Wiggo's Package said:
Robert5091 said:
Wiggo's Package said:
Twitter is quoting L'Equipe as reporting 'Froome's lawyer has asked the UCI for all his Vuelta samples "with the aim of showing that the controls are not trustworthy given the way they are conducted". The LADS refused to release them.'
This comes across as a desperate move by Mike Morgan. Last throw of the dice. He must know that if Froome's defence establishes that doping controls are indeed not trustworthy then anti-doping becomes a pointless irrelevance. And pro cycling becomes the Wild West take what you want and hope you don't die before you cross the finish line
Worth noting that with this legal/procedural play Froome and his lawyer are willing to kill anti-doping and pro cycling to get him off the charge. Which is very different to proving his innocence via the scientific/medical route. Is anyone even surprised?
Desperate? No. They can n't explain the sample, so attack the method of collection - logical!
Yes, indeedy :razz:
It's becoming more and more obvious that the Dawg's only hope is Morgan finding a legal/procedural loophole. And if Morgan's gone nuclear with the 'take the whole house down' option then Morgan's now out of options.
Froome's option to go into the lab clearly expired a long time ago. That ain't happening
Not desperate to attack the procedure. It's sound legal strategy and what a defendant would expect of a . As a larger point, if you're going to live by the rule of law, the law has to be followed by both sides. I always laugh when I hear about people getting off on a "technicality," then it turns out that the technicality was something like a refusal to hand over evidence or someone broke the chain of custody. What if that was you?
The Massachusetts crime lab scandal resulted in 8,000 convictions being thrown out.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/12/28/massachusetts-prosecutors-to-throw-out-8000-convictions-in-second-drug-lab-scandal/?utm_term=.b8cb1149c612
So if it turns out that an anti-doping agency didn't follow the rules, then yes, the case should be tossed. I don't particularly care if that means that Froome gets off.