parkerjohn wrote:
anacondarunner wrote:
Salazar did get caught breaking three specific rules, so by Ken's standards, the case against him should be open and shut!.
Kudos to Jonathan Gault for saying he has no sympathy for AS but overall I think he and Wejo could have pushed back a little more.
I’m not an expert on the case but from what I’ve read AS was “experimenting” with l-carnitine, high doses of calcium, testosterone up to certain limits, and thyroid medication. Am I missing anything? Do we have actual proof that can be used in argument against the likes of a Ken Goe?
Apart from the obvious inference to be drawn about Androgel massages, there is concrete proof that the testosterone experiment took place, which was definitively an antidoping rule violation, as was Steve Magness's l-carnitine infusion. Presumably, Ritz's, Rupp's, and other NOP athletes' infusions were also violations, but Dr. Brown altered those medical records at Salazar's request. See:
On October 3, 2013, Respondent sent an email to Dr. Brown asking him to “write up a
letter” about the volume of the L-carnitine infusions, as follows:
Hi Dr. Brown, before you leave can you have someone write up a
letter saying that the LCarnitine infusion was done with 50 ml or
less and any supporting documents or evidence and have it mailed
to Roy Thompson’s office? I’m just anticipating that USADA may
come back asking for it and I’d rather have it ready to send right
away.
I realize you may not have anything written down about that
volume but whatever you have such as the record of the special
syringes and your statement will have to be enough for them.
Thx!
And:
Dr. Brown admitted that he altered those medical records:
Q. You altered Dawn Grunnagle’s record and you put an
improper and inaccurate amount on it, just like the
Ritzenhein record, just like the Rupp record, correct?
A. The important thing, that it was - - it was less than 50 CCs.
Q. - - number on there, correct?
A. That was inaccurate, that’s correct.
And finally:
Respondent thus positioned the infusions as injections and forcefully instructed the NOP
Athletes not to disclose them. Respondent’s argument that no doping controls actually
occurred and thus there was no instance where the instructions were followed is of no
relevance to the analysis. The Panel must determine whether Respondent engaged in
what he considered to be intentional or fraudulent conduct to alter results or prevent
normal procedures from occurring.
A majority of the Panel finds that Respondent did deliberately engage in intentional
conduct to alter results or prevent normal procedures from occurring. He was clearly
operating under the impression that the NOP Athletes could be asked about infusions and
a majority finds he tried to prevent the normal procedure from occurring by instructing
the NOP Athletes that no declaration of use of LCarnitine was required and that they
should deny they had the L-carnitine infusion when asked about infusions when getting
drug tested in or out of competition. The full email is at Paragraph 137. At that time, he
knew the NOP Athletes had been given infusions but he deliberately stated they were
“classified as an injection” in his email to them. In addition, in his email to Ms. Rodemer
confirming how he would proceed, he also mischaracterized the infusions as injections
even though he referred to them as “infusions” in his communications with the NOP
Athletes. A majority of the Panel finds that Respondent’s conduct with this instruction
is intentional and fraudulent conduct that was designed to prevent normal procedures
from occurring. His intention is clear from the sequence of events. A majority of the
Panel finds this conduct to be Tampering as it fits squarely in the definition.
Again, nothing inadvertent about Salazar's violations.