GregR
Footballguy
I think it's good to see the legal perspective. However I think the author is goofing up when he tries to apply which parts of NFL's tests conform to which parts of the law. The author is suggesting that the 16 was the result of the Law's initial immunoassay test and the 13.6 was the result of the confirmation gas chromatography/mass spectrometry assay called for in the law.mvereb said:
We've had posted here that the first test measures multiple types of THC while the second test measures one. The first test's results may be triple that of the second test as a result.
Gordon's defense team were said to be arguing the results are invalid because the 16 and 13.6 should have been the same result. If they were from these two different tests whose results are several times different than each other, that argument would make no sense for them to make. Instead they would have argued that the 16 should have been a lot higher if it's supposed to be several times higher than the 2nd test.
Not to mention there's an actual report from the Browns beat writer that he got a 38 on the immunoassay, a 16 on the confirmation GC/MS test and a 13.6 on an additional confirmation test done at the player's request. Those results fall in line with what the testing lab documentation says to expect, which is what makes me think it is probably the best version to put our faith in.
Good to see what the legal steps are, and he very well could get an injunction for all I know. Maybe Ohio law would decide that if 2 versions of the confirmation test are run both have to be above the threshold, I don't know. But the author treating the 13.6 as the confirmation test, or as the sole one at least, doesn't seem likely to be correct.
Last edited by a moderator:
