The switch from the NASCAR media to the local Charlotte TV stations leading the way in the Mayfield saga was swift. Local TV reporters without some of the limitations of the ESPN and Internet media who deal with NASCAR on a daily basis have jumped into the deep end of the pool.
Click here to watch Mayfield jump from the sports report to the top news story in the Charlotte TV market. This WCCB-TV video also has the jaw-dropping assertion of the chief toxicologist in Broward Country, FL that is going to set the national media on fire.
Click here for the big Friday WCCB video that had everyone talking. Mayfield unloads for twenty minutes on various topics. His answers are amazingly concise and just add to the confusion over who is playing what games in this whole mess.
Charlotte area reporter Alan Cavanna has been very aggressive in his attempts to get front and center on this issue over at WSOC-TV. Clicking here will open a search page and entering "Mayfield" in the last seven days search will result in a handful of videos.
Cavanna first got Mayfield from his car to repeat that he has never used meth and subsequently wound-up in one of Mayfield's attorneys' homes being shown the negative lap report from Lab Corp. On camera, Cavanna gets the attorney to suggest that Aegis doctored the second Mayfield sample to save face on this issue.
Finally, WBTV's Sarah Batista gets Mayfield sitting on his front porch and talking casually about his reluctance to fall in line with NASCAR's original findings. Click here to see another local Charlotte area TV station deliver what ESPN could not.
Batista's interview contains Mayfield's version of what happened during the day of the second drug test, including calling NASCAR's version "a bunch of lies." It is a relaxed and calm Mayfield who does a very good job of getting his views across in this interview.
Kudos to all three Charlotte area TV stations for getting into this issue and using the resources at their disposal to put this issue out in the public eye. Without the hard work of these reporters, fans would not be able to see what Mayfield has to say and then make their own judgement.
Click here for the NY Times new take on Mayfield and the resulting effects on NASCAR.
TDP welcomes your comments and will continue to add additional video clip links to this post. To add your opinion on the media role in the Mayfield saga, just click on the comments button below. This is a family-friendly website, please keep that in mind when posting. Thanks for stopping by.
32 comments:
Mayfield story contradicts the story of six other witnesses, including some former law enforcement officers, who all signed sworn affadavits telling a very detailed and very similar story.
You either have to believe these six people or you have to believe those six are all in on the conspiracy to get Mayfield, too.
I am so sick of hearing about how calm and concise Mayfield is -- the undertone is that if he's calm he's clean. It's hooey.
I hope Mayfield is having fun. I think he is really enjoying the attention. I think it feeds his belief that he has a big check waiting for him. I still believe he won't get one cent out of NASCAR. So there wasn't a list? Try that one in court. "Members of the jury, my client wasn't given a list that told him he could not smoke meth..."
And for the uninformed, giving a "signed affadavit" means your statement on paper is made under penalty of perjury. It is the legal equivalent of taking the stand, putting your hand on the bible, and testifying.
Are all six telling a bogus story? All six mention in their sworn statements that they saw and were aware of the video cameras present from the moment they arrived. Do you think they would all see videocameras and then tell a story that didn't happen?
What is so jaw-dropping about the toxicologist of Broward County's assertion? He says:
"In my expert opinion...I do not believe that Aegis' test results revealing 67,000 nanograms per milliliter of methamphetamine could be remotely accurate, unless Mr. Mayfield was deceased or a chronic abuser."
Well, the assertion by NASCAR and Dr. Black is that he is a chronic abuser.
SO -- in other words -- you could just as easily say that "if Mayfield is a chronic abuser, then the Aegis test could be correct." I mean, that is also what the toxicologist is saying.
Mayfield better watch which experts he calls to his defense. At first glance, his statement may seem to vindicate Mayfield, but upon further examination it might also fit right in with the NASCAR's assertions.
This toxicologist says he has been a part of three-million urine tests? Huh? If he has been in drug testing for 20 years (and prior to that, urine testing was fairly new) - that is 7,120 days on the job. That means he would have been a part of 420 drug tests a day, every single day including weekends, for the last two decades. 420 in an 8-hour work day is 52.5 drug tests an hour.
So it is this toxicologists assertion that he has been doing one test per minute, full-time, for the last 20 years non-stop?
Sorry, but that sounds even fishier than Jeremy Mayfield's version of the second drug test.
This thing gets just gets weirder and weirder.
There's not a thing new in this that hasn't been dragged around before. As Anon stated, the toxicologist actually agrees with Dr. Blacks assertion that JM is a chronic user.
I'm getting super sick of these dog and pony shows JM and his attorney's are playing. Funny the one thing that could refute the signed affidavits from those witnesses is a copy of the video that JM's "film crew" took when the folks were there to collect the sample, especially since his story is so different than all of theirs. He claims to have been calm, cool. collected and complied without incident or delay, lets see it then?
I'm getting frustrated with the legal system too, because they could put a stop to this dog and pony show by First ordering a gag order to both sides and let the battle go on where it should, in court ad stop this "playing the crowd" crap.
Second for the court to call Mayfield and tell him to be at the courthouse for a random drug test witnessed by court bailiffs and a representative from NASCAR or Aegis Lab, having the collection be done by certified urine collection personal from an accredited lab. Then send the sample to a Federally approved and accredited lab with just the court docket number and no other information.
This should be done before the court even considers the options of reinstating the suspension. This should have been done before it was decided to lift the suspension to start with.
Just think of the theatrics we all would have been spare if it had.
I just don't see this story or report as any thing other than just more of the same magic show we've been watching.
Just get the darn thing in court and out of the press once and for all.
JM's claim Dr.Black isn't a real Dr and questions his credentials is so ridicules it isn't even funny .
JM questioning how someone could test positive and still be OK as he questions what NASCAR/Aegis has said is also ridicules but works well to stir up the masses.
Here is the WADA link to the expanation of International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.
This is exactly what NASCAR and Aegis said they do and if you have legal perscriptions and your use falls within the prescribed amounts you are cleared.
http://www.wada-ama.org/en/dynamic.ch2?pageCategory.id=373
Notice though that JM wants to use some things that WADA says that he thinks supports him, that he has failed to comply with these guidelines by NOT notifyng and furnishing the prescriptions until after the fact, and the quanities exceeded the prescribbed amounts.
As far as the claims NASCAR is violating JM's rights by not givig him the "B" sample, are you kidding me? Wonder why he's not telling them that NASCAR is only refusing to send them to an unaccredited, non Federally approved lab.?? Which is required for the tests to matter.
If these reporters have researched even a little, I wonder why they don't ask if the Labs They want to use fall under the Federal guidelines for this type of testing??
I'm really glad NASCAR is taking the high road, filing their papers and letting the court deal with it.
Oh and one other thing I read on the WADA site for those that keep saying that JM should have a hair test and that would prove it once and for all.
First they are not approved under Federal Guide lines. Secondly, you have to have hair longer than 1 1/2" which Jeremy does not have as he keeps a buzz cut.
Greg Engle has an interesting article on NASCAR Examiner of 7/19 titled 7 up: that is worth readind too.
@ Anon 2:44am
I thought I had read everything about this story but I guess I missed the affidavits by former law enforcement officers. Would you please advise where I can find more information on this? Thanks!
ANON 9:43
the affidavits are in the court filings.
it is a 43 page PDF file you can download and read the most recent NASCAR filings to the court. The link is in one of the other discussions of this subject, I think it's the lazy Sunday one, but if you read through them you'll see it.
@eaglesoars - the one filed last week, right? The only affidavit I see that is from a former law enforcement officer is also an employee of NASCAR. Am I looking at the wrong one? Thanks!
Anon, that's the only one I've seen.
I'd love to get access to ALL the actual filings of this case, anyone know how to find them?
Thanks eaglesoars! I guess I assumed (My mom, rest her soul, would be wagging that finger at me! LOL)the former law enforcement affidavits were from individuals not involved in this case. Maybe the 1st Anonymous was talking about another filing and can further enlighten me on this.
I think the only way to see the filings is through Pacer. Not sure if anyone can use this service or if there is a fee. Have you seen the last Mayfield response posted anywhere?
Guess we are the only ones here this morning. :)
Don't be so quick to drink the NASCAR Kool Aid folks. Any organization that blackballs journalists and drivers for either telling the truth or speaking their mind, violate Federal laws,or "spike" somebody's urinalysis samples (no, not Mayfield's)cannot be trusted. Information coming out in the Tim Richmond Lawsuit shows just what lengths NASCAR will go to in eliminating somebody and ruining their career and besmerch their reputation and memory.
I am no longer reading more stories on this (scanned JD's column) because UNLESS somebody WITNESSES the urine leaving JM's body into a specimen cup and THEN see's it given/tape up in box to send off to lab, all tests are useless.
I dont care how high tech nor the specificities of chemical breakdowns in said tests if they are testing the urine of OTHER people.
Thus JM's two Positive tests were by witnesses. The other 15 negative, JM used others urine/powered urine for all I know?
but I am the only one screaming for the COLLECTION PROCESS to be explained. In the JM video NOBODY asking that either. *sigh*
eagle,
Second reminder. This is my blog and I will police it. Relax.
Everyone gets to offer an opinion and it may be quite different from yours or mine.
When someone steps over the line I will delete it and contact them. Been doing it for three years, hundreds of thousands of posts and many millions of pageviews.
I think I got it by now. OK?
JD
If Mayfield's plan is to get a settlement, we can expect a lot more of this unless a new gag order is handed down by the court. Short of that, I would expect Mayfield to have some sort of press conference or news release daily. Why not? He knows NASCAR won't respond to everything he says, and he can say whatever he want because none of it will be entered into the record.
Mayfield can hold a press conference tomorrow and say "I have obtained PROOF that NASCAR spiked my test, and my attorneys will offer it soon." NASCAR will have to take the PR hit, reporters will be compelled to report such a big headline "Mayfield has proof NASCAR doctored test" would be in every newspaper in the country, despite the fact that you get to paragraph three before you realize it's just an allegation.
Mayfield is going to have a field day. He might as well. He has no chance to win in court, might as well try for a PR win.
Yes JD I understand, sorry. I would have deleted it almost immediately but it seems I don't have that option, or I just don't know how.
Anon, that's one thing that puzzles me, I thought that gag order was still in effect?
The gag order was issued by the judge deciding the injunction. He decided, now they can talk all they want. It is on appeal and appellate judges don't issue gag orders because they are not ruling on points of fact but instead points of law.
Going forward, I doubt there will be any gag orders. But every single thing Mayfield says will be gone over line-by-line in a deposition. Every press conference he gives is only going to cost him more money later as attorneys go over it again under oath later. People keep expecting his attorneys to shut him up -- this ain't a criminal trial. Let him talk, more money for them.
Mayfield sure is all calm, cool and collected when a friendly reporter gives him an open mic. I would LOVE to see his demeanor when he is deposed by NASCAR's attorneys for several hours and has to answer all the uncomfortable questions and all the inconsistencies are put before him. Oh, I bet he'll be super hot under the collar and not looking so calm then.
It's easy to look command when you are unchallenged. I would love to see 60 Minutes do a Mayfield interview!
Well, if I were in the same situation I would be screaming my innocence from the treetops like him. I agree with Anon 12:27 nothing is surprising in regard to Nascar. I'm glad JM is on the offense now I said that from the beginning that he should do that.
The question that needs to be asked is why NASCAR/Aegis will only allow the B sample be tested by three other labs (as reported by Marty Smith on NASCAR Now, 2 in the US and 1 in Canada). There are 39 different labs that are on the "Current List of Laboratories Which Meet Minimum Standards To Engage in Urine Drug Testing for Federal Agencies" http://workplace.samhsa.gov/DrugTesting/Files_Drug_Testing/Labs/FR070209.pdf
Labcorp in NC is one of those on the list(Aegis is on as well) that said during Mayfield's last test did not include any methamphetamines.
Does anyone else smell something fishy about this?
If NASCAR/Aegis has nothing to hide why not send the B sample to one of these labs (not necessarily Labcorp or one of the three determined by NASCAR/Aegis)? If these are acceptable to the federal government, why are they unacceptable to NASCAR/Aegis?
The fact that the B sample sits in an Aegis lab somewhere means that this will not end for a long time. If NASCAR/Aegis really believes that their process is so much better than every other lab in North America that only three other labs can detect what they detect, what does that say? Someone who has the level of methamphetamines in his system as Mayfield has been described as having.
Broward County (Fla.) medical examiner Dr. Harold Schueler, who reportedly stated in an affidavit that the methamphetamine level allegedly found in Mayfield’s urine in testing by Aegis Labs not only was “astronomical,” but also “could not be remotely accurate, unless Mr. Mayfield was deceased or a chronic abuser,” according to the Associated Press.
If noone other than three labs on this list can discern this then what does that say about the testing procedures of all these other labs? Only three labs in this country can catch a chronic meth abuser? I don't think so. There is some serious ass covering trying to go on here. I understand that unless actually observed, you can cheat the system, but that's were the B sample comes in. If the 35 other companies on this list are not good enough for NASCAR/Aegis, what does that say?
FYI:
Scenedaily.com 7/21/09
Mayfield submitted negative….. Bob Pockrass
1. 16. SS396Chevelle said: Jul 22, 2009 at 7:31 AM
For the 100th time, which the other 99 haven't posted. Solution: Judge orders Mayfield to a lap and has him give a blood and hair sample and a urine test all at the same time. The results end the case one way or the other.
1. 26 jlanphere said: Jul 22, 2009 at 10:44 AM
The level is almost impossible. A CHRONIC abuser wil test between 1000 and 33,300 ng/ml. Jeremys levels of 48,000ng/ml the first time and 67,000 ng/ml the second are ludicrous.
1. 31 lacomfort said: Jul 22, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Hair sample, hair sample, hair sample...it will detail all of prior drug history. They do it on Offshore Rigs when you apply for a job...same rules should apply to Nascar drivers.
Jayski.com 7/22/09
Dr. Harold Schueler of the Broward County (Fla.) Medical Examiner's Office, filed an affidavit on behalf of Mayfield that claimed the levels of methamphetamine in NASCAR's test are "astronomical" and "could not be remotely accurate, unless Mr. Mayfield was deceased or a chronic abuser." (Associated Press)(7-22-2009) Comment here
Autoracingdaily.com 7/22/09 Jerry Bonkowski
work very closely with Dr Schueler and let me tell you something about this man. His ethics are impecable. I recently saw some numbers atributted to JM’s test and wondered to myself if it was someone playing a terrible joke. Those numbers couldn’t be true unless someone added meth to the urine sample. I was on the fence about this before but now I’m backing JM.
Posted by Speedster on 07/22 at 01:06 PM
Marybeth
@eaglesoars
To delete your own post, at the end of your post should be a tiny garbage can looking icon. Click on that and it will delete your post.
anons
I posted this in another column but agree about ONLY THREE labs can distinguish between allergy meds and meth? How is it we did not hear about this important CRUCIAL detail.
This kind of throws a boomerang in the whole deal as far as I am concerned.
SOMEBODY has a LOT of explaining to do.
Anon 6:43PM,
Happy to have your comment and opinion but not happy to have your profanity.
Please repost, you made some good points and obviously have a strong viewpoint on this subject.
We have all ages reading this blog, so we work hard to try and keep profanity and hatefull speech away. Thanks.
JD
Thanks Sophia, but I found if you don't have a google account I guess you don't have that option.
I'm going to sign up for one though.
Hair sample, hair sample, hair sample...it will detail all of prior drug history.
Even saying it three times doesn't make it true. And in this case, it is not true at all.
I called my buddy whose drug test got him fired from a cushy job at a Fortune 500 materials company. He was smoking what he described as a "small amount" of meth once every mornign and then once after work. He said he pulled a 82,000 ng/ml the first time. He asked for a re-test, bought one of those kit off the internet, and a week later when he did the observed pee-in-a-cup he pulled a 78,000 ng/ml and lost his job. The cutoff was 1,000 ng/ml for the first test and only 500 ng/ml for the second test, so he wasn't even close to passing. He was pissed because the test didn't work. I wonder why he didn't stop the meth instead.
He continued to smoke meth for another five years before finally getting clean and getting a decent job (although nothing like the one he had).
All this talk about Mayfield being dead with those numbers -- I guess people don't understand how much drugs some of these serious users can do. I was watching VH-1 the other day and they were talking about Ozzy Osbourne snorting a line of cocaine that was 7 feet long on this huge dining room table. Obviously if you or I did that our heart would explode. But for him, it was just another big party.
Eric Clapton was on heroin for more than a decade yet never looked sickly and never missed a concert. Angelina Jolie admits to having a nasty heroin habit early in her acting career, but look at the videos and she was as hot as ever.
There are a million ways to try and rationalize away this test, but to do so you have to believe Aegis is willing to risk their entire multi-million dollar business to frame a part-time driver. Sorry, doesn't make sense.
Could it be that if one is taking Allderall (sp?) and/or something like Claritin-D in addition to meth, that few (only 3?) labs can distinguish that there is meth "behind" the other drugs?
Not being an attorney, this sounds to me like a situation where the judge needs to have a hearing with a gaggle of expert witnesses to determine which lab to use that is capable and fair to both sides.
I do find it intriguing that the NASCAR-bashers keep defending JM because, in essence, he would have gotten past the old NASCAR drug program since he doesn't "look" like a meth-head.
Sure would at least put the NASCAR program in context if someone in th media had asked Brian F or someone at NASCAR to explain in some detail how and who developed the program.
Post a Comment