> This seems to me to be one of the most basic principles > of justice - it just can't be right to punish accidental > and deliberate drug taking exactly the same way. Surely. > Can it? There's a third way of committing an offence - negligence. It can be punished in law just as severely as the deliberate act. So many 'accident' theories have been put forward by suspended athletes that those who do not brew their own tea, keep their toothpaste under lock and key, and so on, could be considered to have lost the right to plead 'tampering'. That excuse was often put forward by people accused of drug-smuggling, too. Apparently the authorities are confident that the courts will reject the 'tampering' excuse if Customs officers have asked, before inspecting luggage, "is this your own luggage?" and "did you pack it yourself?" Why could drug-testers not put corresponding questions to any athlete about to be tested? So, a question. Does anyone know what action Customs officials take when a traveller says, "Now that you mention it, when I was walking down a street in Bogota on my way to the airport, my case fell open and a total stranger stopped and helped me put my things back in. Wasn't that kind of him?" - "that horse's but's, P.N. from New Zealand" - M M Rohl. (Hopefully he meant "butt".)
