Mats Nilsson wrote:but we cannot treat her or other cheating athletes [Ben Johnson comes to mind] as common criminals. Don't you guys think that she deserves better?
Hardly an accurate comparison. Jail time was never in the picture for BJ.
There is little connection with the jail time and her taking the PED's or being a superstar athlete. On the other hand there is a connection with her perjury and fraud. It is the latter two that are going to get her jail time.
You are missing the point Daisy. The point is that we [the general population + media] treat these athletes as low life criminals in all ways except for jail time.
OK, I did miss that this was your point. This whole thread seems to be at cross purposes. There are two issues. First, does Marion Jones deserve to go to jail. I don't think there is any doubt about this (fraud and perjury). Second, and the more interesting debate, should athletes who are caught using PED's be treated like criminals. I do not believe they should be. However, I do think they should be banned from the sport for breaking the rules. Are the rules fair? That is a third issue.
Exactly, but I still don't agree with the first point. We can save that discussion for another forum on the American judicial system/politics.
Mats Nilsson wrote:Tuscaloosa....not Birmingham. Big difference.
Aha, I see - no wonder you're bitter!
Oh yeah, my "bitterness and despair" keeps me up day and night Tafnut. Tell me the logic in this: on one hand you defended MJ a couple of years ago although it was obvious that she had been juicing and now you are the first one in line to crucify her. How noble. Where is your humanity?
I am a constant critique of doping-users and I think they should be banned life-time from the sport. When I was an active athlete, the reason for this was purely egotistical. Nowadays, I just feel sympathy for all the athletes that are trying to push the limits withut using PEDS. However, I have also realized that sport is never really on a level playing field to start with [compare the training conditions of an African javelin thrower to a Finnish for example], so from a philosphical perspective I don't think that PED users are morally inferior to Joe Schmoe who is taking Viagra to improve his sexual ability. All walks of life are extremely competitive and while we allow the general population to improve their performance we hold the athletes to a higher standard. I find it hypocritical to some extent. Thus, I would and will never allow myself to compare the PED users to low-life criminals regardless if they lie about it in federal court or not [it is not like the feds always tell the truth anyway ].
why was the plea entered in a U.S. District Court in New York State (White Plains, NY)? What is the significance of using New York State? If she does happen to actually serve jail time, anybody know what prison or state that might be in?
tafnut wrote:What does being an athlete have to do with anything? Athletes should NOT be treated differently than anyone else. If our legal system says her wrongdoing is criminal, she's a criminal. If it says she should go to jail, she should go to jail. Period.
I don't think you are capable of viewing this topic objectively, certainly not so soon after the "crime".
Mats Nilsson wrote:Tell me the logic in this: on one hand you defended MJ a couple of years ago although it was obvious that she had been juicing and now you are the first one in line to crucify her. How noble. Where is your humanity?
I defended her when there was no PROOF that she was guilty. During ALL the time I defended her, I always said, if and when we have proof or her confession, THEN I will be convinced. Now I am convinced. Now that it's clear that she's guilty, she should pay the full consequence of her actions. My humanity is wholly intact.
Mennisco wrote:I don't think you are capable of viewing this topic objectively, certainly not so soon after the "crime".
I'm one of the FEW who clearly saw BOTH sides of this issue. I presumed her innocent until proven guilty. Why should she be treated differently from a non-athlete? If you do illegal drugs, you get punished. Seems like a simple concept to me.
jazzcyclist wrote:The Feds don't care about PED's, they only care about lying.
I don't think that's true. If they didn't care about PED's, they could have just thrown the book at Marion on the bank check thing. But it seems to me that it was important for them to get her to help in the Graham case and perhaps also to clarify the status of her own PED use. Lying was perhpas the least of it, but they used that issue to get the deal done.
jazzcyclist wrote:The Feds don't care about PED's, they only care about lying.
I don't think that's true. If they didn't care about PED's, they could have just thrown the book at Marion on the bank check thing. But it seems to me that it was important for them to get her to help in the Graham case and perhaps also to clarify the status of her own PED use. Lying was perhpas the least of it, but they used that issue to get the deal done.
Then why aren't they going after Jason Giambi and Jose Canseco? I think the G-men are only concerned with PED distributors, not users. Since USATF and the IAAF have no collaborative relationship with the FBI, Marion Jones would have come out of this unscathed if she had only told the truth.
Mennisco wrote:I don't think you are capable of viewing this topic objectively, certainly not so soon after the "crime".
I'm one of the FEW who clearly saw BOTH sides of this issue. I presumed her innocent until proven guilty. Why should she be treated differently from a non-athlete? If you do illegal drugs, you get punished. Seems like a simple concept to me.
Do you mean that she has not embarrassed you? From your posts on some other threads, that seems to be clear. Not that anyone could blame you - as one of her most vocal [perhaps THE most vocal] supporters, that would be understandable. Someone who didn't really care one way or another about her would not be as likely to take the whole thing at least somewhat personally.
Mennisco wrote:Do you mean that she has not embarrassed you? From your posts on some other threads, that seems to be clear. Not that anyone could blame you - as one of her most vocal [perhaps THE most vocal] supporters, that would be understandable. Someone who didn't really care one way or another about her would not be as likely to take the whole thing at least somewhat personally.
I defended her when I thought she deserved defending. Now that her guilt has been established, I ask that she receive the full force of the law, whatever that might be. If her lawyers can plea bargain it down to 6 months, good for them. I fail to see how my 'objectivity' has been compromised. Am I disappointed in her? You betcha. Same as I was with Gatlin. I thought both had the talent to forgo the PEDs route. My bad. Will I continue to defend those who are under suspicion, but for whom there is no proof. Probably. I'm not going to give up entirely on the idea of clean T&F elites. Am I chagrined about all this? Yup. Will the sun rise tomorrow? Yup.
Daisy wrote:On the other hand there is a connection with her perjury and fraud. It is the latter two that are going to get her jail time.
Maybe I missed something here. What she admitted to was lying to Federal investigators, which is neither fraud nor perjury (which as I understand it means lying under oath in a court of law), but rather 'Obstruction of Justice'.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully-- (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
This was the perjury charge, not to be confused with the Montgomery obstruction charge.
The Northern District of California Criminal Investigation subsequently expanded to include, among other things, investigation into whether various witnesses made false statements during interviews with federal agents.
The act of making false statements, as outlined above, constituted perjury in the eyes of the folks holding violaters to the letter of the law.
].