Nick Diaz and his attorney showed their hand yesterday. Today, the NSAC showed theirs.
Despite having what sounds like a pretty strong argument, it looks like Diaz’s lawyer, Ross Goodman, is going to face a little resistance from the commission when he gets the opportunity to plead Diaz’s case. The NSAC has heard their response and they don’t seem too impressed. None of the actual commissioners have spoken on the record yet, however NSAC public information officer Jennifer M. Lopez relayed their stance to Yahoo! Sports’ Kevin Iole.
Christopher Eccles, a Nevada deputy attorney general who represents the state athletic commission, referred telephone calls and email messages to public information officer Jennifer M. Lopez.
In a written statement, Lopez said, “Not only did Nick Diaz violate the law by testing positive for marijuana metabolites, but he also lied to the Commission on his Pre-Fight Questionnaire when he swore that he had not used any prescribed medications in two weeks before the fight.”
To clarify the last part, Goodman claims that Diaz stopped smoking his medically prescribed marijuana eight days prior to the fight, however since Nick checked “no” on the Pre-Fight Questionnaire next to the question that asked whether he had used any prescribed medications two weeks prior to the fight, the NSAC contends that Diaz “lied” or didn’t disclose his medical marijuana use.
Goodman still believes they have a strong case, however it remains to be seen if he’ll be able to convince the commissioners of that. Regardless, Goodman believes a little common sense tells you that Diaz didn’t actually do anything wrong.
“WADA prohibits marijuana in-competition because they don’t want people fighting, or doing [expletive] under the influence of marijuana,” Goodman said. “Nobody can say – not the athletic commissioner, not [executive director] Keith [Kizer] – nobody can say Nick was impaired or under the influence of marijuana. Nobody.
“So let’s just talk street. Let’s just talk common sense here. Why do you want to punish him, basically for a metabolite that resulted from legal use eight days before the fight? Why? What did it do that you guys [the commission] are so concerned about, because contrary to what Keith is saying, we know it didn’t create a safety issue because everybody knows … that it’s out of your system in a couple of hours.”
That’s really what’s so frustrating about this. If Nick wasn’t high during the fight, then what difference does it make?