Eric Thames

[packs]

I agree with some of your sentiment but we shouldn't forget how callous Braun was to the sample collector he more or less called a liar, and maybe even insinuated had tampered with his sample rather than come clean about what he did.

[the 'stache]

Braun acted on the advice of counsel, whose job it is to vigorously defend their client. The collector, Dino Laurenzi Jr., did not properly maintain the sample, per the mandate established by the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. Laurenzi Jr. was required to drop the sample at an approved shipping facility within a certain amount of time after its collection. Instead, he took it home, and it sat in his basement, on a counter top in a Tupperware container, not a refrigerator, until the following Monday afternoon. There were several Fed Ex locations between his home, and Miller Park (including, from memory, two locations that were open 24 hours).

Braun, in his statement, did not accuse the collector of wrongdoing. What he did say that an investigation by is legal team learned things about the collector, how the sample was stored by the collector, and how easy it would be to tamper with the sample if the custodian of the sample were so inclined to do so. There is a difference, and it may be a subtle one, but this is a common defense tactic, to create doubt, not in court this time, but in public opinion. And remember, Braun won his hearing because procedure was not followed. So, nothing he said was inaccurate. He did not slander the collector. Had Laurenzi, Jr done his job per his mandate, Braun could have never raised the issue.

Ultimately, Braun shouldn't have said some of the things he did, and he definitely shouldn't have used the prohibited substances. I don't defend his actions. I am merely providing some perspective. The guy is not the dirtbag some are trying to make him out to be. He's done a hell of a lot of charity work in Wisconsin, both before and after the test results became public. Let us not forget that we should have never even have known about the failed test, and the winning appeal, because the whole process is supposed to be confidential. MLB dropped the ball somewhere along the line in allowing the information to be leaked.

Originally Posted by packs

I agree with some of your sentiment but we shouldn't forget how callous Braun was to the sample collector he more or less called a liar, and maybe even insinuated had tampered with his sample rather than come clean about what he did.

[Econteachert205]

Braun is a grade a jerk who deserves continuous negative comments. He also deserves to continue his fine career. I'm Fine with Thames, good for him.

[packs]

Braun defenders always get hung up on the chain of custody thing but the fact remains that it didn't matter what the collector did with the sample. Braun admitted that he used.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Braun acted on the advice of counsel, whose job it is to vigorously defend their client. The collector, Dino Laurenzi Jr., did not properly maintain the sample, per the mandate established by the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. Laurenzi Jr. was required to drop the sample at an approved shipping facility within a certain amount of time after its collection. Instead, he took it home, and it sat in his basement, on a counter top in a Tupperware container, not a refrigerator, until the following Monday afternoon. There were several Fed Ex locations between his home, and Miller Park (including, from memory, two locations that were open 24 hours).

Braun, in his statement, did not accuse the collector of wrongdoing. What he did say that an investigation by is legal team learned things about the collector, how the sample was stored by the collector, and how easy it would be to tamper with the sample if the custodian of the sample were so inclined to do so. There is a difference, and it may be a subtle one, but this is a common defense tactic, to create doubt, not in court this time, but in public opinion. And remember, Braun won his hearing because procedure was not followed. So, nothing he said was inaccurate. He did not slander the collector. Had Laurenzi, Jr done his job per his mandate, Braun could have never raised the issue.

Ultimately, Braun shouldn't have said some of the things he did, and he definitely shouldn't have used the prohibited substances. I don't defend his actions. I am merely providing some perspective. The guy is not the dirtbag some are trying to make him out to be. He's done a hell of a lot of charity work in Wisconsin, both before and after the test results became public. Let us not forget that we should have never even have known about the failed test, and the winning appeal, because the whole process is supposed to be confidential. MLB dropped the ball somewhere along the line in allowing the information to be leaked.

In my 30 year legal career, not once have I ever seen advice of counsel to be "go out there and keep lying. Keep it up." Advice of counsel is shut up and say nothing.