In article <
[email protected]>,
MagillaGorilla <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>MagillaGorilla wrote:
> >>
> >>>True or False:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>If **** Pound died 5 years ago, Floyd Landis would still be stuck in the
> >>>EXACT SAME predicament he is in right now (scroll down for the correct
> >>>answer).
> >>
> >>dumbass,
> >>
> >>the landis case is a cut and dry doping case (unlike puerto). the only
> >>thing that makes makes it different is the importance of the tour.
> >>
> >>if it had been some 180 lb. belgie at the wafflehaus groteprijs who got
> >>popped it would've been a footnote to a footnote on cyclingnews. no
> >>wikipedia defense, no powerpoint slides, no dedicated blogs, no cbc
> >>specials.
> >
> >
> > Sure, that's a way of looking at it. But when I hear stuff about T-E
> > ratios, and read that Landis' T-count was well below normal levels, and
> > read that even Pound doesn't seem to quite understand the nature of
> > Landis' positive, well, I start to wonder if Landis is positive but
> > innocent*.
>
> What does Pound's understanding of a doping case have to do with its
> accuracy? Pound has no involvement whatsoever in the laboratory testing
> or its adjudication. His proficiency on the science of any test is
> irrelevant. This will be proven in that Pound will not be called as a
> witness by either USADA or Landis in the CAS hearing.
Certainly. But if **** Pound, a smart, deeply involved lawyer who is,
you know, essentially in charge of the process, can't properly keep in
his head the difference between high T and T-E ratio, then something's
wrong. He is, after all, the public (the very public!) face of this
prosecution. If he says things that make me think he doesn't really
understand the case at all, I begin to worry whether he's been paying
any attention.
> > The problem with Pound is he has both the strengths and failings of
> > Eugene McCarthy: a man fighting a legitimate problem but overplaying his
> > hand. It's one thing to know Alger Hiss really was a doper, it's quite
> > another to randomly accuse a third of all pro hockey players of being
> > Communist spies.
>
> What most of you dumbasses don't seem to understand is Pound is not
> suppose to be objective. He's the head of the prosecutor's office. It
> would be totally different if the arbitrators who were going to preside
> over the Landis case said this, but they're not.
Which is curious indeed. Because in Canada the tradition is that
prosecutors generally shut up and let cases be prosecuted before the
courts. They are usually loath to say anything outside of court other
than the blandest descriptions of the case.
I know the US tradition often has the prosecutor standing in front of
the courthouse, declaring the defendants incredibly guilty before the
trial, and so forth. I'm not sure that in any way improves the course of
justice.
Moreover, Pound's tendency to make stuff up is unseemly in a prosecutor.
One sees such behaviour as more characteristic of a witchfinder.
--
Ryan Cousineau
[email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
