How Can You Prove A Negative?

We live in an age of cynicism, where the slightest allegation made against someone is considered to be proof that the accused is guilty. I don’t know if it’s gotten worse over the years, or whether it just appears to have gotten worse. These days, guilt by association or accusation is enough for most people.

Suppose you’re a top-level athlete who is on a team where one or more athletes has been sanctioned for doping. I was going to say guilty of doping, but the anti-doping system doesn’t really seem to be geared for determining guilt or innocence, once you’re accused you’re guilty and must then prove your innocence with the deck stacked against you. Ironic, isn’t it, that a system meant to ensure fair competition is not fair in how it treats those it seeks to punish?

Or suppose you have friends who’ve been prosecuted for doping, or once, a long, long time ago you attended the same school and were on the same team as someone who years later admits to doping. Does either of these examples make you a cheat, too?

Not necessarily. But in the public’s eye, often it does. At what point did we stop giving people the benefit of the doubt? At what point did we change from the belief that one is innocent until proven guilty? Once someone is publicly accused — whether it’s of providing secret information to a foreign government (like Wen Ho Lee), or mailing anthrax letters (like Dr. Steven Hatfill), or outing a secret agent (like Scooter Libby), or doping (like so many athletes) — how many of us automatically assume that person is guilty?

Too many. And probably more so when a sports icon is accused. Stories about doping run rampant in the media. I can’t remember how long it’s been since there wasn’t some sort of doping scandal in the sports world. And with so many scandals, the perception can easily become that they must all be doing it.

No doubt, in some sports that may even be the case. But the attitude now seems to be that if you’re a top-level athlete and you do well in your sport, you must be doping. It almost makes me wonder if Jeff Foxworthy could add a whole new line of jokes to his “You might be a redneck … ” routine, along the lines of “You might be a doper … “.

Certainly, those who’ve vehemently denied doping and then either been caught red-handed or admitted to it later on have helped cement the idea that anyone who’s been accused must be guilty. But some athletes have been constantly dogged by accusations and never tested positive, never been photographed injecting steroids or popping suspicious pills and yet, the accusations continue.

Athletes who do great things and overcome insurmountable obstacles (which, if you think about it, would be almost anyone who makes it to the pros in any sport) to win a major event or set a world record are suspect. I’m sure that there are many who believe that Lance Armstrong must have doped, because how else can you explain someone coming back from cancer and totally dominating an event like the Tour de France?

Hard work? Determination? Strength of will? Training harder and smarter than his competitors? Perhaps just being genetically gifted? Nope. Must be the dope.

Did Lance dope? I don’t know. You don’t know. Nobody knows. Except Lance. And he vehemently denies ever doping. And he’s never tested positive. I’d like to believe he didn’t, and in the absence of any proof to the contrary, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Several people around Lance have admitted to, or been sanctioned for doping. Frankie Andreu admitted to doping a few times. The press got all worked up about the story, and then it faded away. Except that people remember that a rider who was once Lance’s right-hand man admitted to doping once or twice. I thought the most telling thing about Frankie’s admission was that he felt like it didn’t really help so much and he stopped.

Marion Jones, who had an A sample test positive last year which was not confirmed by her B sample tests, has long been dogged by allegations of doping. An ex-husband claims she did steroids. An Tim Montgomery, her ex-boyfriend, got busted for steroids. And her former coach has been implicated in the whole BALCO scandal, too. Lots of people around her doped or were involved in doping, but does that make her a doper, too?

There’s even a rumor that Floyd Landis was offered a minimal punishment — whatever that might be — if he would only point the finger at his former captain. And if the rumor is to be believed, Landis turned that offer down flat. But it’s only a rumor. Still, it makes you wonder about the system when they seem to be focused on particular individuals to such an extent. Have the people leading the anti-doping fight lost sight of what’s important?

Some people say you’re judged by the company you keep. And to a great extent that’s true. But how many of us haven’t at least brushed shoulders with someone who’s less than honest, or who might have once done a few things that he or she is no longer proud of? Should we be judged just because someone we know, however well or poorly, has done something that’s not quite on the up-and-up?

Given that so many people are so willing to judge people guilty before the facts of a case are known, what can an accused person who actually is innocent do to prove his or her innocence? There’s a tough question. The louder one protests one’s innocence, the more some people seem to believe in one’s guilt. And yet, what is one supposed to do?

Suck it up? Take whatever punishment is doled out, just because that’s what’s expected? The problem is, many athletes accused of doping by our current imperfect anti-doping system don’t have the resources to defend themselves. Imagine, if the winner of the Tour de France has to dig deep into his own pockets and then raise money to help cover the costs associated with fighting the charges against him, how is an athlete of lesser means able to defend him- or herself? The costs of fighting an anti-doping case are staggering.

How many innocent athletes have had to mortgage their entire futures to fight the charges, and how many have just thrown in the towel and taken the punishment without so much as a fight? My guess: the vast majority. The cold, hard reality is that most athletes accused simply can’t fight the charges. Now, how many of those who couldn’t fight were actually innocent? Hard to say, but given what we’ve learned about the system courtesy of the Landis case, my hunch is that there could be at least a few.

“You can’t prove a negative,” Lance Armstrong said in early 2006. “I can say as many times as I like that I didn’t cheat, but because there’s no way of proving a negative then those who do not want to believe me will not believe me.”

I’m afraid that’s true, no matter whether you’re Floyd Landis, Marion Jones or some athlete yet to be accused. Once the scandal breaks and once the words are spoken, there will be those who will never believe you no matter what you say.

But whether you believe in Floyd Landis’ innocence or not, you have to give the man credit. He’s standing up to the system and working to make things more fair for the athletes. No matter the outcome of his case, if the system changes for the better then he’s made something good come of this awful situation. But right now, if I were a gambler, I wouldn’t bet against Landis. The more that becomes known, the more the tide seems to turn in his favor.