What do you think of Victor Conte's explanation for Jones most recent test failure? That being he was taking a short acting drug that had cleared his system prior to the test, but it was tainted by what he got busted for because the people who made it failed to properly clean their equipment. Does that sound plausible to you?
its plausible but theres no evidence to either prove it or disprove it.
All we know is that the turinabol entered his system sometime after 7th July and before around the 26th July
we know the earliest point because of his last negative test
And we know it was the long term metabolite they detected not actual turinabol so it must have been administered long enough before his sample was collected on weigh-in day for the actual turinabol to have left his system
So we can whittle it down to 7-26 July for when it was administered
beyond that, we have no idea.
If we presume
intentional use there are really only two options. It could be Jones took turinabol unaware of the new testing protocol and thinking it had a short detection window, It could be as Conte hypothesises that he took something else with a short detection window that was contaminated with turinabol. There is nothing to disprove either theory, but there is nothing to prove it either.
If it is
non-intentional use then it would be a supplement consumed between 7th and 26th that he hadnt used previously, and did not use after the 26th July. So a supplement that he had never used before that he took a month before the fight and stopped using 4-5 days before the fight. That he cannot remember taking, did not write on his doping control form, and has been unable to provide to USADA. But again, there is nothing to prove or disprove that this is what happened.
which leaves us with...
USADA have demonstrated that he had a long term metabolite of turinabol in his system. That is all they have to prove or demonstrate. They dont have to prove how it got there, only that it was present.
Its down to Jones team to either, prove it got there unintentionally, or that the testing and analysis protocol is flawed. They already stated in the CSAC hearing that there were no errors in the collection or analysis procedure and they accept the presence of it in his sample. Which leaves their only option to demonstrate unintentional use.
The only possible way they get a reduction is if they can demonstrate that.
