Saturday, July 05, 2008

Gary Hall article - he calls out dopers and talks about insulin and an anabolic agent



I called out, suggested that Amy Van Dyken had steroid connections before Gary Hall but I was more polite. I suggested something was fishy with her since she had to testify at the Balco grand jury. :-P From the New York Daily News: [Link]

Below are links as to how and why I formed the opinion that all was not right with Amy Van Dyken.

Addendum: Amy Van Dyken has never tested positive for steroid usage. However she wads a BALCO athlete. From SFGate.com: “…Through Romanowski, Conte also gained access to athletes from other sports, such as six-time Olympic gold medalist Amy Van Dyken, who once described herself as “the Bill Romanowski of the swimming world,” and 1996 Olympic gold-medal-winning sprinter Chryste Gaines of San Leandro, a Stanford graduate who last year was charged by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency with a BALCO- related doping offense. …" [Link]

From USA Today: "... Fall 2003: Many athletes testify before the BALCO grand jury. Among those testifying: track and field athletes Marion Jones, Kevin Toth, Regina Jacobs, Chryste Gaines and Tim Montgomery; baseball players Barry Bonds, Jason Giambi, Gary Sheffield and Benito Santiago; football players Bill Romanowski and Barret Robbins; swimmer Amy Van Dyken; and boxer Shane Mosley. [Link]

3 comments:

Sevenmack said...

Sorry dude, but you and Gary Hall are off base on this one. In fact, the arguments each of you is making fail on any logical scale and says more about each person's thinking process than about Van Dyken.

The fact that Van Dyken testified before a grand jury means nothing more than that she was called to testify by an investigating prosecutor. She's following the law and testified as any American called to testify is supposed to do. That's all. Arguing that Van Dyken must have done something or must be guilty because she testified is equivalent to saying that a man is guilty of a crime because he walked into a courthouse; it is a logical fallacy because plenty of innocent people -- cops, witnesses to crimes, experts on matters related to a criminal or civil case -- testify in front of juries every day in this country, the same way innocent people walk into courthouses every day to get married, file papers or pick up official documents.

Since the Feds never found any evidence that Van Dyken actually committed any crime -- especially no evidence that she was on any of the "Clean and the Clear" calendars used by BALCO to track its doping clients -- or was any sort of un-indicted co-conspirator, the facts available show that Van Dyken had some contact with BALCO, as did plenty of athletes before the scandal broke out.

Tony Austin said...

I should have been more polite rather than flippant. I will edit the post when I get back from workout this morning...

I will categorically state that AMy Van Dyken never tested positive for steroid usage.

You must know this though, It is not against the law to take steroids. What is against the law is lying to a grand jury about it. That is why Marion Jones went to jail and Berry Bonds was indicted.

Jones did not go to jail for taking steroid usage nor did Martha Stewart for insider trading.

Amy Van Dyken was a Balco athlete and was called to testify, she did and obviously she told the complete truth.

Scott said...

Frankly Sevenmack I think you're the individual way off base here. If I want your kind of logic I can always program a computer. Rational thought is the reason why we have juries, because it takes humans considering the facts to arrive at a reasoned decision. You imply Amy Van Dyken was randomly selected to appear while in fact she was called because she was on Balco's list as one of their client athletes. Your argument rests upon the fact that mere appearance before a court isn’t illegal – but as Tony points out this post was never about that – it’s about Van Dyken cheating. It’s because of morons like you (and I use moron in its correct sense meaning feeble minded or lacking good judgment) who naturally accept whatever is presented without critical thought that United States is in Iraq, has secret prisons, tortures, has legislated away habeas corpus, and comprises a population where a quarter of Americans would vote for George W. Bush if he could run for president again. Frankly you should follow the old adage “better to say nothing and be thought a fool than speak up and remove all doubt”.