Michael Johnson returns his gold medal. Do you agree with his action?

Wrong. Everywhere. Especially outside a court of law.

No one has shown any so far, so apparently yes. Or did you just not understand the meaning of the word "baseless"?

The lie bein referred to was that her death was caused by drugs. The coroners report is the proof.

Again, wrong and they (and you) have provided neither proof nor evidence

I'm "accusing" her of being clean? You seriously are having trouble with the language here. Sorry, I didn't realize English was a second language for you. Give it a few years and you'll understand

Cite your source or precedent for insisting on this on this site.

As you have chosen to define it, apparently.

I wouldn't consider that worthy proof.

Again, wrong and they (and you) have provided neither proof nor evidence

I do agree that you're sorry. Fine, you are CLAIMING that she's clean. Better? Anywho, the question still stands why you would believe in such a thing and apparently unquestioningly.

Better yet, I will show you by example: Have you stopped molesting small children yet? We all know you do it. No need for me to back that up now. It's the freewheelin' court of public opinion! Facts? Who needs 'em? Wheee! This is fun!

As the dictionary has chosen to define it.

You wouldn't consider a coroner's report "worthy proof"? Um...ok. I suggest you put your tinfoil hat back on, kiddo. You aren't firing on all cylinders. Please, tell us your conspiracy theory.

(Besides, I thought all we needed was "evidence", not "proof")

No. Worse. I am pointing out that you and the other jackals here have presented ZERO proof (and zero evidence) that she was not clean beyond the fact that she ran a really fast time once. Such is always the case with these threads.

Why would I believe in a coroner's report over the rantings of anonymous trolls on the internet? Hmmm, go figure...

Fail. Your attempted 'analogy' holds zero relevance. Can you really do no better?

As your selective use of the definitions in the dictionary taints the discussion.

Do you understand how a coroner's office works and what coroners are able to determine? A coroner could not determine that health conditions had or had not been exacerbated by drug abuse that went on over a decade previous to death. They can only determine what is present in the body at time of death. How do I know? I'm in the business. But hey, keep being an ignorant sheep if that doesn't suit your head-in-the-sand world view.

You have failed to read and comprehend what's been written in even just this one thread, then. Go slap your parents and/or your teachers for robbing you of a sufficient education.

Oh, I can figure alright!

There is only one way to make this fair. Ive said this before under a different post name...Let the athletes dope themselves to the gills. let 'em take all the EPO and "clear" they can handle. and then let em run like hell. We can all marvel at how fast the human body CAN go (albeit enhanced) under top conditions. At least this way we have absolutely no deception and no need to concern ourselves with unlimited and worthless discussions about whether an athlete is clean. we would all know they are juiced and subsequently could appreciate the racing for the entertainment it is. And, if someone is clean, they can live to a ripe old age and share 'stories' about how they did it the natural way. No one would believe them, but at least the best would be the best.

Cheers

How, exactly, is that fair? Further, is it even ethical?

There is no "need" for anyone to concern himself with "unlimited and worthless discussions about whether an athlete is clean," anyone who participates does so entirely by personal choice.

Let me do the math for you. Try to keep up. Here is the equation: Any Sprinter + major success post 1990 = JUICED, CHEATED, LIED!!!!

How do I know? I'm in the business.

Sadly, it was only at this point I understood that you are a lying troll.

You have failed to read and comprehend what's been written in even just this one thread

The only thing I failed to do was realize I was dealing with a troll. Lesson learned.

Um, just why would I lie about working for a forensics lab that does testing for coroner cases? Oh wait, you must be projecting! Hey, anything to protect your own ignorance and generally disingenuous nature. You must have some personal stake in defending FloJo's reputation.

hey yah! why would sombodyt lie on the internet? you people must be crazy!

If I were going to lie about my profession, at least for the sake of this discussion, I'd say that I'm a lawyer or an anonymous USATF or USOC official. Claiming to be a lab lackey isn't really something so fantastic. Not that I'd really care whether any random internet crank with an agenda believes it.

punk youd lie about anything like everybody else in this thread! lab guy isnt fantastic but it sure is really convenent!

That's right, school's out for summer.