Big development: Woman who falsely testified in Jarrion Lawson case is one who popped Houlihan. Houlihan ordered a carne asada b

The guilty protest innocence as fervently as those actually so. Which flips "innocent until proven guilty." In today's cancel-culture, mob mentality rules, perversely pleasured watching one fall from grace after another. Houlihan was found guilty. AIU and CAS weighed evidence and arguments and found Houlihan guilty of punishable doping. But "found guilty" isn't necessarily being guilty. Courts hand down wrongful convictions again and again. When it happens, we may never find out. When we do find out, it's rarely because anyone owned up. The same systems making incorrect decisions hold themselves infallible and will frustrate challenges. Appeals require exhaustive and expensive process and rarely overcome stacked and long odds. If we can execute innocent people, we must regularly wrongfully convict innocent athletes of doping offences. I allow for possibility of an incorrect or no-fault test result. Not probable - but possible. Houlihan has an appeal left. But even she wins, she loses. Vindicated or not, her peak performance window shrinks and evaporates, competitions will come and go, her results always suspect -- she's damaged goods here on out.

Ace_of_Base wrote:

LR wrote this article before you even heard the prosecutions side and evidence...had I only heard the defendants attorney there would be a murderer walking free.

you tell it so well wrote:

westie boy wrote:

Ding ding ding we have a winner. Actually a Doper.

Interesting to see the actual numbers/difference.

A huge and notable difference.

HUGE difference; I listened to the lawyer and he was going on about how labs are detecting tiny trace amounts and dont know what to do with it. It's all smoke and mirrors - she was 2.5 times over the allowable amount, that is not a trace amount.

rocket ship wrote:

gameantenna wrote:

Exactly. I can't believe people are falling for this psychopathic sh*t. Had it been anyone outside the USA they wouldn't even give her a second thought. But since it's a white American we get multiple 10 page articles about how the doping system is flawed? How convenient that the people who are quick to call out dopers quick are now questioning the very system that they've been praising after one of their own gets ousted as a doper. I've seen it all on Letsrun but this bullsh*t needs to end.

GO TO HELL. You are the racist one for bringing race into it at all.

Ah typical. Not wanting to side with a doper so now the problem is me for doing so. It's gonna be a Lance Armstrong part two with the gaslighting. I am gonna get my popcorn ready for the circus show that all the psychopaths are gonna put on because one of their own got convicted as a legitimate doper.

wejo wrote:

So she has a food log and says she ate carne asada?

The fact she is admitting she didn’t order pork makes me want to believe her more.

She easily could have said ‘my iPhone proves I was at the food truck’ . I ordered pork burrito.

How could we doubt that?

I’m curious how everyone remembers the burrito was really greasy? Not sure if remember what I ate a few months ago. But overall if it was at a unique enough place like a training trip yes. Weird thing is I just ate pork tacos and was debating between them and carne asada. They really were greasy.

Apparently she still has the receipt so maybe she had to admit it was carne asada if she wanted to use the receipt as evidence of eating at the food truck, cause it would say she ordered carne asada.

wejo wrote:

So she has a food log and says she ate carne asada?

The fact she is admitting she didn’t order pork makes me want to believe her more.

She easily could have said ‘my iPhone proves I was at the food truck’ . I ordered pork burrito.

How could we doubt that?

I’m curious how everyone remembers the burrito was really greasy? Not sure if remember what I ate a few months ago. But overall if it was at a unique enough place like a training trip yes. Weird thing is I just ate pork tacos and was debating between them and carne asada. They really were greasy.

Gault did a great job with the article

@wejo I had a related but different reaction. It doesn't seem that Shelby was able to produce much evidence. Even trivial/anecdotal details about where she ate and what they serve could be spun to help her case...if it helps. I assume she is giving honest details about her order because the only evidence she can produce also verifies the "carne asada" detail.

Idk how Gault can keep up with these threads but would like to know more about why he believes option #2 and his thoughts on the test levels. The nandrolone meat study that keeps getting cited suggests a large amount of boar offal is required to test at the levels Shelby did. Sure, it's plausible she was served the wrong burrito. It seems improbable, maybe impossible, she was served a burrito with 100% boar offal meat.

So she keeps a food log to be sure she knows what’s in her system for testing purposes, and eats mystery burritos from Mexican food trucks, knowing she is being strictly tested in the lead up to the damn Olympic Games. Yeah right!!!!!

I’m a recreational runner and even I know that low quality meat is filled with hormones and antibiotics. I wouldn’t eat that crap because I don’t want that in my body. I’m not getting tested, ever, and I would not eat that crap.

She’s an Olympic favorite training in the richest, most advanced running program in the world and she and her coach and team of doctors and dietary advisors are too stupid to do their job properly!!

If you are a professional athlete or coach and can’t be where you said you’d be for testing, took some tainted medication or supplements, or ate meat full of hormones and antibiotics, you are too stupid to be an Olympic champion.

If you are too stupid to do your job properly as an athlete, coach or dietician, you should not have a damn job. Just like the real world.

You are either a dirty cheat or you are too stupid to be a professional athlete. Just like Coleman. Third test he misses because he’s Christmas shopping. What an idiot. It’s natural selection. If you are so stupid you can’t manage the drug testing system you’re responsible for, you should not even bother training.

If you either don’t have the brains, dedication or organizational skills to manage the testing system, don’t bother training or get a smarter coach. Hire an assistant.

No, she had an adverse finding. That was adjudicated -- which is the due process here.

So you can play semantics all you like with 'found' vs 'is' guilty, but the evidence was collected, results examined and a judgement made, action taken, then the process exhausted. That's how you establish guilt/innocence in the system they all agree to.

You throwing a bunch of silly derision about society at the top doesn't make this less just of a decision. Everyone agrees to the rules and when any and everyone that gets popped responds it's always the same script and evolution. "Absolutely not -- i dont dope. Never heard of doping (strong denial)" "Maybe it was this thing that i didn't know about (mistakes were made)" "Yeah obviously, everyone doped, it's systemic (ratting out others)"

Nice find. As I said, Gault will regret his biased opinion piece.

All meat is contaminated.

Use your brains. 10x an extremely low value is still a very very low value.

They could even have spiked the drink, instead of the burrito. That’s how they took down Ben Johnson.

o0hn2 wrote:

*It is absolutely concerning that the same woman who provided fake testimony for Lawson is the one who popped Houlihan. There is no denying this at all.*

I like Gault's work, and I think he's being fair. I just don't think the "because I know her" argument is going to hold up anymore regarding Shelby. The truth is that none of us know her.

I'm one of those people who is inclined to believe she is innocent, despite this. But I really really wanna know what the CAS case and the AIU case will come out and say against her.

and for the billionth time. WHERE IS CENTRO? He was so quick to defend Salazar but not his girlfriend? Why do I get the feeling that Shelby is lacking some support due to her affiliations with him?

I think they broke up a while ago, maybe last summer. This LRC thread talks about it a little, there used to be a lot of photos of them together on their Instagrams, but they were all deleted at some point around then.

It's funny to see people talk up the gourmet nature of food trucks in OR in order to then dismiss food trucks as slop on wheels that any high-performance athlete is simply shoving into their mouth.

I doubt a pro distance runner at that level is simply taking a flyer on the mystery meat burrito. Actually, that's probably the most absurd thing we are being asked to believe in this whole narrative

So the one time that she decides to eat at a food truck is also the very time that one of her enemies is lurking inside spiking her food and is also one of the few days a year that she gets tested.

Similar situation 3 years ago with the Olympic silver medalist.

https://www.npr.org/2019/05/10/722183792/mexicos-star-race-walker-lupita-gonz-lez-hit-with-4-year-ban-for-doping

ThirdJo wrote:

Idk how Gault can keep up with these threads but would like to know more about why he believes option #2 and his thoughts on the test levels. The nandrolone meat study that keeps getting cited suggests a large amount of boar offal is required to test at the levels Shelby did. Sure, it's plausible she was served the wrong burrito. It seems improbable, maybe impossible, she was served a burrito with 100% boar offal meat.

He believes option 2 because LetsRun relies on positive performances by the biggest names in the sport to generate clicks. Mix that with the inherent racism in this case vs. the many African situations, and he'd probably get fired if it were any other way.

I don't mean that to say he's writing what he's told; I mean nobody who would ever believe #1 could have gotten a job at LetsRun in the first place.

dont underestimate Laura Muir's cunning!

*stipe wrote:

you tell it so well wrote:

+1. A dreadful piece of work from JG. In truth it hurts Houlihan more than it helps her, it’s riddled with contradictions and half truths.

https://kevinbeck.substack.com/p/a-quick-take-on-quick-takes-the-medias

Kevin Beck’s blog is spot on.

Pretty good take, although he goes a little too hard against the woke. Whether you believe she's guilty or innocent (I'm not completely sure either way), there's no doubt the story would have been treated very differently if the athlete in question wasn't from the media darling BTC/Jerry Schumacher camp.

blanket fort wrote:

you tell it so well wrote:

Interesting to see the actual numbers/difference.

A huge and notable difference.

HUGE difference; I listened to the lawyer and he was going on about how labs are detecting tiny trace amounts and dont know what to do with it. It's all smoke and mirrors - she was 2.5 times over the allowable amount, that is not a trace amount.

Where are you getting 2.5x the limit?

The men’s upper limit is 2ng/ml, women’s is 5.

I don’t think we’ve actually learned what her reading was yet, just that it was over 5ng/ml.

Also, Lawson didn’t test positive for nandrolone, his was for trenbolone. Comparing the values doesn’t do much.

It depends whether she regularly went there, whether she pre-ordered with a phone, and even whether anyone in the vicinity (supposed teammates) are on the take, etc. spiking a drink can happen very quickly, and the case says the PED was by ingestion.