Er... wrote:
I know I'm a pedant, but I wish people would be more careful with what they write, especially in threads discussing claims such as these.
Note how in the "post of the day," a check from Alberto to an NOP employee is first called "physical evidence" of reimbursement for shipping androgel (it could have been for innumerable other legitimate services) and then is called "the John Stiner Androgel receipt." A freshman comp essay would handle its sources better than that.
Again, I have no opinion on whether Alberto's guilty or not. I suspect he is and if he is I hope everyone participating has to pay for their misdeeds. But please stop mischaracterizing the information being discussed.
I appreciate being careful with words. You are mischaracterizing my statements. First of all, my statements were made to disarm the "yawn" reaction typified by Chet Manly and, now, Centro. Nothing in my post points to that check as, like, the only piece of evidence here. I'm fully capable, as I will show, of understanding that the check could be for other things. But the fact that Alberto allegedly explained the testosterone as something given to him for his heart health, shows that this is an important issue, and I hope he has to answer for this incident publicly!
My wording was, relative to the average post on here, and relative to how you're characterizing it, very clear: this is physical evidence backing up claims from multiple sources that show a pattern of behavior (Salazar and NOP athletes and, I guess, Salazar's son, dealing with testosterone and/or testosterone-related substances). I never say that the physical evidence proves anything (though on the whole I share your inclinations towards "guilty" of at least some rule-breaking... which in this sport, is a big deal, ask Tyson Gay). I didn't say that those pieces of evidence would be damning in court, I merely point out to the poster Chet Manly (who surely represents many others who don't want to believe this information, or want to *yawn* at it) that these are not just vapid, off-the-record claims from unknown sources with no physical evidence.
The check is a physical piece of evidence that the relevant "witness" (Stiner) claims is from the event. Also, the check memo, written on a check with Alberto's name, says something like "shipping" or "package shipment". In other words, the piece of evidence, along with the claims, is potentially directly relevant to the accusation of Alberto having testosterone "on his person", potentially while traveling with competing or training athletes.
Again, we're not in court, and I'm not holding myself to some ridiculous standard that NOP wants me to hold: "There's no solid evidence against us doing anything wrong! NOP athletes do not take special supplements!!" (ok, maybe L-Carnitine) blah blah blah. I was careful with my words, on a board where people have no requirement (and usually no capacity) to be careful with their words. Probably, since my argument was compelling, you want to give me extra criticism. Surely, Salazar will say that Stiner is lying, or that he had the testosterone to treat his heart condition. To counteract Salazar's probable claim, at least one journalist-contacted doctor source said, "given testosterone's effect on people with heart problems, it's hard to believe a doctor would prescribe this to a heart patient" (paraphrased). In great and grand America, where everyone* gets their day in court, Salazar has every right to deny, deny, deny. He's both taking full advantage, and had plenty of time to learn from the best. After all, he works in the Salazar building right near where the Tiger Woods building, Lance Armstrong building, and Joe Paterno child care building do, or once did, proudly stand on the Nike mega campus. People can judge whether they believe Salazar is doing everything within the bounds of the rules or whether he and his athletes are abusing the rules.
*except the people who get shot beforehand
In court, Salazar's lawyer could argue to have the check thrown out. The prosecuting lawyer would argue that both Stiner and Salazar could take the stand and testify, under oath, what the check was paying for (though Salazar could surely avoid testifying). Was it a check that was paying Stiner to send Salazar male enhancement and testosterone substances, or not? If so, then why was Salazar carrying testosterone? These are not irrelevant or irresponsible questions, considering that the best distance runner in America, a global medalist, coached since his teens by Salazar, has records from age 16 (and these, I dare say, are backed up with quite solid physical and testimonial evidence) saying he was taking prednisone and testosterone. Why would Salazar's possessing testosterone supplements while traveling not be at least plausibly relevant?
All that aside!! ... For the first time with NOP, the public is living in a material world, where actual physical evidence and on-the-record, corroborated public testimony by high-profile (and low-profile) actors is coming out, via responsible, measured, and highest-quality journalism. Big day for global distance running. Next up, maybe we'll be hearing from the Kenyan versions of Magness, Stiner and the Gouchers!!? But, then again, surely these gray areas are not being explored in lovely Iten!!