If you had something worthwhile and true about EPO (which you don't), do you honestly think it helps your case by also defending people like Jama Aden and all the cheats you've defended here in the past? I mean there is absolutely no logical reason (other than being motivated by doping apologism) why somebody should have a genuine belief that EPO doesn't work AND a belief that just about every doper and shady manager or coach is innocent.
I think no one has "something worthwhile and true about EPO" and elite distance running performance. We need better observations.
I try to stay with the known facts. Defending the facts sometimes gets misinterpreted as defending "shady" people accused of things without facts.
Facts!! They are not necessary in our modern world of the witch hunt. You know that Rekrunner. Don't let the notion of facts get in the way of the "everybody is doping" version - it is only opinion that matters to Coevett, Armstronglivs, Steveaddict, etc. They don't need proof, because there is always a reason (excuse) for why facts are not required - usually the default that you are just a "doping apologist". Other than Renato it is pretty obvious that none of these people actually coach anyone of substance (and thank god for that) or they simply wouldn't think that way (everybody dopes). That is the saddest part of this too often shrill bleating - they are the deluded ones who have given up on the sport. Why the heck they even watch it or post on it is beyond me. But then coaching world-class athletes has its privileges - to really see what it takes to see athletes develop to their potential. Is there doping? of course. Is it as prevalent as these jokers say? Of course not, but then how would ANY of these people know? NONE are involved with serious athletes and none were themselves - that is the only fact.
The article doesn't say what the specific charges were but based on the fact that it refers to the lack of evidence of an organization and a scheme, I'm guessing the problem is he was charged with some sort of conspiracy-type offense, maybe under a law similar to the US's RICO statute, but there wasn't enough evidence of some specific elements of that offense. So possibly a situation where the charges the prosecutor went with weren't the best choice of what to pursue.
Seems like they could not prove the PEDs were his. There were other plausible (under the law) sources. In terms of common sense, the links between Aden and doping are immense. David Torrance being exhibit A.
I always think I'm siding myself with the known evidence.
LOL. No. You always side with the suspect, see Aden + Salazar + Decker + Houlihan + Jeptoo + Kiprop for starters, no matter whether or not the evidence was enough for a ban.
My "siding with the suspect" is always evidence based, while many allegations against the suspects are not.
The article doesn't say what the specific charges were but based on the fact that it refers to the lack of evidence of an organization and a scheme, I'm guessing the problem is he was charged with some sort of conspiracy-type offense, maybe under a law similar to the US's RICO statute, but there wasn't enough evidence of some specific elements of that offense. So possibly a situation where the charges the prosecutor went with weren't the best choice of what to pursue.
There was a more detailed charge some years ago, but I recall they charged him with harming his athletes' health. I guess they decided that the non-doping vitamins in Aden's room were not harmful, but the doping substances in Mounir's room were, but there was not enough evidence that both were working together to dope any athletes.
The article doesn't say what the specific charges were but based on the fact that it refers to the lack of evidence of an organization and a scheme, I'm guessing the problem is he was charged with some sort of conspiracy-type offense, maybe under a law similar to the US's RICO statute, but there wasn't enough evidence of some specific elements of that offense. So possibly a situation where the charges the prosecutor went with weren't the best choice of what to pursue.
Seems like they could not prove the PEDs were his. There were other plausible (under the law) sources. In terms of common sense, the links between Aden and doping are immense. David Torrance being exhibit A.
In the end David Torrance said he didn't know what Aden was injecting, but he was told it was B-Vitamins. How is that "exhibit A" linking Aden to doping?
"Although it should be pointed out neither Dibaba nor Aden was ever punished for the incident and Aden was acquitted in Spanish court last year after being charged with supplying banned substances to an athlete."
When did that happen? Anyone have any more information?