Drummond sues Gay and WADA for defamation

But a key thing in my mind is to remember that Gay tested positive multiple times over a short period of time. Only an idiot does that. David Epstein always tells me it's very hard to get caught once - let alone multiple times - if you trying to hide it.

Also Gay was on the extra testing super tight thing for Wada - project clean or whatever it was.[/quote]

That is just idle speculation. The are hundreds of people who on the IAAF doping list, are they all idiots. Perhaps the testing had increased who knows. The only thing we know for certain is he failed tests for steroids. What happened to the athlete being responsible for what goes into their body.

Would you have the same reaction if he was from Russia. This is little different to that discus thrower letting her coach be the fall guy.

"Rojo,

Your response is exactly what the poster accused you of saying."

Exactly! Come on Rojo, get a grip, THINK about what you are saying.

.cowp wrote:

Who is the Atlanta chiropractor?

and why were creams, etc sent to Eugene, Oregon. Gay didn't live there, right?

I would HOPE that USADA received more than Tyson's word about who gave him what in order to get a shortened ban. The Drummond quotes give me pause to wait until USADA or Tyson release fully what was said and given over as evidence. If there is no evidence (receipts, text messages, voicemail, fingerprints, etc) and we are just relying on Tyson's good name, then I can sympathize with Drummond. Unfortunately though, I have long felt something was not right with Drummond and that he hid behind a mask of super-ethical behavior that was fake. That's not evidence, but it doesn't help me give him the benefit of the doubt.

That's the thing, in a civil proceeding, the initial burden of proof is on the complainant, first to state a cause of action in the complaint, then to initially prove the ultimate legal issue--that is, that liability should legally attach to the defendant as a result of his actions.

If the complaint is defective, there can be an immediate dismissal for failure to state a cause of action.

If it is good but the initial burden of proof has not been met by the plaintiff, the case can be dismissed upon a motion for summary judgment at the conclusion of the presentation of the plaintiff's case, without the defendant presenting their case.

In a libel or slander suit, it is not sufficient to simply state a cause of action, it must be supported by factual evidence--in this case, Drummond has to prove on a balance of probabilities that something Gay or USADA said or wrote about him was false. If that is initially proven, it is up to Gay/USADA to move the goalposts back on whether it is false or not.

If it is proven to be false on a balance of probabilities, even after the defense is presented, then it must be shown that it caused damages, was the proximate cause of those damages, the quantum must be determined, etc....

The filings should be available for public view. I will try to post a link on this board.

.cowp wrote:

Who is the Atlanta chiropractor?

Clayton Gibson III. His client list include many NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL players...also track athletes, golfers, college athletes, etc.

But look at this Epstein's quote:

“...He convinces guys to use all this herbal stuff.” The former All-Pro and another professional athlete who worked with Gibson said he cited his Christian faith to reassure them, asserting that it would reflect poorly in the eyes of God if he gave someone a product that caused them to fail a drug test..."

WhereToStart wrote:

So is letsrun changing its editorial stance now?

HAHAHahahahahaha, "editorial stance". HehehehahahaHAHAHAH. They are just a couple has been blowhards like most the other cats on here. "Editorial stance" implies editorial standards, of which there are none. Like most the drivel here, their shit isn't carefully thought out, or carefully articulated.

You're all idiots.

That's funny. The chiropractor is a man of God, so obviously HE wouldn't do anything unethical.

And Drummond managed to work in to his defense that he uses his position as an ordained minister to fight drugs, so obviously HE can't be guilty.

And Gay is always quick to thank God for his successes, so I think it goes without saying that HE wouldn't behave in the way he is accused. Plus, he even campaigned for a drug-free sport, for Christ's sake!

So the only conclusion a reasonable person can draw is: they are all innocent of all charges. They are all men of God, and, as history has clearly demonstrated, men of God do not cheat.

OK, just kidding. What a good laugh the old "but I'm a Christian" defense is.

I'm currently a law student and can tell you if what Gay says is true, he certainly won't be liable for defamation. Further, it is possible Drummond is a limited purpose public figure which will bring a much higher standard of proving defamation(thus making it harder to prove defamation).

Gamera wrote:

[...]

OK, just kidding. What a good laugh the old "but I'm a Christian" defense is.

"Temptation, defamation, so bad it makes him cry..." (rewrite of The Police - Don't stand so close to me)

no one is above temptation. i don't care who you are, or what your beliefs are.

I thought Tyson was graduated from college like all the smart poster on this board.

Groucho Mark wrote:

The saying "A drug positive is a failed IQ test" seems to apply well in Tyson's case.

Lance Armstrong tactics.

Drummond's story sounds like a total crock. I've told people for years to stay away from that dirty jacka/ss

I feel for him and think he is being made the fall guy to save American sprinting. It reminds me so much of what happened at the 2003 World Championship when Drummond was falsely accused of moving and robbed of his chance to compete in the final.

I saw the sincerity then and see it now. TG is saying what he needs to say to save his HGH enhanced asse and be eligible to compete in Rio.

Drummond in 2003. See it, feel it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxn7yaOfEoY

Isn't it always an Atlanta Chiropractor? Or an Anti-Aging clinic in Florida? (which is just a relocated chiropractor from Atlanta).Gay has had so many injury problems, I could see how he and others might cut corners. Not the brightest bulbs on the tree, which I think has been pointed out earlier

.cowp wrote:

Who is the Atlanta chiropractor?

Tyson Gay is lying. What will come out of this legal action, is who scripted Gay's sad story.

I predict Gay goes to court to defend himself and lies down and pouts like Drummond did, hoping that that will somehow fix everything.

Brian D Purcell wrote:

I would HOPE that USADA received more than Tyson's word about who gave him what in order to get a shortened ban. The Drummond quotes give me pause to wait until USADA or Tyson release fully what was said and given over as evidence. If there is no evidence (receipts, text messages, voicemail, fingerprints, etc) and we are just relying on Tyson's good name, then I can sympathize with Drummond. Unfortunately though, I have long felt something was not right with Drummond and that he hid behind a mask of super-ethical behavior that was fake. That's not evidence, but it doesn't help me give him the benefit of the doubt.

No one has published the complaint yet, but from the descriptions I've read and public interviews, Drummond has admitted he learned about the sketchy chiropractor from Marshevet Hooker, Drummond does not dispute that he introduced Gay to the chiropractor, Drummond does not dispute that he went to the chiropractor with Gay, Drummond does not dispute that Gay received the banned substances from the chiropractor, Drummond does not deny that Gay took the substances while he was coaching him. The only point of contention - and the whole basis for the lawsuit - is that Drummond claims he “did not recommend that Tyson enter a relationship” with the chiropractor and that "he had personally instructed Mr. Gay to discard any products that he himself had not recognized as safe."

So Drummond introduced Gay to the quack and supervised his training after that, but told him not to use the products he got from the doctor that Drummond found? I'm sorry, but based on his own admissions it sounds like Drummond is guilty and this defamation suit is just a hail mary attempt to avoid culpability.