Greg Lemond Pt. II My response to comments

1. At least you recognize that you don’t understand criminal courts and burdens, but why do you still argue with the lawyer about them?
2. It is foolish to say that crime scene testing isn’t structured. I have not found anything more meticulous and painstaking that crime scene investigation, evidence collection and testing. This is exactly why a comparison of burdens is relevant. Any flaws in the procedure and analysis in regards to evidence renders that evidence inadmissible or untrustworthy. Thus, it cannot be used to reach the truth, not just convictions.
3. The Innocence Project’s numbers are greatly overstated. The fact is there are very few actual innocence cases. One was is in my jurisdiction, and it was our office that did the exoneration, not the Innocence Project. Though they came in on the back end with the exonerated’s family and took all the credit, they had nothing to do with it. And this is usually the case. They use fabricated documents and unethical tactics to get press with the goal of ending the death penalty. They do not actually do anything trustworthy in seeking exonerations. It is the prosecutors doing their job even after a case is seemingly over.
4. Although the collection and transportation stage is the easiest place to corrupt testing, it is not the only place. Any expert in testing would know exactly how to fabricate the necessary paperwork, and by that I mean testing logs, etc., to fabricate a false test. Thus, your collectors, testers and administrators must be extremely trustworthy. And one can’t say that just because they are expert scientists that they are trustworthy. BALCO’s scientists certainly weren’t.
5. What does me prosecuting Marion Jones have to do with anything? But since you bring her up, she was charged with perjury, not doping. No one, by results or testing in anyway could show that she doped. There was nothing unusual about her progression and success as an athlete. She got caught through bank records and a paper trail and was convicted of lying under oath with regards to her association with BALCO. Secondly, take Floyd Landis. There was nothing unusual about his progression as an athlete either. And on that famous stage 17, his power numbers were at or below his training numbers. After his initial escape, which was not unusual, he made up his time on the descents. He was the fastest descender in peloton, and could surely do it alone better than a group. Also, there were very few flat sections for the peloton to really be able to chase, and we all know that they can make up much more ground on flats than on mountains. Also, the 70+ water bottles he used to keep himself cool played a huge factor on his fatigue. He had everything he needed right there with him to succeed that day. Thus, whether he doped or not, his performance numbers do not tell the tale, his urine does.
You may also look at Christian Vande Velde and David Millar, two athletes who are certainly clean. On the one hand, Christian’s performance has dramatically improved in the last couple of years, however, he has always had exceptional blood numbers. Thus, you cannot say he was doping, based on performance. The blood tells the story. And with Millar, his performance since his return from suspension has not fallen off. There is no real discernable difference in his performance when he was doping and since he has returned clean.
6. The Floyd Landis case also further proves my point on burdens of proof, procedural requirements and reliability of testing. First, USADA ruled that Floyd was guilty 2-1. In a criminal case, the verdict must be given unanimously from a jury of 12 peers. Second, Floyd was largely convicted by the isotope test, which was not approved for use in testing at that time. WADA and USADA violated their own standards in hearing that evidence. That would not happen in a criminal case. The isotope test would have been thrown out. (That is not a comment on its accuracy, however. It is extremely accurate.) Also, this is not intended to put me on one side or the other in regards to Floyd’s case. From what I know, I do not think he should have been convicted, especially when the USADA’s top lab would have called the same results a negative. However, I will not say that I believe he is innocent either. I do believe that the urine that was tested, that was claimed to be Floyd’s, did have synthetic testosterone in it. Given the discrepancies in the record keeping, only Floyd and those doing the collectin/testing know whether that was actually his urine and thus I have no opinion on whether it was or was not.
7. As far as the reliability of the other tests, they are the same as in criminal cases. They, and we, use spectrometry to identify substances. Whether it is cocaine, alcohol in a breathalyzer or PEDs in blood or urine, spectrometry is accurate. Every substance has a unique molecule that reflects light in a unique way, and thus can be identified in that fashion. Where it breaks down is in figuring concentration. The subject’s blood volume, lung volume, and blood composition must be taken into account properly. This is why the blood passport program must be in place.
8. With regard to circumstantial evidence, it is highly reliable. You and Greg, however, do not understand its definition. Circumstantial evidence would include blood testing, fingerprints, etc. It is reliable when collected and analyzed under strict standards, according to proper methods, by trustworthy individuals. Direct evidence is simply some saying it happened.
9. Greg does imply throughout his speech and in many other interviews that he raced against and beat clean people. This is largely because of his claim that Lance must be dirty because Lance beat dirty people. If Greg admits that he beat dirty people, he must also succumb to his own argument that he was also dirty.
10. Greg did admit that Pantani did something wrong in his death and in his lifestyle in this speech. He does not admit that Pantani was a doper. He also implies here that Pantani must have been beaten by dopers when he speaks of Pantani being beaten. In other interviews, he has claimed that Pantani was clean and that anybody who can beat Pantani or Pantani’s numbers must be doping.
11. Yes, I am mistaken about Greg’s date for meeting Ferrari. However, the Greg’s point does not meet scrutiny. Power meters were still rarely used until after 2000. Ferrari, like most physiologists, understands that blood monitoring is the best way to track results and improvements. I majored in exercise physiology, and all we did was blood test athletes. That is not to say that Ferrari wasn’t involved in doping, just to say he understood the importance of understanding the information in blood. WADA and UCI also understand this, hence the blood passport program.
12. Yes, plea bargaining is a good idea, if the information given by the accused is accurate. It must be investigated and substantiated. This is how we do it in the criminal world. We use little fish to get to big fish, but we use them for leads, then go build the case ourselves with real evidence. If this is done, then plea bargaining will work. Blind accusations will not fly.
13. If you don’t know what Greg said in his other interviews, then why bring it up? And if you admit you don’t know something, why do you feel the need to argue about it? You have already admitted you don’t know anything about it.
14. Yes, it is ok to tag your blog with all topics involving cycling. This is a relatively new blog and I would like to attract readers. To do that, you must get them here. To get them here, you must make your blog show up on their radar. It is done with all websites, which is why search engines come up with all kinds of seemingly random results.

Advertisements

~ by Velosophy Esq. on June 19, 2009.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: