidencing her guilt. She also did not present any expert testimony or other evidence to provide an alternative explanation for the incriminating test results.
You enjoy laughing, no eldrick? Collins attorneys biggest defense was that she had passed every drugs test administered to her, this despite the fact that she was clearly taking a drug which was thought to be undetectable.
52. What counsel for Ms. Gaines did not do was in any way undermine Ms. White’s evidence regarding her conversations with Ms. Gaines in 2002 and 2003. The evidence of those conversations, most especially the conversation during which Ms. Gaines admitted her use of the Clear, which the Panel considers to be clear and compelling, thus stands uncontroverted. It is also, as indicated above, sufficient in and of itself to find Respondent guilty of doping.
to demolish uncorroborated testimony doesn't require perry mason
no matter what simple statements counsel may have made along lines of " kelli, where's your proof ?", cas had their judgement already made
http://www.tas-cas.org/en/pdf/Montgomery.PDF Tim Montgomery
back to same ole 100% belief in kellie's unsupported testimony
the laughable thing is :
51. Of course, as noted by USADA's counsel during closing argument: "It would be a real different issue if Tim Montgomery took the stand and said ‘no, no, when I said "it" I meant something else’." It might indeed have affected the Panel's appreciation of Ms. White's evidence had Respondent chosen to provide the Panel with a different explanation of their March 2001 conversation or had he denied that the conversation took place as described by the witness. The fact remains that he did not.
no mention of the fact that his counsel must have stated the one sentence denial on his behalf
i have never read anything so crass : if tim personally had said instead of his counsel :
‘no, no, when I said "it" I meant something else’
cas wouda given consideration to the reliability of kellie's testimony !
Contacted Wednesday, Arguedas declined to discuss what Montgomery had told the grand jury.
"No one can legally or legitimately have Tim's grand jury testimony, and if they think they have it, I would like to see it," she said. "Otherwise, there's no way I can respond to these blind allegations, and I'm not going to comment on it."
did usada/cas have access to full grand jury testimony ?
from cas, on usada's evidence against tim :
(7) Reports in the San Francisco Chronicle supposedly based on secret grand jury testimony by Mr. Montgomery in which he admits to using various prohibited substances.
usada had no grand jury testimony to bring to cas : just the same sfgate article off the web as everyone else had !
so usada had no official transcript of tim's confession - just a newspaper article !!!
so, all they had was kellie's tesimony to convict on - which they wouda considered suspect if tim rather than counsel had made a 1 sentence denial
USADA v Collins:
In USADA v. Michelle Collins, ...
convicted by e-mails she sent
pity usada coudn't find anything as concrete on tim or chryste rather than just rely on kellie
USADA got its Grand Jury testimony from the US Senate.
During a hearing hearing on 2004-February-27, the U.S. government agreed, as part of its discovery obligations, to provide the defense counsel a copy of the transcripts of grand jury testimony from various athletes, with both the defense counsel and the government agreeing on the record, that the production of the transcripts would be subject to a stipulated protective order. The United States Senate provided USADA unprotected parts of those sworn depositions after a committee led by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., voted to subpoena Justice Department documents connected to the steroid-distribution.
You said you had this all down pat.
Arguedas jumped ship when Montgomery went straight for CAS, rather than through the normal channels of arbitration in the USA.
Why do you assume they didn:t? They stated evidence collected in the BALCO case already hung up Montgomery. Being fair, they took into account all of the evidences - including White:s. Recall, they had considered seven types of evidences against Montgomery, and had deeply considered whether or not to use his confession as a basis for banishment, each of the seven as individual evidences to reach that conclusion, or to look at all of the evidences as a whole and determine, without a reasonable doubt, that he was guilty.
White chose to speak, because she was provided a plea bargain which stipulated any constructive cooperation with authorities in this case would reduce her ban from lifetime to two years. That constructive enablement was to be fool-proof - able to withstand the scrutiny of the courts, and not based on hearsay.
Everyone is going too far into this.
Michael Johnson gave his opinion whether you agree or not is not the issue.
The fact of the matter is her image has been tarnished beyond repair no doubt. Should she retire - I think so, will she retire soon - I also think so. But she will drag it through for as long as possible. I'm not a Marion Jones hater never was. I think it's really unfortunate that the Sport continues to get bombarded by Drug accusations regarding almost every successful Athlete.
For the health of the Sport she should retire. Just my opinion. I agree with Michael, I generally do.
Regarding the fact others have mentioned could she better her PR's - that doesn't matter. Times are not the be all & end all of the Sport. The be all & end all is the competition. The Gold medals, championships.
Allen Johnson just ran .04 away from his PR but more importantly was he won the World Cup race. If he came last and ran 12.70 would he be happy - not sure.
Ouch, eldrick: you:ve not read the pdf file yet, no?
As noted, Mr. Montgomery has never had a single drug test found to be a positive doping violation, but USADA’s charges are based, in part, on all of the blood and urine tests at IOC-accredited and non-IOC-accredited laboratories that he has had in recent years. USADA also relies, among other things, on documents seized by the U.S. government from BALCO that have been provided to USADA; statements made by BALCO officials; and other documents.
Why they chose to list supposedly based on secret grand jury testimony by Mr. Montgomery in which he admits to using various prohibited substances is beyond me - espcecially considering they had the unsealed USADA copy of record. USADA, itself, attempted to prove the the doping offence in the absence of any analytical adverse finding. USADA, based on the information it received in the unprotected portion of Montgomery:s testimony, sent him the "Charging Letter".
When you looked at the below statement earlier, where you attributing his statements to have been made to White, or under Grand Jury testimony?
As will be seen, the Panel's determination of the case against Mr. Montgomery turns on certain statements made by the Respondent himself which make it unnecessary for the Panel to determine whether the mass of other evidence adduced by USADA and derived in large measure from the BALCO documents, is also conclusive of the doping charges brought against him.
Randy Treadway wrote:Marion who? Never heard of her.
She was pretty much forgotten before she sang on Thursday. I'd lay a few bucks of my horse money down on a remote (and I do mean remote) possibility that she might show up in a WNBA uniform, say like 2010, when all the smoke from this disaster has cleared.