Re: The likelihood of a false positive in this case is substantial
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TEC Message Board ]
Re: The likelihood of a false positive in this case is substantial
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TEC Message Board ]
Posted by Why Not on July 02, 2009 at 21:07:50:
In Reply to: Re: The likelihood of a false positive in this case is substantial posted by buckeye3 on July 02, 2009 at 20:08:37:
Well then Jeremy would be screwing himself in his lawsuit against NASCAR. He is asking for damages for what has been done to his rep, well if he could have repaired that with his own test, I would agrue that his rep was damaged by his own decision to not release test results.
The source of the meth was (if a false positive) Clartin D. But they have an out because I believe Mayfield admits he took more of that drug than what is advised. By the way, that drug is banned by many sports. Mayfield caused a lot of his own problems by taking not admitting to taking a controlled substance until after it appeared in his test and taking more than recommended of an over the counter drug.
Mayfield's defense is that the lab was at fault. The judge gave him an injunction because they felt they could prove the "possibility" of lab error. In other words he doesn't have to prove he is clean just that it is possible the lab messed up. I would rather he show me he is clean. I will always wonder if he wins on a "possibility".