Results 1 to 9 of 9
01-31-2013, 10:21 AM #1Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Columbia, MD
- Blog Entries
Mike Florio at PFT May Have Molested Children
The latest from SI:
"Mike Florio, well-known football journalist, may have associated with an organization that has been responsible for molesting and sexually assaulting hundreds of children. This old organization, steeped in ritual, and run exclusively by men (mainly old men), has been proven to have fondled, molested, violated and raped boys as young as five. Florio may have been associated with this group throughout his adult life.
When asked about the allegations, Florio avoided the question by saying that the allegation was preposterous. He later made a more emphatic denial. He further claimed that no children that were raped ever had any of his biological material on them.
His denials do not exonerate him, however, as they do not conclusively prove that he did not rape children. After all, Lance Armstrong also denied doping and he had multiple negative drug tests to corroborate his story.
Unfortunately, no journalist has been able to ask Mike Florio the pointed follow up questions that would be needed to resolve this issue. And even if they ever do, we may never know if Mike Florio is telling the truth. Simply put, this alleged child rape scandal will hang like a cloud over his head for the rest of his career and the rest of his life, tainting his reputation."
To be clear: I am not dissing the Catholic Church. My wife is Catholic as was my grandmother. I am merely showing that this guilt by gotcha journalism practiced by SI and PFT is irresponsible, sloppy and shameful. I see PFT was at it again this morning. (For the record: there is no evidence to show that Florio is Catholic or molested children. Just like there is no evidence to show that Ray ingested IGF-1 in any quantity that would have given him any advantage.)
To get to proving Ray "guilty", you would have to establish the following facts:
1. Ray spoke to Ross
Let's stipulate to that and assume that Ray is on a tape talking to Ross and telling him to send him everything he had.
2. Ray received spray from Ross.
There is no proof of this -- only Ross' word that he sent it to Ray.
3. Ray took the spray.
4. The spray contained IGF-1.
Expert testimony says that is impossible.
5. There was sufficient IGF-1 to provide Ray a competitive advantage.
Expert testimony says that even if IGF-1 is in the bottle, there isn't enough to make a difference.
BONUS: Ray knew the spray contained IGF-1.
There is simply no proof of this.
So, based on most of these unproven assertions, we are throwing Ray in with Lance Armstrong. This is infuriating in the extreme. If there was a public trial of Ray on these facts, any third year law student worth his or her salt would get you an acquittal. I don't even think a judge would even allow such a "case" to get to the jury.