Yesterday, you posted the following:
"Nick's wife admits he had EPO and testosterone. There are allegations from other athletes that he doped them secretly."
Please provide the documentation for this statement. This is factually incorrect. EPO was NEVER mentioned at any time, by anyone, in any documents.
The original police report only discussed any sort of drugs on three occasions:
page 27 - "was ultimately prescribed testosterone cream. Mr. Johnson stated he did not tell Lauren [my emphasis] about this medication because of her drug testing for professional running." There is further discussion of this cream throughout the paragraph.
page 28 - first few lines of middle paragraph
page 31 - one sentence in third paragraph
At no time was Lauren ever asked about the cream nor did she volunteer this information. For reference, discussions with her are contained on pages 22-24, 32, and 34.
The only other mention of "drugs" is on page 32 in reference to a data acquisition being conducted on Nick's mobile phone, where he states that incriminating information concerning alcohol and recreational drug use by some of his athletes might be found.
The lawsuit document only mentions three specific substances/drugs/creams by name: (1) Icy Hot, (2) what a plaintiff "believes" was Prednisone, and (3) what a plaintiff "believes" was coco butter. Other than that, every mention is "an unknown substance," "a substance yet to be determined," "unknown pill," etc. NEVER were the words erythropoietin, EPO, recombinant human erythropoietin, rhEPO, or any other possible name for this drug used, nor were any other drugs mentioned.
At no time did Lauren mention testosterone cream or EPO during her interview for Fox 59 on November 18, 2022. either.
You presented a statement as a fact and then locked the thread to prevent responses to it. I don't know if you did this because you are simply ignorant of the case, read the false posts by certain posters on this board and take every word they say as Gospel, or purposely stated a false "fact" to deceive and mislead readers. I certainly hope it is not the third option because while Section 230 might protect board owners from what others post, it does not protect board owners when they post false and/or malicious things themselves.
You need to either present a document where Lauren Johnson specifically states that she knew Nick "had EPO and testosterone" or you need to publicly retract your statement. That is what journalists do when they make an error.