Jon Jones Hit and Run Megathread - threads merged here

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
Before alleged hit-and-run, Jon Jones threatened legal action against the NSAC | MMAjunkie

Throwback...Friday?


“We are actively considering civil claims against the NSAC, and its board members, for invasion of Mr. Jones’ privacy, based on the NSAC’s admitted mishandling of Mr. Jones’ out-of-competition drug testing,” wrote Goodman.

A test conducted Dec. 4 came back positive for cocaine metabolites, but the NSAC did not discipline Jones since the drug is not banned out-of-competition, or more than 12 hours from an event. The commission later called its decision to test for street drugs an “administrative oversight.” The UFC ultimately fined Jones $25,000 for violating its code of conduct.

“The wrongful dissemination of such medical information further invaded Mr. Jones’ privacy triggering additional attacks on his professional reputation,” Goodman wrote.

The attorney claimed the commission not only violated the World Anti-Doping Agency’s code, which allows for disclosure only in the case of a positive, but also Nevada law by releasing information not related to Jones’ licensing as a fighter.

As a result, he argued, the commission caused “permanent and irreparable reputational harm along with a $25,000 fine imposed by the UFC.”

Goodman gave the NSAC two weeks to turn over paperwork related to the testing as well as the names of anyone to whom the information was leaked. He asked the commission to justify its decision to release the information and questioned the authority used to test Jones, who was not licensed at the time of his Dec. 4 test.

(Goodman also is representing Wanderlei Silva in court against the NSAC on the claim the commission overstepped its bounds when it tested him as an unlicensed fighter and issued a lifetime ban for evading an out-of-competition test. Silva previously criticized the NSAC’s handling of the Jones case.)

The NSAC did not cooperate with Goodman’s requests. In a letter dated Feb. 13 – the last day to respond – the state’s attorney general, Adam Laxalt, dismissed the attorney’s claims.

Laxalt argued the NSAC has “broad powers” to protect the health and safety of unarmed combatants and said they could be tested at any time by order of the commission. He pointed out that the NSAC is not, in fact, a signatory to the WADA code and is thus not bound by its rules on disclosure. Rather, the commission is bound by state laws that permit information pertaining to a license to be made public.

Further, he wrote, “the commission did not disclose the Dec. 4 test results to the media; the UFC did.”

“When a fighter requests license from the commission, they are placing at issue their character, integrity, and ability to participate in a contest of unarmed combat,” Laxalt wrote. “Many factors can influence a fighter’s character, integrity, and ability to participate.

“Mr. Jones’ test showed that he had been using cocaine, which violated the laws of Nevada. Cocaine is an illegal drug and Mr. Jones’ use of cocaine is something that is and may be considered in the licensing process. Such activity in or out of competition brings discredit to the sport of unarmed combat.”

It’s unclear whether Jones’ complaints went any further than Goodman’s initial letter. Goodman declined to comment on the matter beyond acknowledging he had represented Jones in Nevada.

With Jones now at the center of an alleged hit-and-run accident, his attention has shifted to defending himself against potential criminal charges. A district attorney’s office has 60 days to decide whether or not to proceed with the case.

Jones only public comment on the matter came in March, when he said he had hired an attorney to look into how the commission handled his test.

“We haven’t quite completely let it go,” Jones said. “We wanna see what went wrong and what could be done about it. I’m not gonna comment too much on that whole situation, but I am aware that there was some foul play in the whole situation, and right now I’m kinda weighing my options.”
Click to expand...

So Jones was involved and continues to be involved with a number of criminal activities, most of which is unclear. However, I find the holier than thou act, to the point of suing, a hilarious ignoring of personal responsibility...

1> Jones wtf are you using cocaine for?
2> Now you are going to sue the NSAC because the UFC leaked out your behavior that violated any number of voluntary agreements. Fighting professionally is a privilege and not a right. Why didn't you sue the UFC?
3> If instead of looking to displace blame that the NSAC hired lab ran a complete test instead of just a PEDs test, Jones had turned inward to consider the choices he was making and the people he was surrounding himself with he would likely still be fighting in May.

I know there are plenty of people that are REALLY unhappy that a commission would test for ANY drugs not near the fight time. I get that. It's an interesting debate to have. But from Jones' point of view, perhaps he would have been better served considering the effect of his own actions instead of the faux-moral indignation that his someone accidentally ran a test.
 
M

Morpheushasleftthebuilding

Guest
it happens in cycling every time under the WADA code, they test positive on rec drugs, if the want to sue WADA, they just say, he don't be a prof athlete, case closed.
 
Wild

Wild

Zi Nazi
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
91,420
132,183
Splinty said:
Before alleged hit-and-run, Jon Jones threatened legal action against the NSAC | MMAjunkie

Throwback...Friday?





So Jones was involved and continues to be involved with a number of criminal activities, most of which is unclear. However, I find the holier than thou act, to the point of suing, a hilarious ignoring of personal responsibility...

1> Jones wtf are you using cocaine for?
2> Now you are going to sue the NSAC because the UFC leaked out your behavior that violated any number of voluntary agreements. Fighting professionally is a privilege and not a right. Why didn't you sue the UFC?
3> If instead of looking to displace blame that the NSAC hired lab ran a complete test instead of just a PEDs test, Jones had turned inward to consider the choices he was making and the people he was surrounding himself with he would likely still be fighting in May.

I know there are plenty of people that are REALLY unhappy that a commission would test for ANY drugs not near the fight time. I get that. It's an interesting debate to have. But from Jones' point of view, perhaps he would have been better served considering the effect of his own actions instead of the faux-moral indignation that his someone accidentally ran a test.
Click to expand...
I'm beginning to wonder if the NSAC was tipped off to Jones recreational use prior to that fight w/ DC, and it was no mistake he was tested at all.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom