Rasmussen again

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

skwerl

New Member
Location
London
fuzzy29 said:
This is getting too much like the Landis case. "I didn't do anything wrong, but I will not prove my innocence" would not stand up in any court in the world.

Actually it would. The burdon of proof is on the accuser/prosecutor. 'Innocent until proven guilty' and all that. You're not helping matters if you refuse to provide evidence that may benefit your case (if you have any evidence that is) but it's our basic right to say, "I'm innocent. Prove me wrong".
 

skwerl

New Member
Location
London
CSC "had no official test, but there were misgivings about some things, which didn't seem to be in order. I don't want to be nailed down to any figures, that's not the point. I only know that it [the hematocrit level] was not over 50, but that it was close to 50, which also was suspicious for me. That's why Michael was sent home,"

This is all a bit crap. 'No official tests but it all looked a bit odd so we sacked him'. Take the hamatocrit reading for example. The cut-off is 50. Over 50 you're guilty, under 50 and you're clear. Nearly 50 is under 50. Even if it's 49.999 it's still under 50. You can't start saying, "well it's under 50 but quite close so it all looks not quite right". How would you feel if the cops stopped you for speeding and said, "you were doing 38 in a 40 limit. It's under 40 but you were close enough"?

This article doesn't really show CSC in a good light. It looks like they were looking for reasons to off-load him. I don't think that article should be used to strengthen the case against Rasmussen.
 

asterix

Comrade Member
Location
Limoges or York
skwerl;34304][quote=fuzzy29 said:
This is getting too much like the Landis case. "I didn't do anything wrong, but I will not prove my innocence" would not stand up in any court in the world.

Actually it would. The burdon of proof is on the accuser/prosecutor. 'Innocent until proven guilty' and all that. You're not helping matters if you refuse to provide evidence that may benefit your case (if you have any evidence that is) but it's our basic right to say, "I'm innocent. Prove me wrong".[/QUOTE]

Yes but life isn't 'fair', is it? Clearly, now isn't really a good time to try and by-pass the system whether you are really clean or not.
 
OP
OP
Keith Oates

Keith Oates

Janner
Location
Penarth, Wales
I see he is racing again in Denmark and also suggesting he has further employment offers. He raced in an umarked Yellow Jersey. I'm slowly beginning to dislike this man as a person!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Tetedelacourse

New Member
Location
Rosyth
Innocent until proven guilty was exhausted as an ethos in cycling a lonnng time ago, sadly.

I do agree though that the CSC "revelations" are weak to say the least. Sounds to me like they had valid reasons for giving him the spanish archer but possibly they were damaging reasons in terms of CSC's public persona.

Agreed though, more hypocrisy and trying to make him a scapegoat is not doing anyone any favours.
 
Top Bottom