Justin Clouder wrote:That's a fair retort. There are degrees however - the level of anger and scorn here exceeds that justified by her crime, IMHO. My point was that to judge by the response here, one might assume she had killed someone.
OK, but it's not unusual here to see "anger and scorn" over nothing more serious than some luckless competitor having a bad meet. (I write as one who has not participated in "piling on" poor MJ on this or related threads.)
George P. wrote:OK, but it's not unusual here to see "anger and scorn" over nothing more serious than some luckless competitor having a bad meet. (I write as one who has not participated in "piling on" poor MJ on this or related threads.)
Indeed - a sense of proportion has never been this forum's strong point. IMHO!
jazzcyclist wrote:I'd like to see sporting fraud made a federal crime, punishable by mandatory prison time.
The advantage of that would be that the law and courts would have to come up with much clearer definitions of what constitutes unfair aid and what does not than the current woolly position.
The rule about no-fault liability would also have to go since a conviction for a crime would require active knowledge and participation by the accused.
This wouldn't anyone involved in BALCO, of course, though it would give Jones a chance to argue in court that she had no knowledge of being doped - given the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt in court, it's possible she would get off whereas under T&F rules she's toast.
Now her competitors, those who lost money and WC & Oly spots, need to sue her (not that she has any money) and her main sponsor(s) as the result of her fraud and their complicity in it.
Justin Clouder wrote:This wouldn't anyone involved in BALCO, of course, though it would give Jones a chance to argue in court that she had no knowledge of being doped - given the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt in court, it's possible she would get off whereas under T&F rules she's toast.
Careful what you wish for!
Justin
I thought that ignorance was no defense for violating a law, or at least that's what I've heard. By the way, didn't Ludmila Engquist successfully use the ignorance defense to beat the T&F rules?
Mighty Favog wrote:Athletes who attempt to compete at the highest levels of women's sprinting without using PEDs do come out winners here.
You mean like the 'new' Sydney Olympic champion Ekaterini Thanou
I have a strange feeling she might not get to keep that gold for long. Someone had better give Tayna Lawrence a call. And while they're at it, they can call Merlene Ottey. Who was 5th in that race? Block? Sturrup? One of them might get the bronze before this is all over with.
On sports radio in NYC, co-hosts who interviewed Bud Selig indicated that the Mitchell report will likely be released after the World Series and before the end of the year. That could get Marion out of the headlines.
Halfmiler2 wrote:On sports radio in NYC, co-hosts who interviewed Bud Selig indicated that the Mitchell report will likely be released after the World Series and before the end of the year. That could get Marion out of the headlines.
She is barely in the headlines right now. Imagine if she had confessed in late-2003 or early-2004. This thread, now on Page 6, would have been on its 20th page right now. She picked a convenient time to sing, with all the other activities going on right now.
Halfmiler2 wrote:That could get Marion out of the headlines.
Marion will be out of the headlines here in the US by Monday at the latest (and that is only to give the Sunday edition of major newspapers a chance to give it a once over).
Last edited by bad hammy on Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Halfmiler2 wrote:That could get Marion out of the headlines.
Marion will be out of the headlines here in the US by Monday at the latest (and that is only to give the Sunday edition of major newspapers a chance to give it a once over).
Give this man a cigar, a nice one too, maybe a Punch.
Mighty Favog wrote:Athletes who attempt to compete at the highest levels of women's sprinting without using PEDs do come out winners here.
You mean like the 'new' Sydney Olympic champion Ekaterini Thanou
I have a strange feeling she might not get to keep that gold for long. Someone had better give Tayna Lawrence a call. And while they're at it, they can call Merlene Ottey. Who was 5th in that race? Block? Sturrup? One of them might get the bronze before this is all over with.
Interesting op-ed piece on the front page of T&FN:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/sport/jon ... 68411.html It brings up the question, 'who is the legitimate (non_PED) women's 100m record holder?'
Unfortunately, it is not an easy question to answer, and it speaks to how dirty the sprints have been/are.
I have to admit, it's hard to fully trust any great sprint times/sprinters these days.
While texting an American friend last night I added, "I'm glad they got Marion Jones at last". He is a huge sports fan. He replied, "What??? I thought they caught her years ago with cj". To the general public, and even regular sports fan here, I think the story will be effectively dead by Monday, in the context of what they already think about T&F.
Justin Clouder wrote:This wouldn't anyone involved in BALCO, of course, though it would give Jones a chance to argue in court that she had no knowledge of being doped - given the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt in court, it's possible she would get off whereas under T&F rules she's toast.
Careful what you wish for!
Justin
I thought that ignorance was no defense for violating a law, or at least that's what I've heard. By the way, didn't Ludmila Engquist successfully use the ignorance defense to beat the T&F rules?
Ignorance OF the law is no excuse, but should PED use become a crime, it would follow that an athlete could not be convicted of anything if they had no knowledge of being doped - which is what MJ claims. Should she be able to convince a jury that she was an innocent victim of Trevor Graham's actions, she might get off. Whereas she's got no chance under T&F's no-fault liability rule.
Engqvist did get off, I believe, because she was able to prove that her ex-husband had spiked her food (IIRC). The difference is that she had to prove this and was held guilty until she did, whereas in a criminal court the authorities would have to prove that MJ knew what she was taking (depending how the law was framed of course) and until they did, she'd be innocent.
I guess my point is that the effect of making PED use a criminal offence is double-edged. While some egregious cases would get jail time, the threshold of proof required for conviction may well be much higher than the current sporting rules, resulting in more people getting off.
Justin
Last edited by Justin Clouder on Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Halfmiler2 wrote:On sports radio in NYC, co-hosts who interviewed Bud Selig indicated that the Mitchell report will likely be released after the World Series and before the end of the year. That could get Marion out of the headlines.
She is barely in the headlines right now. Imagine if she had confessed in late-2003 or early-2004. This thread, now on Page 6, would have been on its 20th page right now. She picked a convenient time to sing, with all the other activities going on right now.
Its going to be a REAL shock to the system when baseball players start going to prison.
It seems like football are the only ones not shooting themselves in the foot, and they might be the worst.
marknhj wrote:To the general public, and even regular sports fan here, I think the story will be effectively dead by Monday, in the context of what they already think about T&F.
I wish. Joe Public may have thought that, but the bulldog press is gonna bite on this and chew it for a LONG time, which keeps it the public eye and turns them AGAINST us, rather than the apathy we currently 'enjoy'.
Illuminati script - new limits: Timothy McVeigh 2001 + Kostas Kenteris 2004 + Jan Ullrich 2006 = Marion Jones 2007
Matt Marriott explained how the illuminati had no problems upscaling their terror agenda, by gradually introducing these BIG LIE techniques as proof:
- the "defense lawyer" (1);
- manufactured evidence (2);
- hearsay (3).
Now by having the "Marion Jones concedes doping" headlines today all over illuminatiland, they upscale the terror agenda yet one more time. To the ultimate limits: their media falsely reports that a public personality, who is NOT in prison, admits to be guilty.
Notes
(1) The "Defense Lawyer" technique was first used with the innocent who was falsely accused of the Oklahona city bombings. It consists of having the "defense" lawyer falsely stating that his "client" admits to be guilty. This technique was planned to be used with Milisevic in the Hague "Court". But it did not work as planned, since Milosevic had the possibility to communicate to the public that he did not accept the "defense" lawyer the "court" assigned to him.
(2) "Manufactured evidence" is the technique used again and again to falsely accuse the best athletes of mesurable natural sports (athletics, cycling) in the world that they dope, with faked "tests" in the illuminati laboratories. In 2004, 5he physical attack against Kostas Kenteris, supervised by IOC President Rogge, was a first upscaling of this technique. It was planned to suggest that the Greek sprinter was trying to create an alibi to escape doping tests. Besides that it was a way to physically get him out of the scene, which was precisely the Olympics 2004 at his own country, Greece, so that people did not wonder why he was not being given the word to tell his story in the media.
(3) "Hearsay" as proof was first used in the hours before the beginning of the Tour de France 2006. Not because it was required to eliminate the two best cyclists at the start, Jan Ullrich and Ivan Basso, since the illuminati control the laboratories that do the Tour tests. The reason why the Hearsay technique was used was to upscale the terror agenda.
In the Tour de France 2007, this technique was upscaled again, using the danish cyclist Rasmussen, who was eliminated as he leading and it was clear he would win, based on a statement of an italian journalist who played the role of having "seen" him in Italy at a time where Rasmussen declared that he was in Mexico.
MattMarriott wrote:Illuminati script - new limits: Timothy McVeigh 2001 + Kostas Kenteris 2004 + Jan Ullrich 2006 = Marion Jones 2007
Matt Marriott explained how the illuminati had no problems upscaling their terror agenda, by gradually introducing these BIG LIE techniques as proof: - the "defense lawyer" (1); - manufactured evidence (2); - hearsay (3). Now by having the "Marion Jones concedes doping" headlines today all over illuminatiland, they upscale the terror agenda yet one more time. To the ultimate limits: their media falsely reports that a public personality, who is NOT in prison, admits to be guilty.
Notes
(1) The "Defense Lawyer" technique was first used with the innocent who was falsely accused of the Oklahona city bombings. It consists of having the "defense" lawyer falsely stating that his "client" admits to be guilty. This technique was planned to be used with Milisevic in the Hague "Court". But it did not work as planned, since Milosevic had the possibility to communicate to the public that he did not accept the "defense" lawyer the "court" assigned to him.
(2) "Manufactured evidence" is the technique used again and again to falsely accuse the best athletes of mesurable natural sports (athletics, cycling) in the world that they dope, with faked "tests" in the illuminati laboratories. In 2004, 5he physical attack against Kostas Kenteris, supervised by IOC President Rogge, was a first upscaling of this technique. It was planned to suggest that the Greek sprinter was trying to create an alibi to escape doping tests. Besides that it was a way to physically get him out of the scene, which was precisely the Olympics 2004 at his own country, Greece, so that people did not wonder why he was not being given the word to tell his story in the media.
(3) "Hearsay" as proof was first used in the hours before the beginning of the Tour de France 2006. Not because it was required to eliminate the two best cyclists at the start, Jan Ullrich and Ivan Basso, since the illuminati control the laboratories that do the Tour tests. The reason why the Hearsay technique was used was to upscale the terror agenda. In the Tour de France 2007, this technique was upscaled again, using the danish cyclist Rasmussen, who was eliminated as he leading and it was clear he would win, based on a statement of an italian journalist who played the role of having "seen" him in Italy at a time where Rasmussen declared that he was in Mexico.
You might wanrt to go one better:
McVeigh 2001+Kenteris 2004+Ullrich 2006+Jones 2007=Barry Bonds 2008! What I've been hearing, from the news, is that Marion's confession may be a pretext for the Bonds case. That one is likely to overshadow them all.
There may be one that may overshadow even Barry's case, and it involves former Diamondbacks pitcher Jason Grimsley, who turned over a long list of names to the feds. If there are some Hall-of-Fame-worthy names on that list, we'll never hear the end of it.
Last edited by CookyMonzta on Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
If a high school prodigy like Marion Jones, who seemingly had no qualms about taking PED's, couldn't come within 0.2s and 0.4s of 10.49 and 21.34 at sea-level respectively, then what chance does a clean athlete have of breaking these records regardless of talent?
Last edited by jazzcyclist on Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Justin Clouder wrote: Engqvist did get off, I believe, because she was able to prove that her ex-husband had spiked her food (IIRC).
Justin
Don't know the full story but i think her ex husband came forward and said that he had spiked her because she was leaving him. This was obviously bollocks but it allowed her to get of the drug rap.
Daisy wrote:Don't the illuminati have bigger fish to fry?
Funny you should use the phrase "bigger fish". If this had happened in 2003 or 2004, Marion would surely have been THE biggest fish. Notice that even she's had to share the spotlight with Britney, Barry, Hillary, Barack, Rudy, Fred, Myanmar, the baseball playoffs and the UEFA Championships? She's barely a footnote now.
Last edited by CookyMonzta on Fri Oct 05, 2007 11:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
tafnut wrote:. . . but the bulldog press is gonna bite on this and chew it for a LONG time, which keeps it the public eye and turns them AGAINST us, rather than the apathy we currently 'enjoy'.
Not a chance. There is no new story here. The BALCO story, including all of the MJ and Barry Bonds stuff, was in 2003/2004 and is DONE. All that is going on now is that the feds are sticking a fork in it by crossing the tees and dotting the eyes on some perjury issues.
She'll be briefly back in the news (not major headlines) when the IAAF takes her medals and hands one to another drug cheat, and again when the perjury sentence is announced, she goes to jail and gets out of jail.
Last edited by bad hammy on Fri Oct 05, 2007 11:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
Is mental illness some sort of protection against having unintelligible rants, full of unfounded and bizarre accusations, deleted by the TAFNEWS sheriff du jour, or against simply being booted from the Board? I mean, it's kind of entertaining, to a point, but aren't we past that point?
Justin Clouder wrote:This wouldn't anyone involved in BALCO, of course, though it would give Jones a chance to argue in court that she had no knowledge of being doped - given the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt in court, it's possible she would get off whereas under T&F rules she's toast.
Careful what you wish for!
Justin
I thought that ignorance was no defense for violating a law, or at least that's what I've heard. By the way, didn't Ludmila Engquist successfully use the ignorance defense to beat the T&F rules?
Ignorance OF the law is no excuse, but should PED use become a crime, it would follow that an athlete could not be convicted of anything if they had no knowledge of being doped - which is what MJ claims. Should she be able to convince a jury that she was an innocent victim of Trevor Graham's actions, she might get off. Whereas she's got no chance under T&F's no-fault liability rule.
Engqvist did get off, I believe, because she was able to prove that her ex-husband had spiked her food (IIRC). The difference is that she had to prove this and was held guilty until she did, whereas in a criminal court the authorities would have to prove that MJ knew what she was taking (depending how the law was framed of course) and until they did, she'd be innocent.
I guess my point is that the effect of making PED use a criminal offence is double-edged. While some egregious cases would get jail time, the threshold of proof required for conviction may well be much higher than the current sporting rules, resulting in more people getting off.
Justin
I believe the current federal laws allow the government to sieze your personal property if they find drugs in it, regardless of whether you knew it was there or not. They put the burden of proof on you. I've read and heard about dozens of cases where people had their homes or cars seized because a child or relative were storing drugs in them without the knowledge of the owner. Also, we already have federal laws that make it illegal for a player to point-shave in the ball sports. There may even be laws banning the administering of PED's to race horses, but somebody else more knowledgeable about that sport will have to weigh in on this one.
DrJay wrote:Is mental illness some sort of protection against having unintelligible rants, full of unfounded and bizarre accusations, deleted by the TAFNEWS sheriff du jour, or against simply being booted from the Board? I mean, it's kind of entertaining, to a point, but aren't we past that point?
DrJay wrote:Is mental illness some sort of protection against having unintelligible rants, full of unfounded and bizarre accusations, deleted by the TAFNEWS sheriff du jour, or against simply being booted from the Board? I mean, it's kind of entertaining, to a point, but aren't we past that point?
Are you referring to Matt or Tafnut?
Oh, OK now I get it. You're right - tafnut should have been permanently banned about 24,000 posts ago . . .
jazzcyclist wrote:I thought that ignorance was no defense for violating a law, or at least that's what I've heard. By the way, didn't Ludmila Engquist successfully use the ignorance defense to beat the T&F rules?
Under a former name, yes (sabotage). Under Swedish name, no. She wanted to commit suicide after being discovered to be a cheat. Crime doesn:t pay in this country. She split and moved far, far away.
jazzcyclist wrote:If a high school prodigy like Marion Jones, who seemingly had no qualms about taking PED's, couldn't come within 0.2s and 0.4s of 10.49 and 21.34 at see-level respectively, then what chance does a clean athlete have of breaking these records regardless of talent?
A midget, who is under see-level, just might. Same with a very tall person who is over the see-level. Perhaps Vlasic should change events.
