Landis found guilty of doping

Kenny said:

http://tinyurl.com/2syaj2

Great. Only six appeals and three years to go...

Lemme see if I got this straight...

The original screening test was found to be "improper" and its result was
thrown out...but the 2nd "confirmation" test result was upheld despite the
fact that it would never have been done in the first place if the first
*had* been done properly and had come up negative?

....this is "justice"???

Brian said:

Lemme see if I got this straight...

The original screening test was found to be "improper" and its result
was thrown out...but the 2nd "confirmation" test result was upheld
despite the fact that it would never have been done in the first
place if the first *had* been done properly and had come up negative?

...this is "justice"???

/French/ justice.

Bill Sornson said:

Brian said:

Lemme see if I got this straight...

The original screening test was found to be "improper" and its result
was thrown out...but the 2nd "confirmation" test result was upheld
despite the fact that it would never have been done in the first place
if the first *had* been done properly and had come up negative?

...this is "justice"???

/French/ justice.

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency is French?

nmp said:

Bill Sornson said:

Brian said:

Lemme see if I got this straight...

The original screening test was found to be "improper" and its
result was thrown out...but the 2nd "confirmation" test result was
upheld despite the fact that it would never have been done in the
first place if the first *had* been done properly and had come up
negative?

...this is "justice"???

/French/ justice.

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency is French?

No, the people who /sabotaged/ the tests were.

Bill "hell, even the WORD is French!" S.

Brian said:

The original screening test was found to be "improper" and its result was
thrown out...but the 2nd "confirmation" test result was upheld despite the
fact that it would never have been done in the first place if the first
*had* been done properly and had come up negative?

The reason for a test being performed has no bearing on the credibility of
its result.

"Michael Warner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Brian said:

The original screening test was found to be "improper" and its result was
thrown out...but the 2nd "confirmation" test result was upheld despite
the
fact that it would never have been done in the first place if the first
*had* been done properly and had come up negative?

The reason for a test being performed has no bearing on the credibility of
its result.

I disagree, especially as the *same* laboratory that produced the "improper"
initial result also did the follow up...

B.

Michael Warner said:

Brian said:

The original screening test was found to be "improper" and its result was
thrown out...but the 2nd "confirmation" test result was upheld despite the
fact that it would never have been done in the first place if the first
*had* been done properly and had come up negative?

The reason for a test being performed has no bearing on the credibility of
its result.

I think that if in the USA the police serve a search warrant on your
house by accident (for example, they meant to go to the house next
door), whatever they find there is not admissible evidence, not even
for getting another warrant.

It's a very similar situation with the Landis tests.

I, for one, am very saddened, however, about the final test results.

Brian Huntley said:

Michael Warner said:

Brian said:

The original screening test was found to be "improper" and its
result was thrown out...but the 2nd "confirmation" test result was
upheld despite the fact that it would never have been done in the
first place if the first *had* been done properly and had come up
negative?

The reason for a test being performed has no bearing on the
credibility of its result.

I think that if in the USA the police serve a search warrant on your
house by accident (for example, they meant to go to the house next
door), whatever they find there is not admissible evidence, not even
for getting another warrant.

It's a very similar situation with the Landis tests.

The Landis case doesn't involve a trial. It involves rules surrounding being
involved in sporting competition at the professional level. You can't apply
rules of American criminal procedure to this situation, which is neither
fully American nor criminal.

Quoted message said:

I, for one, am very saddened, however, about the final test results.

Me, too.

Mike Kruger said:

It's a very similar situation with the Landis tests.

The Landis case doesn't involve a trial. It involves rules surrounding being
involved in sporting competition at the professional level. You can't apply
rules of American criminal procedure to this situation, which is neither
fully American nor criminal.

Good thing too otherwise he'd be open to prosecution for perjury.
--
zk

Zoot Katz said:

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:55:40 GMT, "Mike Kruger"

Quoted message said:

It's a very similar situation with the Landis tests.

Quoted message said:

The Landis case doesn't involve a trial. It involves rules surrounding being
involved in sporting competition at the professional level. You can't apply
rules of American criminal procedure to this situation, which is neither
fully American nor criminal.

Good thing too otherwise he'd be open to prosecution for perjury.
--
zk

Who, Landis or the lab tech?

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Bob Hunt (for President) said:

Zoot Katz said:

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:55:40 GMT, "Mike Kruger"

Quoted message said:

It's a very similar situation with the Landis tests.

Quoted message said:

The Landis case doesn't involve a trial. It involves rules
surrounding being involved in sporting competition at the
professional level. You can't apply rules of American criminal
procedure to this situation, which is neither fully American nor
criminal.

Good thing too otherwise he'd be open to prosecution for perjury.
--
zk

Who, Landis or the lab tech?

LOL

Bob said:

Zoot Katz said:

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:55:40 GMT, "Mike Kruger"

Quoted message said:

It's a very similar situation with the Landis tests.

Quoted message said:

The Landis case doesn't involve a trial. It involves rules surrounding being
involved in sporting competition at the professional level. You can't apply
rules of American criminal procedure to this situation, which is neither
fully American nor criminal.

Good thing too otherwise he'd be open to prosecution for perjury.
--
zk

Who, Landis or the lab tech?

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Pay attention, Bob.
--
zk