GoatandTricycle-
so is your position that he is likely to be exonerated?
No, my position is that he is likely to be innocent. If this was a criminal matter, there's more than enough out there already, without lab testing Froome, to provide the reasonable doubt which would force a jury to acquit. It's not, though, and UCI only has to make out its case to the comfortable satisfaction of the CAS tribunal, an easier hurdle to get over than "beyond reasonable doubt". Froome's chances are further harmed by the fact that doping is a strict liability offence, so UCI only has to demonstrate that the permitted dose was exceeded, not that it was intentional or even negligent. Froome could offer evidence in mitigation if that case is made out, but it will only reduce his punishment, not overturn the verdict.
You are reading a single comment by @GoatandTricycle and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
gbj_tester
The jury in this case is likely to be CAS, so three expert arbitrators with knowledge of anti-doping regulation.