nah. You are the lawyer, but isn't the standard knowingly asserting false information that disparages the character of another person? As I said, I have heard the rumor enough to report on it here, so in my mind it is not demonstrably false. Plus we KNOW he took PEDs. He said so. All we are speculating on is the kind.
Thanks for the offer though
No. The standard is recklessly disregarding. You do not have to know it is false.
When Grier tested positive for the PED, the NCAA contacted UF first. Remember that privity of contract concept we previously discussed? It goes from the NCAA to Florida then from Florida to Grier. Florida knew what it was when they confronted Grier about it.
From the NCAA's website on drug testing:
What happens if a student-athlete tests positive?
Drug Free Sport will provide your institution’s director of athletics or designee the name of the student-athlete who tested positive and the substance found in his/her urine sample.
- The institution/student-athlete has the option to be present at the lab for the opening of the B sample or a surrogate may be designated.
- If the B sample is positive, Drug Free Sport will notify the director of athletics or designee and the student-athlete will be declared ineligible.
- If the student-athlete tested positive for a substance for which a medical exception is warranted, the institution may request a medical exception. Drug Free Sport will assist with the medical exception process.
If you have just an ounce of common sense then you'd see quite clearly that the bullshit your "journalist" friend is feeding you is just that: bullshit. It's OBVIOUSLY false on its face.
If he's not just making it up then someone at the UAA (and I have a pretty good idea who it is having dealt with the mental giant on prior occasions) is leaking this to smear Grier.
And you wonder why I have so much contempt for this kind of stuff and the "writers" on all of the websites.