New info: Head over to our friends at 4wide.com for a copy of what is said to be a negative lab report on Mayfield. Offered by his attorney, it looks like the other side of this issue is slowly creeping toward the surface. It's now or never. Click here for the direct link.
The hero, the underdog and the persecuted. Jeremy Mayfield worked the legal and public relations angles continually since his initial positive urine test for meth.
Right up to the end, he maintained his innocence and pointed to his victory in a recent court ruling that returned him, in theory, to the track.
The end came Wednesday afternoon when NASCAR confirmed through documents submitted to the court that Mayfield has indeed tested positive once again for meth. Now, the logical conclusions begin to fall on the other side.
Mayfield's attorney suggested the first test from Aegis had reported meth levels so high a normal person would have been a zombie. The only exception would have been someone who was a longtime addict. That seems to be someone named Jeremy Mayfield.
The long and confusing story about Mayfield getting lost on the way to a Monday test now makes sense. Mayfield was attempting to dilute his sample and delay the test. This time, it did not work.
NASCAR has basically asked the District Court to end the temporary injunction it granted Mayfield. The judge told NASCAR it could test Mayfield whenever it pleased. They did and confirmed the first result. This time, NASCAR and Aegis took the time to close all the loopholes.
In a way, all of this comes to a close at the only quiet time before the seventeen race run to the 2009 Sprint Cup Series Championship. ESPN2's NASCAR Now, SPEED's Wind Tunnel and The SPEED Report will be the only shows on the air. There is no RaceDay, no SPEED Stage and no This Week in NASCAR.
By the time things crank-up for The Brickyard, Mayfield will have joined the number of other NASCAR license-holders this season who have been asked to leave and get their lives in order because of substance abuse.
This time, let's hope for the sake of the sport that Brian France and Dr. Black do not appear on camera for interviews. In addition, it should be interesting to see which local media types try to get Mayfield on-camera to see what direction his life is taking.
NASCAR's Sprint Cup Series drivers and teams are enjoying about ten days of vacation before the long run to late November. Upon their return, they may all be relieved to know that one troublesome topic is off the table and NASCAR can concentrate on racing once again.
Click here to be reminded of why we used "drowning face down" on the title of this post. The band is Saving Abel.
Story links, click on the title to read the story:
Mayfield again tests postive for meth. (Jenna Fryer from the AP)
NASCAR says Mayfield tests positive. (AJ Perez from USA Today)
Update: Mayfield made a poor decision to go on the Sirius NASCAR channel Wednesday. Among other memorable quotes: "Brian France talking about effective drug policy is like Al Capone talking about effective law enforcement."
Click here for WSOC-TV's Alan Cavanna who got Mayfield on-camera talking about the issues.
Friday update: WBTV learned from a source on Thursday that Mayfield has sold his race shop and equipment located on Highway 49 in Harrisburg, NC.
TDP has followed this story from the start. Readers have been very vocal in their opinions of the NASCAR media and how this story was covered. We would ask for your final opinion on this topic in terms of how you got information about Mayfield and what you think was good and bad in the coverage of this episode?
To add your opinion, just click on the comments button below. This is a family-friendly website, please keep that in mind when posting. Thanks for stopping by, even on this sad day. Good luck to Mayfield in his recovery, it has to start somewhere. Today might be a good choice.
306 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 306 of 306Actually, there are shampoos that can defeat drug tests. THey are obviously much more than "shampoo" alone, usually using a form of bleaching agent that penetrates the hair.
@Phathead -- do you have a link to Mayfield's step-mom's blog or are you only going on what Mayfield said she said about him on her blog? So far, I haven't actually seen her blog, have you?
Thanks to you all for what may be the best group of comments in the three year history of TDP.
You are the real NASCAR fans and I appreciate the intelligence and thought that has gone into these opinions.
Thank you.
JD
How effective is hair follicle testing in detecting drug usage?
In comparison to a urinalysis drug test, cocaine, PCP, opiates, and methamphetamine have proven hair analysis far more effective than urine testing in identifying low-level drug use over an extended period of time since these are normally out of the bloodstream in within 3-7 days (see drug detection times). The detection of marijuana is currently less sensitive than the other drugs in identifying low level drug users, but is considered approximately equal to urinalysis in identifying marijuana users. The detection period for hair is limited only by the length of the hair sample and is approximately 90 days for a standard screen.
Back to TopQ:
How do drugs get into hair?
After a substance is ingested, whether orally, smoked, snorted, or injected, metabolites are produced as the drug is processed by the human body. As these drugs and metabolites circulate in the blood stream, they enter and nourish the hair follicle and are then inserted into the hair strand.
~~~
most hair these days has chemical treatment but the structure of the follicle does not CHANGE. So Phathead was correct.
Cut and paste above since JD doesn't allow links w/o his permission. :)
My room mate is in HR management and indeed they use urine AND sometimes hair for drug testing if it has a short half life as mentioned above. So it IS USED.
p.s. Also on chart in his new office today, room mate saw where methamphetamine leaves the body after 48 hours. He's been asking me for WEEKS if anybody got a hair analysis from JM...I told him NASCAR has not mentioned it or I should say it's NOT been mentioned on TDP.
I'm guessing this shampoo is available at your local head shop. I've never heard of this. Too old for this culture now.
If I'm not mistaken, a Forensic Files episode showed arsenic in varying levels in a dead woman's hair. She was murdered by her husband. I always thought hair was the magic drug detector.
The things learned at TDP.
@ JD, does this topic hold the record for the most comments? I've never seen it go to two pages. Except for race coverage.
In comparison to a urinalysis drug test, cocaine, PCP, opiates, and methamphetamine have proven hair analysis far more effective than urine testing in identifying low-level drug use over an extended period
I think the key there is "low-level drug use over an extended period." And while it may, in this type of scenario, be more effective at identifying the presence of one of these things, it cannot make the fine distinctions that the Aegis testing does.
When I mentioned hair earlier, I was just stating that on the Aegis website, you can scroll thru all the drugs they test for, and how they test. So evidently, another lab could/would use a hair sample.
@ Anon 9:10PM
Ok, then since NASCAR claims that Jeremy is a "chronic user", a hair analysis could verify their claim and make their case stronger? I wonder why they wouldn't want to do that?
Ok, then since NASCAR claims that Jeremy is a "chronic user", a hair analysis could verify their claim and make their case stronger? I wonder why they wouldn't want to do that?
Because Mayfield is claiming to be taking Adderall, which a) can create a false positive on some of the more basic screenings, b) a hair test cannot separate and detect the Adderall from the meth, which the Aegis test can do and did, c) Adderall is used by many meth-heads in the way Sudafed used to be used -- as a way to not use as intended but as an ingredient to cook up your own batch. The hair test may be able to reach a longer time frame than a urine-test, but it cannot as accurately identify amounts taken and when. Being able to test for recent usage is far more useful than long-term tests. Would you rather know "yes he's taken X in the last 90 days" or "yes he's taken 2x the normal amount of X in the last 24 hours." Hair can do the former much muhc better than urine. Urine tests (like Aegis' not all labs) can do the latter much much better than hair.
A positive hair test can be attributed to a false-positive caused by Adderall. A urine test can detect and separate both.
I think it really says something about our society that there is a website called PassYourDrugTest.com. Here is a link to buy the shampoos to beat a hair test:
http://www.passyourdrugtest.com/kits/hair-tests.htm
Hair testing for drugs should not be confused with other kinds of tests
that have a more established record of reliability.
Hair testing for particular DNA, despite using the same sampling
material as a hair test for drugs, is altogether different. For one
thing, the analyte in the actual detection phase of the test is present
in millions of times the quantity as would be the analyte in a drug
test.
Hair drug testing should not be equated with urine drug testing either.
Urine tests, although still not perfect, have several advantages in
terms of reliability:
-- The mechanism of drug deposition in urine is reasonably understood.
With hair it is not clear if the blood, sweat, or sebum is the
depositing medium.
-- The analyte, if present, would be there in larger quantities in urine
than in a hair test.
-- The sample does not need to be washed. The washing step may introduce
contamination and is controversial for other reasons.
-- The probability of environmental contamination is less. Urine comes
from inside the body.
-- With urine, there is no cutting step. Hair needs to be chopped into
small pieces. This is another place where contamination can occur.
-- There is no liquefaction step. Apparently there are three different
ways to liquefy hair. Comparative benefits and hazards do not appear to
be clearly established.
-- The relationship between levels of detected analytes and usage has not
been established with hair tests. There have been no large-scale
controlled dosage studies. Consequently, so-called cutoff levels do not
have a scientific basis and are not standardized.
-- With urine testing there is a great deal of experience: the procedure
is established and is legally certified. Hair tests are not legally
certified. There is no oversight whatsoever.
The Society of Forensic Toxicologists (SOFT) and the Toxicology Section of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences remain on record as not supporting hair testing for employee substance abuse programs due to lack of scientific knowledge, technologies and certification programs.
Excellent info on the hair tests
CLARIFYING earlier statement, my room mate has NOT been asked to get a hair sample at the hospitals or labs he has worked in, but has heard the hair analysis used at conferences but not often. The place he works now (just 2 days) does not do hair analysis..as they bust folks just FINE with drugs.
So I was going to delete my previous post and correct it but here's my correction.
Glad to see savvy people here.Those masking agents for urine/hair might fool somebody once (depending on one's metabolism and other convoluted things)but I would NOT count on it to save somebody's job.
He said urine tests always told the tale for questionable employees for the 17 years he has worked in HR as manager.
He just asked about Mayfield's hair being used as he figured NASCAR had the money in their budget to pay for it. Where he works now has contracts and procedures and their's is for urine/or blood tests for drugs only.
SAMSHA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) currently is not certifying laboratories for drug hair tests.
STATEMENT FROM SAMSHA
Presently, urine is the only specimen collected for Federally regulated Workplace drug testing programs and for most private sector programs. Urine drug testing in the Federally related Workplace is currently recognized as the “Gold Standard” because of its proven accuracy, reliability, and fairness.
I find it hilarious that Jeremy Mayfield's original complaint was that NASCAR failed to follow federal employee drug testing guidelines (even though NASCAR isn't a federal workplace) -- but now he wants to rely on a hair test that isn't even certified under the federal workplace guidelines that were the centerpoint of his entire case. Unreal.
Google Dr Gary Wadler (the critic of NASCAR's policy) and hair drug tests and you will see that even he is not a fan of them and in the Hingis cocaine case said that hair tests are never used in sports because the window of usage they can detect is irrelevant to determining if an item was ingested in conjunction with performance.
JM came off cool as a cucumber in that news video JD posted a link to tonight. If I was ignorant of addict's behavior, I would STILL want to believe Jeremy.
And the guy (Wooten?) that worked with JM says he never ever saw hint of drug use in 10 or 12 hr workdays with the man.
When asked about NASCAR's testing..he was smart enough to say he, Wooten, believed in NASCAR's policy. The man does need a job.
Jeremy should be an actor. He is good.
All addicts are excellent actors. Any drug counselor will tell you this.
I haven't gone back and read all the posts, but I do have a few opinions.
What would Mayfield's stepmother have to gain with her deposition? Is there any evidence that she's being paid by anyone? Would her claims of Mayfield's alleged use be classified as hearsay, since it doesn't appear she has any substantive evidence such as photos or video?
What's with Mayfield filing an unlawful death lawsuit against the stepmom? His dad's death was listed as suicide, but now Mayfield is going to bring this issue up? This is going too far, imho.
Jeff Hammond has now said in his blog on Fox that it's time for Mayfield to go away. I'm beginning to agree. This whole thing is way beyond anything. It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that Mayfield is finished in racing. I wish everyone in the media would let this go, allow both sides to squabble all they want and let the lawyers pull all the tricks out of their bags. And then once this whole thing is over, report the final results.
While Mayfield's reputation is destroyed forever, Nascar has a huge black eye that not even the smoothest talking PR person will be able to hide. Perhaps in the long run, the kick in the teeth that Mayfield handed to the likes of Brian France and all the rest, might be the best thing for the sport. Perhaps Nascar will learn that their iron fisted hold over the sport may not be tolerated. We can only hope.
Anon
TRUE I know addicts can be actors. But with all the media scrutiny, JM still something else.
Also JAYSKI says JM has a sponsor for Indy? When is the last time Jay updated THAT headline. Dated the 15th? JM can NOT drive now.
What would Mayfield's stepmother have to gain with her deposition?
Nothing to gain. She swore under oath that what she said is true and is subject to criminal prosecution for perjury if any of her signed statements are false.
Is there any evidence that she's being paid by anyone?
Any payment to her would not only completely invalidate her claims, but would be looked upon most unfavorably by any court, which would view NASCAR as attempting to buy evidence. NASCAR would have to be dumber than dirt to even think of trying something like this.
Would her claims of Mayfield's alleged use be classified as hearsay, since it doesn't appear she has any substantive evidence such as photos or video?
No, hearsay is the repetition of something you do not have first-hand knowledge of. If she witnessed him doing drugs, her testimony is considered to be "direct evidence" (as opposed to circumstantial evidence). Not only is it not hearsay, but it is exactly the kind of testimony that most cases hinge on: eyewitness accounts.
What's with Mayfield filing an unlawful death lawsuit against the stepmom?
It would seem to be an intimidation tactic. His dad died two years ago, there was never any criminal investigation, and any case would likely be thrown out on summary judgment. Notice how Mayfield says he went to see an attorney about this -- because his high-priced attorneys working on the federal case don't want any part of these silly revenge cases.
@ Sophia
I'm not sure Jeremy can't drive now, I know NASCAR filed to have the suspension re-instated but I don't think there has been a ruling on that. Jeremy's attorney's had until yesterday to file their response. That was one of the reasons that Jeremy didn't go to Chicago, so the ruling didn't have to be made immediately and his attorney's would have time to file their response.
I have never posted here before (only lurked), but I was embarrassed by Roger Cosack's so-called legal analysis on NASCAR Now.
Here is my prediction/analysis on this case (I used to be a criminal attorney, but haven't practiced in 10+ years and never tried a federal case, but I was a prosecutor for years and know the system very well):
NASCAR made a tactical error by relying on an appeal to the Mayfield injunction. They should have taken the second test used that as the basis to acquire their own injunction against Mayfield moving forward. It is easier to get an injunction than have one that has been decided overturned on a rule of law by an appellate panel. Why didn't NASCAR simply file a new motion, seeking to prevent Mayfield from attending a future race based solely on the 2nd test? Seems an easier bar to jump over than winning an appeal, which required fed. justices to find fault in the original ruling on a rule of law (not on a factual basis, per se).
Still, I think they will win the appeal -- and then here is what happens:
The two cases will move forward. It may be six months before the next hearing is set. In the meantime, there will be lots of discovery (evidence gathering) in the form of depositions. Mayfield will have to sit in a room and answer questions under oath from NASCAR attorneys (and will want to have his attorneys question NASCAR, as well). The problem: he's got to have his $300/hr (minimum!) attorney with him at all times. He probably wants two attorneys and they probably cost more than that for a federal case. Let's say NASCAR let's him off easy and only deposes him and his wife for three days each (god knows it will be much longer given the scope of what they are discussing and all the interruptions for objections and the attorneys to discuss whether or not a question is ok or if an answer should be given. That's six days x 8 hours a day x $300/hr per attorney x two attorneys. You get the point. It will go on and on. Mayfield could realistically expect to be deposed for 50 hours, his wife just as much. And how many hours would his team want to depose a myriad of NASCAR officials, lab technicians, experts, etc.
If Mayfield can somehow get the money to do this, there will be weeks worth of pre-trial motions, each motion at a different hearing, likely weeks apart. If both sides decided that they wanted to go to trial ASAP with no shenannigans, I think the earliest they would get thru pre-trial motions, jury selection, etc, and seat a panel it would be 18 months from now. Oh, and about $300,000-$1,500,000 in legal fees. No, I am not joking. Not at all. This is federal court, so spending that much is a given if this thing moves forward beyond the next few weeks.
I predict Mayfield will walk away from his case within four weeks. He will claim he is too broke to continue (probably true) and he will be able to maintain innocence without ever having to offer up the evidence in court. Unfortunately for him, he yanked on NASCAR's chain so hard early in this fiasco that they countersued him, so walking away might not be that easy. He will probably have to sign something saying he will never sue NASCAR again and that he claims no wrongdoing by NASCAR against him in order to fully get out of this. He'll sign that and then can tell anyone he wants how he was unfairly run out of the sport.
The only alternative to the above scenario is that he gets help, enters a program, and who knows maybe in a year or two everyone forgets how ugly this is and he can become an inspirational story of redemption and overcoming addiction. He can use that message to either get back on track, or else carve out a nice career as a motivational speaker. If he kicked meth, found God, cleaned up his life, everyone would want to hear his story.
From where I sit, he either has that choice or else continue to use drugs until things end poorly.
JD - great blog. I've never posted her before, only lurked.
As arbitrary and arrogant as NASCAR can be, why would NASCAR mount an elaborate conspiracy to destroy Jeremy Mayfield? When one considers that dozens of people, at minimum, would be involved in the chain of custody for the tests and samples, how does NASCAR get everyone to participate in the frame-up? Are all of Aegis' individual lab technicians out to get Mayfield? In my opinion, given modern ethics, if there was truly a conspiracy, somebody would be shopping exclusive insider information to the tabloids by now.
There have been some excellent posts here with diverse opinions. However, other than some predictable "NASCAR is evil" posts, I have not seen or read anything that demonstrates that NASCAR and Aegis have entered into an illegal conspiracy to "get" Mayfield. The consequences of a criminal conspiracy include prison. Why would anybody take that risk just to get poor ol' Jeremy? That is basically what JM is saying.
I think that if NASCAR actually had the power to launch a frame-up conspiracy in order to provide an example, they would not have chosen a chronic whiner like Mayfield. His finger pointing would have been predictable based on his history.
I just don't understand the conspiracy logic.
fbu1
Since JM lives somewhere between Charlotte and Statesville, NC from what I have seen written and there are so many NASCAR reporters in the area, it does strike me as curious that no one has written anything about where the qualified labs are in the area in relation to where JM lives.
PocketTens, thanks a lot. Our readers run the show.
Richard,
There is a new post up about the dynamic Monday NASCAR Now show that ESPN has lined-up.
I would appreciate it if you could suggest those types of issues on that post.
Looking for some media reviews on the Mayfield story this week.
I am also curious about that and other things. I just can't believe we have not heard from some of the other folks suspended this season by NASCAR for drug use.
What a wild week.
Thanks again everyone!
JD
@ PocketTens, great comment. Thanks for the insider information.
Just curious, Jeremy's attorney(s) wouldn't take this case on a contingency basis, would they? I don't even see how he has paid his legal fees up to now.
Good point Dot. I realize that even the start and park guys can make a some cash, but could his lawyers be banking on him getting re-instated adain and qualifing for a race to get paid? Among his assets his former GM said he had "5 or 6 cars and a trailer" to sell.
Good point Dot. I realize that even the start and park guys can make a some cash, but could his lawyers be banking on him getting re-instated adain and qualifing for a race to get paid? Among his assets his former GM said he had "5 or 6 cars and a trailer" to sell.
Before the district court hearing JM said or included in his suit that he was having to sell peronal items to pay expenses. On Wednesday ESPN quotes JM as saying "I'm prepared to go all the way and have the backing to do it if it takes everything I've got." Does this mean that JM has a mystery backer helping him pay for his court fight?
I'm sure his lawyer is working for a smaller retainer and a portion of the settlement they hoped to squeeze out of NASCAR.
Mayfield will not be getting any race winnings. He has no employees, and no money to buy parts. I read a quote from him earlier today where he admits he's pretty much given up on the idea of racing. Not only that, one of his suppliers, Triad Racing Technologies, has sued for non-payment.
It's going to be interesting to see how long his lawyers stick around. PocketTens figures four weeks. I think that's generous, given the second positive test, but I'll defer to the expert. :-)
--KarenB
PocketTens
Thanks for taking the time to type out details of the $$$ involved. Geez, I wonder how ANYBODY can try and clear their name. Might be easier to go thru rehab and then write a book how "I wasn't really an addict but wanted my job back."
Cheaper than legally fighting to clear one's name. Mercy.
Richard in N.C. said:
"Does this mean that JM has a mystery backer helping him pay for his court fight?"
I'm sure his former employees wonder that too.
In fact, the spouse of a former employee called into Sirius today and said Jeremy stilled owed her husband the last 1 or 2 paychecks.
Said Jeremy claims he doesn't have the money to cover the checks, yet somehow he has the money to pay his high-priced lawyers.
The lady was very distraught, claiming her husband was having a hard time finding another job and they are having difficulty feeding/providing for their family.
My heart goes out to her family and the other innocent former employees caught up in this.
I can guarantee them all one thing: Jeremy could care less about any harm or suffering he has caused them. That is just the modus operandi of addicts.
Spaw,
Great comment but your "pigs" line was not the type of language that we use on this blog.
You have good points, so I hope you can find a moment to repost.
Thanks,
JD
"This time, let's hope for the sake of the sport that Brian France and Dr. Black do not appear on camera for interviews."
Wow, never expected that one.
One does not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out why Mayfield's step-mother came out against him ... imagine the army of PIs that NASCAR has engaged to spy on JM and to dig up whatever dirt that they can find. 10+ years of meth use and no one but the "evil stepmother" knew? Please.
She's smirking all the way to the bank this morning. Cha-ching, baby.
a very wise person once said: "the primitive mind is drawn to the shiny object." in my opinion, mayfield's step-mother is a shiny object, nothing more.
eyes on the prize, folks, not the shiny object.
Even with all this new information that has come to light, I still find it hard to trust Nascar. I can't reasonably believe that Nascar would ever be proven wrong; with the "monopoly" that the sport it, I wouldn't put it past them to fix these results to prove themselves correct. The can't afford to lose a case. It would open up a new world not only in drug testing cases, but also penalties and general rule violations.
The levels of meth found in Jeremy would either have him as a "walking zombie" or a meth addict for many years. If the latter was true, we would be able to see side effects of the drug.
Not do defend Jeremy, but all of this still doesn't add up for me.
Hannah said...
I can't reasonably believe that Nascar would ever be proven wrong; with the "monopoly" that the sport it, I wouldn't put it past them to fix these results to prove themselves correct.
July 17, 2009 9:41 AM
Great Post and proves a big point. The folks that believe NASCAR is the evil empire will all ways believe that no matter what happens. Even if they win in a court of law and prove the tests were accurate you will always believe they covered up to win.
You have an unrealistic idea of just how much power NASCAR really has if now you're thinking they can manipulate they can buy off businesses that are fare larger and actually have more power but would certainly risk there reputation and entire business for the likes of NASCAR and that they can control and manipulate the Federal Court system.
If I'm not mistaken the ASA still runs races, ARCA runs races, and they even run races on tracks owned by ISC, a division of NASCAR, so NASCAR can not be a monopoly. A monopoly means they will not allow any other racing series to survive, that the are the only one. Every weekend I watch hours of racing and lots of it has no affiliation to NASCAR what so ever, so how can it be a monopoly?
Now does the France family and NASCAR officials control NASCAR with an iron fist? Yes they do, and they have every right to do so because it is a privately owned business, and it is privately held corporation which means they do not sell stock on the open market. The general public can't buy shares of NASCAR, it is 100% owned and managed by the France Family and their appointed representatives.
That is Free Enterprise in America, you are allowed to start your own business, work hard, come up with creative ideas and grow it to be successful and as big as you can. There is not a point where the government says you're to successful and people are complaining because you did too good a job so we're going to take it away and force you to share it with people you don't really want to.
sorry for all the typos, I was doing other things while trying to type that.
Anon 8:29A,
The circumstances have changed and both France and Black have made statements that should not have been made public.
This time, the judge said test him whenevery you want. NASCAR tested and Mayfield was again confirmed as someone who clearly tested positive for high levels of meth.
Nothing was violated, the test was done in his home, and the court cleared NASCAR to do it.
The bottom line is that unless something pops-up that is completely earth shattering, Mayfield tested postive for meth a second time.
Aegis puts a bar code on the samples for the lab, no name. The company drug tests for all different kinds of public and private companies.
Nothing except legal maneuvering and public relations spin has come of Mayfield's claims of innocence.
That is why the Monday show is going to be so interesting.
I fully expect this debate to translate over to that program.
JD
According to the court documents, Aegis has been testing users for meth for more than 15 years. In those 15 years, they have detected meth in someone's urine more than 7,000 times! Of those 7,000 times, not a single case has ever been shown to be a false-positive.
This according to court documents filed by NASCAR.
You can distrust NASCAR all you want, but the conspiracy theorists have nothing - NOTHING! - to damage to credibility of Aegis. Their reputation is sterling.
"The levels of meth found in Jeremy would either have him as a "walking zombie" or a meth addict for many years. If the latter was true, we would be able to see side effects of the drug."
That is simply not true. You are thinking of a meth junkie, which is different from a meth addict.
Please folks, shake from your mind the picture of the sterotypical meth junkie we've all seen on tv and the web.
Trust me, sometimes you can't tell from just looking.
I'm tired and my head hurts, so I'm going back to bed. Wake me when it's over.
Dodge Boy from Canada
Hannah said:
Even with all this new information that has come to light, I still find it hard to trust Nascar. I can't reasonably believe that Nascar would ever be proven wrong; with the "monopoly" that the sport it, I wouldn't put it past them to fix these results to prove themselves correct. The can't afford to lose a case. It would open up a new world not only in drug testing cases, but also penalties and general rule violations.
Please tell us how they would accomplish this?
I've asked the question but, it hasn't been answered yet.
What benefit does NASCAR get by "Fixing" the tests.
As a few others have said,
How does NASCAR get literally hundreds of people and numerous companies to participate and ALL tell the same story and convince ALL of them to risk their lively hoods, business's, professional and personal reputations and the possibility of Federal Perjury charges and prison time for the France family?
And why couldn't NASCAR be found to be wrong? It could happen. Or has NASCAR added the district court to their cabal?
Dave in Milwaukee
Hey JD - since TWIN won't touch the Mayfield story, what are they going to do for Monday? Another scanner show? One of their clip-heavy recaps?
Anon 4:15PM,
It is a special on the Roush Performance Engineering company.
Irony?
JD
If Jack Roush says anything about tweaking his engines, I'm gonna die laughing.
And I'm fine with TWIN not addressing the Mayfield situation in depth. They're too fluffy for that sort of issue. That's better left to a show like NASCAR Now. We'd only get a cursory examination of the issue, and that's exactly what we've been saying we don't want to see. We can't have it both ways, folks.
--KarenB
JD - THANK YOU. I get a lot more quality information on TDP than the majority of what I see in the so-called NASCAR media.
That interview was interesting. Having seen it, I am back to my stance before Wednesday. I am going to sit back and let this play out because this is far too serious with too far reaching consequences to just simply sit here and speculate. Heaven forbid Jeremy is telling the truth and NASCAR is out to run him into the ground after what could have easily been a "false positive".
The consequence if Jeremy is correct could crumble all credibility as well as the foundation of the sport. My hope is that we get the truth out of all this and that IF Jeremy is an addict, that he gets the help he needs and that NASCAR is not playing a Tim Richmond-esque game with Mayfield.
Regarding the Friday update ... I wonder how the Stavros Brothers feel about Jeremy selling their shop? Jeremy only leased the building.
Dave,
Your last comment was quite interesting.
Forgot about the aftermath.
I would have a hard time believing that NASCAR is playig at that again.
NASCAR may at times be arrogant but stupid, shameless and ready to kill their sport?
I'm not buying it.
But, it does bring a litle different angle to the conversation.
In case others don't know what Dave and I are mentioning, look up Tim Richmaond on wikipedia.
Dave in Milwaukee in both posts
I have a hard time buying it as well annon. Which has always been my question to people that defend Jeremy. Why would NASCAR do that?
Arrogance can coincide with stupidity at times I suppose and perhaps after the false positive and press conference they felt there was no going back and will take this until Jeremy breaks or they can drum up enough sentiments against him he is forced to just disappear. Just a devil's advocate moment there.
NASCAR has not been willing to publicly admit they have adjusted the way in which they retrieve, label and test samples though drivers like JPM and others have stated that much has changed for certain. Perhaps the policy is flawed but I have no idea why the testing facility would be in NASCAR's pocket even IF NASCAR had an axe to grind.
The questions about why against Jeremy outweigh his persistent defense so far. We will see though.
I read Marty Smith's article today.
I can't believe Jeremy's attorneys are allowing him to speak to the media. That interview shown on NN did not help his cause. The more he speaks, the bigger the hole he seems to dig.
Never being in a legal situation myself, I would think even if you're wronged, wouldn't your attorney tell you to "button up"?
This one sentence was telling though. "If we prove all those things we're going to get a bunch of money from NASCAR." Diehl said.
Is he hoping it's another Grant settlement without a trial? I think NASCAR is going to fight this one to the bitter end.
One thing about Tim Richmond and I'm not defending NASCAR. AIDS in the 80s was a new disease. There was a lot of misinformation back then. Remember Ryan White? He was a kid who wasn't allowed to go to school. We've come a long way since then.
I find it hard to believe Diehl is happy with JM's comments - unless he hopes NASCAR might actually want to settle if it becomes too much of a spectacle. In any event, I don't think he could say he didn't like JM's statements since that would just hurt his client. Diehl did say "he" had not told JM to shut up - he didn't say that no one in his office had told JM to shut up.
@ Richard, Per Jayski's news, Jeremy's going against his attorney's wishes by speaking to the media.
I'm betting Jeremy will be looking for new counsel.
well, the amount of information NOT included in that "lab report" is astounding. are there more pages and that's just a cover page? if not, it says nothing substantial and the "mayfield tested negative" claim is not supported by details and specifics.
in contrast, the aegis report included in nascar's filing for relief from the injunction is specific as to what was tested for, how it was tested and what the results were . . . and they even used scientific language and everything!
at least now i understand why nascar doesn't want the B sample from 7/6 tested by labcorp" "there's no 'there' there"!
The LabCorp test doesn't impress me. If you go to their website and drill down, you'll come to a "Drugs of Abuse Reference Guide". It quite clearly states that the "Detection Time in Urine" is one to two days. Mayfield himself has stated he's getting tested every two to five days, which obviously falls outside the detection window. When he goes every day, at the same time of day, I'll be less skeptical.
Also, this test was conducted today(Friday). Where are the negative tests from last week?
And I want to know that these were observed tests. Considering how much of a fuss he put up about the Aegis test in his home last week, I suspect these tests were not observed. And why are they on the Vitality Anti-Aging Center and Med Spa account? Is that where the samples were collected?
Jeez, I'm starting to sound like one of the black helicopter crowd, but on the pro-NASCAR side. Look what you people have done to me...
--KarenB
He might as well have typed up the note himself. That is the lamest so-called lab report I have ever seen. Everyone should really take the time to compare it to the Aegis lab report submitted to the court. I'm not sure what submitting this document to the court would do for Mayfield - it looks like a fax cover sheet!
FYI, red and I are the same person. Either that or we're two bodies (one in Canada, one in the US) sharing the same mind. :-)
--KarenB
What good does a negative test dated today prove? For all we know, the contentious, profanity-filled confrontation at his house scared him into how busted he was, and he abstained for two weeks then was tested today. Big deal!
And a moderate user of drugs can test both positive and negative -- positive when they use, negative when they don't. Some drugs stay in your system a long time, some are indetectable after a short time.
One thing is for certain: The two tests that Mayfield tested positive are the two tests he didn't know he would have to take that day!
Oh, and something else just occurred to me? He must have stopped taking the Adderall, because it would show up as a positive for both d & l-amphetamine in the amphetamine test.
I guess he's off his ADHD meds.
--KarenB
@ KarenB & red,
This whole thing just gets curiouser and curiouser doesn't it?
It's just like a soap opera. We could call it, As the Drug Test Spins.
This whole story is like a train wreck. You know you shouldn't look, but you just have to.
While surfing the net, I did see that Mr Mayfield's death was investigated twice. Suicide both times. Let's see how far that lawsuit gets.
@Dot
Funny about the soap comment. Somewhere this week I called this saga "Days of Our Lies". :)
I am confused where I posted what though now, especially since JD switch the blogs tonight.
I must say I finally got thru the video posted on Jayski or maybe here from Charlotte. Jeremy is believable (Yes I am WELL aware addicts/con men are)
I am just glad they finally showed the bulldog in the video...I kept wondering what the noise was and even muted my laptop twice to make sure the off camera noise was the video.
Oh and that cover letter of "test results"...might have just as well written it in crayon.
Jeremy appears to still have lots of supporters out there.
I like the train wreck analogy, Dot. It just keeps getting increasingly weird.
I suggest we just call it As the Wrench Turns, or perhaps just stick to the tried-and-true Twilight Zone.
--KarenB
kbaskin
True, TWILIGHT ZONE does seem the best fit for this hot mess.
Come on! It's the same place that prescribed his Adderall. This is absurd.
That "clinic" has opened itself to scrutiny by the FDA and the state of North Carolina.
@ dear Sophia, Yes, I remember your soap opera comment.
I didn't realize JD changed the first page when I made my comment. I looked at the Labcorp report. Really? That was it? I'm beginning to question the competency of Jeremy's attorneys. I'd be embarrassed to submit that to a judge.
I wonder if Shana has been advised to stick by her man during all this. Even if she wants out, she'll have to wait until this is over. It will be, sooner than we think.
Everything is relative, and I really do believe that offerring the LabCorp report into evidence would be preferable to calling Bubba the Love Sponge to testify as an expert witness - but not nearly as much fun.
@kbaskins....you aren't even close to the black helicopter crowd. Made the mistake of reading another blogger and comments that followed...linked from Jayski...now those people are part of the black helicopter crowd.
@Dot...perfect...train wreck, but can't look away. This is the most I have ever posted on TDP. I may have to start watching the races live so I can post with you guys...LOL!
I'll tell you one thing...for the many that hate NASCAR so vehemently, I totally don't understand why they still follow NASCAR. When I got disgusted with MLB (a game I loved from childhood) I just stopped watching. Same with the NFL & NBA. Just got tired of drugs and thugs.
@ West Coast Diane:
I am in the black helicopter crowd, but on the opposite side. I'm finding fault with everything Mayfield does, not NASCAR. But what it comes down to in the end is I'm not pro-NASCAR, nor pro-Mayfield, I'm pro-science. That stance is making me nit-pick everything Mayfield does.
Which is weird, because I've never been on the side of NASCAR before. I feel so dirty...
--KarenB
Diane, I don't think the fans of Nascar who question those who run Nascar, hate the sport. What we hate is the way the sport is currently being run. Making up rules as they go, phantom debris cautions, failure to provide drivers and crews total and complete information pertaining to their drug program, refusing to honor the history of the sport, the perception that their rules are applied unevenly and that the stars are protected while the small guys are penalized more harshly. This doesn't mean we want to stop watching the sport, but that we want to see the sport be the best it can be.
Hey guys...I am not talking about folks that question NASCAR on the things you mentioned. I've thrown my share of rocks as well. Notice I used the word vehemently. Some of the posters on the other sites are down right vile and offer no suggestions, just accusations. Many with no basis of fact. They just sound like angry people.
Definitely not the Planeteers style. Which is why I rarely venture to other sites. Sorry if you felt I was talking about posters at TDP.
@ dar, Brava.
This has been my feeling for years. I can't even add to your comment, except to say, this Jeremy mess has put NASCAR in a favorable light for once.
Jeremy Mayfield is showing all of us why people refer to drugs as "dope".
You know I had completely discounted Lisa Mayfields testimony, it being just to weird and I really felt that the scientific facts of this case spook loud enough for me not to try and figure out if she is lying or not. However Jeremy's reactions of now threatening to go after her for wrongful death suit that he first said, but in the TV interview he told the reporter that she either conspired to have, or actually killed his father. One thing I give that reporter great credit for is then she told us that investigating the incident with the county sheriff's office the actual incident report said that it was investigated and determined that it was a suicide, they found 2 guns on him and drug paraphanailia.
Do I hear a ...ding, ding, ding?
In my mind that opens the possibility that it is very possible she did see him doing drugs, they may all have been doing them together? Just seems more possible to me now than before that info was put out there.
I also think it odd getting prescriptions for adderal from an Anti-Ageing and Vitality Clinic but utilizing the clinics services could help mask the "appearance". As pointed out so many times here, the white color crowd can and has been proven to go years without detection because of the fact they have the finances to go to the spas, purchase the cremes, have regular dental visits etc. etc. The folks we see on TV are the ones that have already slid so far down the tube to be flat broke, often homeless cause when they do get money it's spent on the drug for the high, not on trying to look pretty.
Marty Smith has pumped out another article from the layers.
http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/nascar/cup/columns/story?columnist=smith_marty&page=DoorToDoor
kbaskins said...
"FYI, red and I are the same person. Either that or we're two bodies (one in Canada, one in the US) sharing the same mind. :-)
--KarenB"
so THAT'S where the other half of my mind has gone: canada! not a bad choice, actually.
Dot said...
"@ KarenB & red,
This whole thing just gets curiouser and curiouser doesn't it?"
oh, dot, that is one of my favorite phrases of all time: "curiouser and curiouser" indeed! i re-read alice in wonderland every new year's day b/c it serves to remind me of just how bizarre the world of lewis carroll truly was and how lucky we are to have that set down in print.
and, unlike some of us, he wasn't even a "child of the 60s"!
there's a reason jefferson airplane used carroll's images as a lyrical starting point for "white rabbit." and how very appropriate to this situation . . .
Anonymous said...
"Jeremy Mayfield is showing all of us why people refer to drugs as "dope".
sounds like a line the late, great george carlin would have used -- or maybe he did?
i think i need a race or three today to get my half-brain back from canada and remember why i love our sport so much.
Again, sorry for the typo's. Old fat fingers on a laptop don't always react the way they should. lol
It always looks so good in this little box, but once posted they pop out at me. Hope you can under stand what I was saying.
I meant collar, NOT color and the guns and drug paraphanailia was found near his body.
and I meant BY using the Clinic's services, NOT but.
@Red
WOW! A WHITE RABBIT reference in all of this..great song of it's time.I can hear the tune now..and will probably go thru my mind the rest of the day ("Ear worms" can happen with GREAT songs, too! :)
All opinions said, I am no longer able to root for JM, but I have to say, that picture JD uses at the top of this blog, the close up of Jeremy's eyes...as I look at them, my heart really aches for wherever his mind is...he truly believes what he is saying to everybody.
But with the troubled family history, his father's suicide, (what happened to Jeremy's biological mom?) and all that has transpired, it's very sad. I wonder what his childhood must have been like..not to make excuses, just trying to understand.
And so very grateful he never causes a horrible crash on the track or off.
Hope he gets whatever help he needs.:(
Thanks ES. What I took out of that interview is that the lawyer is more concerned about showing that NASCAR deprived JM of making money than showing he's clean.
Slater,
If you were NASCAR, wouldn't you think about dipping into the old cash drawer right now to make this go away? I would.
JD
@ JD
I'm sure they'd like to, but they can't. That would be admitting the possibility of mistakes being made in their drug testing procedures. It would certainly raise doubts in my mind, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who would think this way. And their drug testing policy become a laughingstock.
NASCAR has drawn a mile-wide line in the sand when it comes to drugs, and while it might be easier to settle out of court from a financial and PR standpoint, it's impossible to back down now. If they do, they might as well forget about having a drug policy.
And if NASCAR did settle out of court, think of all the other banned crew members who would be lining up with their hands out. NASCAR has no option but to see this through, for credibility reasons.
--KarenB
I'd have to agree with Karen. I believe they'd rather spend whatever they had to in legal fees than to give JM a dime. He did get a little personal this week, so I can imagine there might be a little spite involved.
One more thing, if I may. I've tried to read as much as possible about this thing to form an opinion. I had heard about him changing his story a couple times. But this morning when I saw on cnnsi that "toxic fumes from a wreck at Talladega caused him to test positive" I about fell outta my chair.
Oh most assuredly agree with KarenB. For NASCAR to settle just to make it go away would be the worst. If they really have the scientific evidence why would they settle? They would lose all credibility even if it was one of those..."not admitting we did anything wrong, just want it to go away" settlements. Just like Michael Jackson. Minute he made the payment to make it go away, many said "guilty".
Next step is the ruling by the judge given the second positive test results. That should be interesting given his first ruling.
Word veri...diangect...my name is in there :-)
Oh most assuredly agree with KarenB. For NASCAR to settle just to make it go away would be the worst. If they really have the scientific evidence why would they settle? They would lose all credibility even if it was one of those..."not admitting we did anything wrong, just want it to go away" settlements. Just like Michael Jackson. Minute he made the payment to make it go away, many said "guilty".
Next step is the ruling by the judge given the second positive test results. That should be interesting given his first ruling.
Word veri...diangect...my name is in there :-)
It's just shameful that CNN can't be bothered to do a bit of basic research to find out that he tested positive for only the illegal form of meth. Seriously, how difficult is this?
The only way this scenario could be possible is if someone had stuff Mayfield's car with the illegal form of meth, and he had a fire during his wreck.
Wow. I just solved the mystery. Huh. Who knew it was that easy?
--KarenB
P.S. Sorry, folks, I seem to be in an extremely sarcastic mood today. I'd have fallen out of my chair with you Slater, if only CNN's assertion wasn't so freakin' pathetic.
You know, one of the normal things in a settlement is that the person being paid never says another word.
That was certainly the case with Mo Grant. Silence is suddenly golden and her outrage is suddenly gone. Imagine that.
Mayfield says NASCAR is right, he was wrong and pockets the retirement money.
With the Chase only seven races away, I would be thinking about it.
Ya know where I am coming from?
JD
JD,
I'm not Slater, but I have to answer.
NO, definitely NO! IMHO that is the reason everyone distrusts NASCAR now, because even cases they're legal and right about they have done that far to often giving fans the impression they must be admitting guilt. That they knew they couldn't win it in court so they just paid folks off to shut up.
IF NASCAR is ever going to be considered legitimate, upstanding and taken seriously they need to follow through with all cases through the legal system and win them once and for all, which will end speculation on the legality of whatever the issue was.
Also IMHO if they just paid off they'd be selling out the credentials of Aegis Labs too, giving the impression that they were not following the law and had stuff to hide also. I could just imagine what Aegis's other clients would be thinking and wondering, and questioning their own programs.
On a personal note;
I have been an avid stock car racing fan since the mid 50's. I have participated in different ways, I was a car owner at a couple of local tracks for a few years, I raced myself on lower levels at local and regional races. Anyway I have not always approved of some of the decisions or methods Big Bill used but I still considered the best sanctioning body out there. Do I think they're perfect? Heck NO! But I do think they have done a fantastic job growing the sport. But just keep pulling out the ole check book and not proving their legality then even I will finally start questioning it.
I do not believe Jeremy was targeted, I do not believe NASCAR decided they were going to make an example of him. BUT at this point with the dog and pony show JM has started they do NOW need to make an example of him to show the team owners, the drivers and the fans that they do have the best most comprehensive and legal drug testing program in all of sports.
If they don't it could honestly be the beginning of the end for NASCAR and we may all be watching and complaining about ARCA.
Just on Ole Pharts opinion.
By the way JD, thanks for keeping this place going.
@ KBaskins, I agree with you. It's gone too far for NASCAR to payoff Jeremy to make this go away. NASCAR needs for this to go all the way.
This is exactly how all the TV comml lawyers make their money. Insurance companies would rather pay than take the cases to trial. It's a lot cheaper.
I think this is what Jeremy's lawyers are hoping for. Big payoff for little work.
@ JD
I still don't think NASCAR could (or should) go that route. Paying Mayfield, even if he does admit to a drug problem and goes into rehab, questions the credibility of testing program. The financial component of the settlement makes it seem like NASCAR is buying Mayfield's cooperation, and to my mind taints the whole process. After all, we know Mayfield is probably hurting for money right now, and he might be willing to take the easy way out.
Having said that, I don't think Mayfield would agree. After watching those interviews, there's no way he's going to admit to using meth, even for a payoff.
According to some websites I've read, a few of the symptoms a meth user (which is not the same as a meth abuser) exhibits are excessive talking, excessive excitation, delusions of grandeur, and a false sense of confidence and power. People like that don't go away quietly.
--KarenB
JD, I wouldn't give JM one red cent. His lawyers are not going to stick with him as he floats downriver. Even they're not that stupid. And why would NASCAR cave anyway? They've got the upperhand. Just to be rid of a nuisance lawsuit? Very doubtful.
Mo Grant, on the other hand, most likely deserved her settlement since heads rolled after she made her claim.
I can't see NASCAR folding and offering a settlement just to get this mess over with before the Chase.
1. It's lasting effects would be felt way beyond this year's Chase.
2. NASCAR may be a sport, but it's also entertainment. And from that standpoint there is no "bad" publicity --- just publicity. NASCAR is suddenly cropping up on shows that wouldn't have given them the time of day before because NASCAR was considered inferior.
Sorry for the double post...that's never happened before. Posting challenged I guess...:-).
NASCAR needs to go to mat on this one, if they truly think they have an ironclad case. In the Grant case, they found evidence that at least some of Ms. Grant accusations were true. Even fired a 2 officials, if I remember correctly. Totally would understand why you would reach a settlement in that case.
The difference with the Grant case is she had a ton of evidence on her side. NASCAR terminated several people accused in the complaint and took steps to address any future situations. Mayfield on the other hand does not have one single fact on his side. He does have an attorney who talks real purty and can throw out catchy terms like "either a walking zombie or he's dead".
jd said:
"If you were NASCAR, wouldn't you think about dipping into the old cash drawer right now to make this go away?"
hell to the NO! i wouldn't think about it, i wouldn't dream about it, i wouldn't hallucinate about it! just NO!
if nascar were to "reach an undisclosed agreement," the entire drug testing policy would be trash. in addition, the previous suspensions would immediately be questionable and that would certainly open the door for more court cases and settlements. so, financially, it makes no sense to not take this to a conclusion.
the zero tolerance policy exists for a very good reason: there are people involved with very fast cars at the race track who have used illegal drugs, sometimes while competing. that's what's led to this case. and i support nascar's determination to get those people away from the track and require them to get some help. even those who insist on seeing the black helicopters hovering above this case can agree on that much.
nascar states that a driver has tested positive for an illegal drug and the driver contests it. if nascar rolls on this, then nothing they say or do would have any authority in the sport. it'd be a case of being hard as all get-out but only until someone complained. if they settle this without going to court and getting a verdict, then all they'd be saying is "we stand firm in our beliefs . . . at least until you make it so unpleasant that it's easier for us to pay you to go away."
(and it would establish a remarkably bad precedent that other sports would then have to contend with going forward.)
nope, this time, i want nascar to stick to what they've said in their court filings is paramount: the safety of the drivers, officials, participants and fans. there's not enough money in the nascar coffers to put that at risk.
besides, didn't our moms all tell us about about "not rewarding bad behavior"?
been reading this w/interest from the beginning. First, let me state I have a general mistrust of Nascar. And most of it stems from my opinion of BF. I won't expound on it here, because JD would delete my comment in a heartbeat! So I was skeptical of the positive test of JM at first. But the more I read & then the circumstances surroundingthe taking of the 2nd test had me leaning towards Nascar. And w/the 2nd positive result, I am convinced JM has taken drugs. For how long or if he is an addict I don't have enough evidence to decide that. Mum-in-law sideshow is a "he said, she said" situation imo. But Nascar is going to have to play hard ball & not fold, no matter how nasty the headlines get. And they are pretty bad right now..
No settlement.
JD, it may be the cheaper route but JM took shots at NASCAR, AEGIS, the policy, and the head honcho himself. You don't settle with someone who crossed the line and made bold faced personal attacks.
Take this all the way or take JM until he has spent his last dime. Either JM caves, NASCAR wins this case, or by some stroke of God or the wizards above, JM steals one out from under all of us are the only acceptable outcomes in all this.
Mo Grant was one thing because NASCAR admitted (even without coming out and saying it directly) to wrongdoing in that case. They settled since there were odds that they could lose the case.
Note KY Speedway, NASCAR hasn't dare settled with them. They saw what settling with Texas caused and they won't do it again.
Sometimes you have to take the fight to the dog. Thats the case here.
I continue to wonder whether NASCAR's history of settling lawsuits might have emboldened JM (and maybe his attys) to figure that he could make this go away if he put up a fight. The only settlement that I could see NASCAR taking is JM admits that he had in fact taken some banned substance and NASCAR agrees to pay for his rehab.
The affidavit from JM's step-mother reminds me of a mob trial - most of the time eyewitnesses are not pillars of society.
Not being an attorney, it does seem to me that the more this goes on and the more digging NASCAR does, the more there become criminal overtones. For instance I can envision in court "Mr. Mayfield, have you ever purchased meth from a drug dealer?" Mayfield- "I refuse to answer on the grounds of my 5th amendment rights." Civil case over.
There is NO WAY Nascar will give JM "retirement money " just so he will "go away". Can you imagine the message this sends to other drivers: Is your career winding down? No problem - just violate the drug policy, whine on NASCAR Now that the program is unfair, then wait for your check. No chance.
Remember, NASCAR counter-sued Mayfield. What is most likely is that the settlement will include Mayfield signing a sheet of paper that doesn't admit any drug use, but states that NASCAR did not wrong him any way, shape, or form - in exchange for them dropping the suit. Because if they decide to continue with the suit, he HAS to pay lawyers and it will crazy-expensive.
If there is a settlement, it will be Mayfield settling with NASCAR, not NASCAR settling with Mayfield.
Well, good points but there is one thing that is at risk.
That would be the entire sport.
TV ratings in the tank, fan base not in the stands, manufacturers going away, economy in recession, all that fun stuff.
Mayfield goes to rehab, apologizes for his comments and is never heard from again. Still seems like a deal in comparison to the sport itself struggling to field three series for 2011.
As a Libra, I normally try to settle everything all the time. Just my nature...
JD
I don't know - if NASCAR settles with Mayfield, then what does every other crew member suspended this year do? Of course, they sue, too. The drug policy would be dead.
Considering Aegis claims more than 7,000 positive meth results in 15 years of testing, and not a single false-positive or oveturned result, I seriously doubt all of the sudden that their two most recent, and perhaps most high profile tests are suddenly wrong. Especially the second test. If ever there was going to be massive oversight to make sure everything was done perfectly it would be on that second test. Did you see how many affadavits NASCAR files on the second Mayfield test? They sent like 6 guys to his house to all make sure they all saw the same thing and could ALL testify to chain of custody. I bet it was the same in the lab, with a half-dozen lab techs double checking the work and ready to testify in redundancy.
The only check Mayfield will be getting from NASCAR is a return of the deposit on his locker.
JD, if they settle then they are asking for anarchy.
Like everyone else has said, that just sets the tone for others to make enough of a fuss of their failed test to force NASCAR to settle, and settle and settle.
Yes, there are other problems in the sport but NASCAR itself is STILL making a profit. Their pocketbooks aren't hurting as a corporation.
If a guy who has shown 2 failed drug tests can settle with NASCAR, get his chunk of change just to disappear do you really think fans will be just okay with that? Heck we raise hell when everything is FINE with the sport, let alone something like this...
You have to set a tone, your either in control of your sport or your not.
If they can win this in court that gives them something to hang their hats on and take to manufactures, fans, and sponsors saying "this is our sport and its a clean sport with zero tolerance"
Of course the world has changed, but I also think part of the problem is that Brian F. is viewed as a nicer (softer) guy than his father. Might just be time to kick some a@@.
And also, ESPN.com on 7/15 quotes JM as saying "I'm prepared to go all the way and have the backing to do it if it takes everything I've got." Backing????????
Post a Comment