- Joined
- May 8, 2005
- Messages
- 19,348
- Reaction score
- 7,770
i'm not ignoring anything, i'm calling out the obvious nonsense in the argumentation.again, you're just ignoring anything that doesn't support your position. you think it's moronic (and it wasn't usada's explanation) that the evidence doesn't support that jones was cycling tbol leading up to the dc fight. but your only response is that he was busted before......
jones having traces of turinabol in his blood means he took turinabol. that's the evidence to support he is a cheat.
his defence could be that a supplement was tainted and he didn't knowingly take it, but then he'd have to produce an example of such a supplement. this has happened before, it's not unheard of. except he didn't, he produced absolutely no evidence of any tainted supplements.
but, they had an arbiter shave months off of his punishment anyway, deciding that he didn't knowingly take it, because apparently it would've been stupid of him to do so. have you tried to apply that logic to any other rule breaking? walk into a convenience store and just take money out of the cash register. when the police arrest you, tell the judge you didn't knowingly steal, that would've been stupid with all the cameras and witnesses.
what's hilarious about this is that they both lowered his suspension for snitching, and for not taking turinabol intentionally. but if he didn't take it intentionally, he just ingested it with a donut he bought at mcdonald's the night before, why did he have to snitch? who did he snitch on? he isn't a cheater, he knows no chemists, he's never used any PEDs. right?