This Chris Henry Situation Doesn't Make Any Sense
So the Kenton County DA's office says Chris Henry failed a drug test and Henry's agent says he didn't. So which is it and how can there possibly be two different answers to a Yes/No question? Here's what I don't get about this Henry situation: Neither side has any incentive to lie about it. It's not like the truth is not easily available. The DA really can't lie about it. His job is kinda contingent on telling the truth (despite Mike Nifong's interpretation of the same job). And worst of all, the test results are available and public. It's not like he gains anything by coming out and saying that Henry tested positive. On the other side of the conversation, Henry's agent says he didn't fail and instead says that the first drug "field test" was innacurate (he compared the first test to a pregnancy test. The accuracy of which is about 97%) and the second test came up negative. He too doesn't really have any incentive to lie about it. He may fear that the Bengals will outright release Henry if this is true and may be trying to buy some time by publicly questioning the results, but that just seems highly unlikely. And now this mystery second test is with the state lab for further tests even though the DA's office doesn't acknowledge that the two tests came up with different results. So what the hell is actually going on? If the Kenton County DA's office screwed up this drug test--likely their most high profile drug test ever--what does it say about the rest of their operation there and how they're handling the overall Chris Henry situation? And more importantly, how exactly do they administer these drug field test? Do they come knock on Henry's door and make him pee on a testing device? Maybe Kentucky is just not good at handling these types of situations. Maybe they should just stick to what they're good at: creating overrated basketball programs and meth addictions.
No comments:
Post a Comment