nedbraden wrote:
pick6 wrote:
Ahillock wrote:
So then why even have a statute of limitations?it applies to cases without these kinds of special circumstances.
Actually the previous case was about the defendant admitting to doping after his initial cases cleared him, which is why they clean the SOL. I have already told you this and presented the exact words from the case but you chose ignore those facts and now you are purposely using false information.
What Im saying very clearly is that it establishes precedent that they can set aside the SOL in specific situations, this is not the first time. It's for different reasons, but they were clearly able to do so under the standard judicial processes for a case like this that the WADA code does not prohibit them from doing. You can be a strict constructionist about WADA code if you want, but the code was designed specifically to cover the fact that it gets applied in different countries; some of which doping is illegal, some it is not and handled as a sporting issue, like we do here. In either case, they are allowed to follow standard judicial practices in the country the NADA resides in if the code doesn't specify otherwise. When you have a conspiracy a RICO type case is warranted to get the full depth of the conspiracy.
On many issues related to this, I'm willing to listen to the other point of view, but not on this one; WADA has confirmed USADA followed the rules, at least twice on this case. You need to let it go.