Legal Strategy 101, *Again*

Dope-ing: Floyd, let us review, shall we? In yet another egregious departure from my crack (at least, free), legal advice, you have apparently decided to outline your offense/defense for the upcoming public arbitration well ahead of time on your website this week. Floyd, I quite possibly believe you are innocent--I certainly believe that the Dr. Do-nothings at the lab botched the job as usual--but for everyone's sake and particularly your own, shut the hell up already! I know you want to say that the samples were mislabeled and the wrong number improperly corrected with white-out instead of a cross-out and all this other procedural crap, and you want to post 300 pages of documents too. But the only one of these things that makes you look actually innocent, as opposed to just goddamned lucky that the lab's incompetent and clearly has an axe to grind against any poor bastard it can find to soothe its bruised ego is the allegation about only one of four testosterone/epitestosterone benchmarks showing a problem, when all 4 have to show a problem for a positive test. 1 out of 4 sounds like a mistake, plain and simple. Leave it there. Trust me, a surfeit of scientifically illiterate boneheads like myself rifling through 300 pages of incomprehensibly sophisticated scientific jargon looking for paranoid conspiracy theories, Floyd, is the last freakin' thing you need. The rest of the stuff you're saying, frankly, sounds like Typical Lawyerly Weaselling. So put the benchmark failures issue out there in the most moron-friendly terms possible if you must--and again, really, you mustn't--but otherwise, please, for your own good, Floyd, SHUT UP.