Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
Let's see...
Some people want to pretend this is not a problem because of the criminal standard of innocent until proven guilty,
Some are comdemning the report because it does not include all those names we "know" were juicing.
So, the report lacks credibility because the Commissioner's office does not have subpoena power and therefore relied on already open criminal investigations and on interviews with those who were willing to talk.
And, it also lacks credibility because it left out some names "everybody knows" are involved for essentially the same reason - it had to rely on open criminal investigations and those who were willing to talk.
I guess you get to pick your justification for denial.
|
The report lacks credibility because many of the names are listed did not speak to the entire scope of the problem and many names were mentioned were based on a conversation and not a failed test or a direct interaction. This would be like if there was an investigation on sports officials fixing games and someone referenced a conversation you had with them about a coach, player or team and then your name is listed without any corroboration or specifics to your wrong doing. I guarantee you or I would want think that would be wrong for your name to be mentioned simply on a conversation with a person that has an interest to save themselves from personal legal issues. And when you leave off the poster boys of this steroid era (which often is based on suspect evidence as well) then why mention names. Many of the players mentioned were not even good players or players that fit the description of a steroid user. I do not know if anyone ever saw David Segui, but he is smaller than I was in HS. The wind could blow and he would fall over and he is in the report as a steroid user.
Peace