Anyone slamming Elka Graham for her refusal to name names following the newspaper account of the time she was allegedly offered performance-enhancing drugs really needs to wake up to themselves. That includes team-mates who have spoken out, as well as Australian officials and Liberal senator George Brandis.
What's Graham supposed to do? Name a name without providing some hard evidence? She'd be sued for defamation and risk attacks from people angry that she had damaged the image of a swimming icon. I have no doubt that the attacks she would be subjected to would be particularly vicious if the person in question was a former Australian swimmer.
It's doubtful she happened to be carrying a recording device in her cossie at the time the incident occurred, so what people are asking is for Graham to open herself to an avalanche of attacks and defamation suits just because she made the 'outrageous' claim that performance-enhancing drugs are used in the swimming world and people get away with taking them.
Why should she sacrifice herself for other peoples' satisfaction? There's probably no way her claim can be proved, no way to go back and test urine or blood samples from the person alleged to have offered her drugs. What is there to gain by naming names?
Confessed drug cheat Werner Reiterer has come out in Graham's defence with some common sense:
In 2000, the AOC attempted - and failed - to haul Reiterer before the Court of Arbitration for Sport to force him to support his book's claims.
Reiterer said tougher legislation to pressure athletes would not expose more drug cheats.
"How's that fixing the problem?" he said. "It's just shooting the messenger again. I can't see how that is going to fix the problem. How can a sporting body still have the right to question an athlete that is no longer part of that organisation? How can they say they have these powers? When do they cease and when do they start?
"You don't have to divulge everything you know. Because in today's world, when everything is so litigious, you just can't do it. You would have to destroy your own life. Who's going to do that?
"I still had a bad taste in my mouth with what I went through, with the AOC. They are going after her [Graham] pretty heavily."
1 comments:
She shouldn't have said anything in the first place.
Either come out and name names, or don't say a thing.
Poor girl is going to get harassed now
Post a Comment