-
I think a lot is being read into the verdict of the GMC tribunal. It wasn't a doping investigation, rather it was deciding on whether a Doctor was fit to continue to practise medicine. Given that he admitted most of the charges the verdict was a given.
What is more interesting, and definitely needs further investigation, is the idea that Shane Sutton is a credible witness. Both this story, and the Jiffy bag story, come from the same source and it widely rumoured that it is Sutton. The Daily Mail have a signed affidavit from him that has never been published. The parliamentary committee that Damian Collins leads that investigated this also have information on Sutton that has never been published.
Sutton clearly has a grudge against BC as an organisation, or individuals who work(ed) there, and this case came about because of that. I hope the UKAD investigation covers this properly.
Not quite. The tribunal's verdict was that Freeman was found guilty of ordering testosterone for an unknown rider.
You don't have to read anything into it, it's pretty clear.
Ste_S-
The tribunal's verdict was that Freeman was found guilty of ordering testosterone for an unknown rider
"This guidance came into effect 25 February 2013"
I'd like to see what, if anything, the GMC had to say about sports medicine before that. I imagine that if the doping element of the allegations is significant in any decision to treat his fitness to practise as impaired, that will be explained in the full decision, which should be published within 28 days of the "sentencing" hearing scheduled for the first week of May.
-
Not quite. The tribunal's verdict was that Freeman was found guilty of ordering testosterone for an unknown rider.
You don't have to read anything into it, it's pretty clear.They have zero evidence to prove this, though. If this was a civil or criminal case, they couldn't have reached this verdict. All they know is that testosterone was ordered and delivered to BC HQ. No evidence has yet been brought into the public domain as to who it was destined for other than Sutton.
Who, we know, used it before when he was a rider.
gbj_tester
andyp
I think a lot is being read into the verdict of the GMC tribunal. It wasn't a doping investigation, rather it was deciding on whether a Doctor was fit to continue to practise medicine. Given that he admitted most of the charges the verdict was a given.
What is more interesting, and definitely needs further investigation, is the idea that Shane Sutton is a credible witness. Both this story, and the Jiffy bag story, come from the same source and it widely rumoured that it is Sutton. The Daily Mail have a signed affidavit from him that has never been published. The parliamentary committee that Damian Collins leads that investigated this also have information on Sutton that has never been published.
Sutton clearly has a grudge against BC as an organisation, or individuals who work(ed) there, and this case came about because of that. I hope the UKAD investigation covers this properly.