What is the status of Ruth Jebet and Asbel Kiprop?

Subway Surfers wrote:

casual obsever wrote:

Still, it's only an assumption that

rekrunner = Jon Orange

DiscoGary = Flagpole.

The first one is mildly possible, but the second is utterly headspinning. ?

To attack yourself is the oldest troll trick.

Kiprop might keep all his medals but the truth is out.

He was obviously off the juice for too long before London Olympics hence his subpar performance. That's about as clean as he got.

3:26 has never been run clean.

rekrunner wrote:

In the case of Kiprop, his A-sample was positive, his B-sample confirmed it, and Kiprop said he couldn't afford to fight it, so we can probably expect a suspension, plus annulment of races (let's see if they go as far back as 2015).

I think there are too many circumstances surrounding the samples to say that we probably will expect a suspension.

Even if Kiprop cant afford a top lawyer to defend him I suppose he will get some public lawyer to defend him?

All this story about officials announcing test the day before and Kiprop paying a "test fee" to the officials makes the case

still very "open". Easy to prove for the defense that he was asked for money and actually payed that sum to the officials if he did.

Their status? They are heroes in Kenya.

But if the CAS hearing holds up the doping positive and bans Kiprop, isn't he going to have to leave the country and take residency somewhere else? I mean how could he show his face around Nairobi and all? They'd laugh and mock him to no end. ?

While I can agree on "strange", I don't see it happening. Once an A-sample positive is confirmed by a B-sample, his odds of escaping a sanction go way down. While everyone mistakenly accuses me of apologizing for dopers, I have stronger faith in testing -- especially an established urine test for EPO. This story about advanced warning and a pay-off, if true, doesn't seem to help Kiprop, but could only help the IAAF. These are reasons that the IAAF might be able to bring up if the tests came back clean. If Kiprop was truly clean, would he still be paying off the testers? The only potential angle I saw, is if he can show the testers sabotaged the samples while he wasn't looking -- something that also seems unlikely short of a confession from one of the testers.

Strange case wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

In the case of Kiprop, his A-sample was positive, his B-sample confirmed it, and Kiprop said he couldn't afford to fight it, so we can probably expect a suspension, plus annulment of races (let's see if they go as far back as 2015).

I think there are too many circumstances surrounding the samples to say that we probably will expect a suspension.

Even if Kiprop cant afford a top lawyer to defend him I suppose he will get some public lawyer to defend him?

All this story about officials announcing test the day before and Kiprop paying a "test fee" to the officials makes the case

still very "open". Easy to prove for the defense that he was asked for money and actually payed that sum to the officials if he did.

The truth is out with respect to Sept. 2017.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Kiprop might keep all his medals but the truth is out.

He was obviously off the juice for too long before London Olympics hence his subpar performance. That's about as clean as he got.

3:26 has never been run clean.

rekrunner wrote:

The truth is out with respect to Sept. 2017.

What is the "truth?" And what's the significance of "Sept. 2017?" Is that the date Kiprop supposedly started doping or something like that?

Sorry -- November 2017. A-sample positive and B-sample confirmation --what we know today.

To prove that the testers sabotaged the samples when he wasn`t looking will be almost impossible I think. Kiprops only chance if not guilty is to emphasize that he was told the day before that the test would be next day. If this is true and the pay-off also is true, the test must be declared invalid. Both of these actions are compressive for the testers if they are true. I think I remember Kiprop showed the receipt from the pay-off in public.

There's nothing strange about this case at all. It's a pretty standard one.

Cheat gets caught, cheats comes up with convoluted excuse as to why he's innocent.

Cheat isn't innocent, gets a ban.

Simple, and a story told a million times over. What's equally predictable are all the muppets who take everything he's saying at face value and actually believe there's a case.

Asbel's final answer to the charges was due to the IAAF disciplinary tribunal by June 7. He was asking for an extension of that deadline, but I cannot find any information that it has been granted.

I can find no information about a meeting schedule in general for the disciplinary tribunal or a hearing date for Asbel in particular, but that would be the next step.

The AIU put out a statement that admits that Asbel received advanced knowledge of the testing, but states this will not nullify that Adverse Analytical Finding , since this could not reasonably have been a cause of the positive test. They deny having breached confidentiality. They state that they did not offer him any improper inducements, which he also alleges. They do not appear to address his claim that he paid the tester. I don't know if he can reargue these grounds at his disciplinary tribunal hearing or not:

https://www.athleticsintegrity.org/downloads/pdfs/knowledge-centre/en/AIU-Kiprop-Statement-May-18.pdf

Barrel of Laughs wrote:

But if the CAS hearing holds up the doping positive and bans Kiprop, isn't he going to have to leave the country and take residency somewhere else? I mean how could he show his face around Nairobi and all? They'd laugh and mock him to no end. ?

Either that or go to jail. Isn't Kiprop a Kenyan police officer?

Inquiring minds want to know wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

The truth is out with respect to Sept. 2017.

What is the "truth?" And what's the significance of "Sept. 2017?" Is that the date Kiprop supposedly started doping or something like that?

The X-Files, "the truth is out there," Rekrunner is Mulder.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Barrel of Laughs wrote:

But if the CAS hearing holds up the doping positive and bans Kiprop, isn't he going to have to leave the country and take residency somewhere else? I mean how could he show his face around Nairobi and all? They'd laugh and mock him to no end. ?

Either that or go to jail. Isn't Kiprop a Kenyan police officer?

Say what? A Kenyan police officer? Isn't he a little too frail & scrawny to be a police officer? I can't imagine him having to break up fights or scuffle with some big brutes twice his size? Though I don't think any bandit could outrun run him in a foot chase.

Well for one, given the advance notice, not just 26 November, but also 21 November, it seems strange that Kiprop would still show up at a test with EPO still present in the system. This isn't taking things at face value, but was confirmed by screenshots of text messages, by the AIU, and a signed statement from the DCO who took the samples. Not saying this is a valid defense by any means, just something strange, because presumably the advance notice would allow an athlete to show up clean -- that's the whole point of not giving advance notice -- to catch athletes by surprise with EPO present in the system. Then we wouldn't be having this discussion. And if the payment was a bribe, what was it for? The advanced notice, or to clean up or swap a dirty sample? Seems easiest to just give advance notice and collect a clean sample, in an ounce of prevention versus pound of cure way. And if the DCO received the bribe -- what went wrong? We could say it was just a stupid rookie mistake, but Kiprop is no rookie.

trollism wrote:

There's nothing strange about this case at all. It's a pretty standard one.

Cheat gets caught, cheats comes up with convoluted excuse as to why he's innocent.

Cheat isn't innocent, gets a ban.

Simple, and a story told a million times over. What's equally predictable are all the muppets who take everything he's saying at face value and actually believe there's a case.

Ruth Jebet is also awaiting a first hearing from the Disciplinary Tribunal. As of May 20th, there were 109 athletes awaiting hearings. They have released a few decisions and appear to be hearing 1-2 cases a week, on average, but I cannot find any listing of a schedule of hearings. Maybe I can find that still.

He was already doping back in 2016 when appeared on the FB hacked WADA document for "likely doping." He's listed as a 3 priority (+++) with notes to hit him hard with IC target testing.

IMO, Kiprop was doing more than microdosing last year when he was given advanced notice of the impending OOC test (how else would someone be so stupid to test positive for EPO). He knew he was glowing and figured he could either run & hide or face the music and hope (pay) someone would bail him out.

Still he was exchanging text messages for six days with the DCO before the test. Six days is a long time to get EPO out of the system so it doesn't appear in your urine. I don't know that 3 +++ means -- it's not in any WADA documentation. If he was still "glowing" -- why not just miss the test?

Urine Specimen wrote:

He was already doping back in 2016 when appeared on the FB hacked WADA document for "likely doping." He's listed as a 3 priority (+++) with notes to hit him hard with IC target testing.

IMO, Kiprop was doing more than microdosing last year when he was given advanced notice of the impending OOC test (how else would someone be so stupid to test positive for EPO). He knew he was glowing and figured he could either run & hide or face the music and hope (pay) someone would bail him out.