Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

USNA player reportedly fails drug test

A freshly posted article in the newspaper NavyTimes says a Naval Academy football player has been allowed to remain at the school after testing positive for drugs, citing unnamed sources and web accounts.

The story says the player smoked a cigar packed with both tobacco and marijuana, then told authorities he didn't know he had smoked pot.

Academy spokesman Cmdr. Joe Carpenter told me he could not confirm or refute the account, citing privacy regulations, but he said the academy has a zero-tolerance policy toward drugs.

There is much discussion of the affair on the Cdr Salamander blog, a site that has broken USNA news in the past.

By Daniel de Vise  |  January 27, 2010; 4:57 PM ET
Categories:  Crime  | Tags: USNA, student drug use  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: U-Md. buys a piece of the Post
Next: Local endowments depleted in '09

Comments

This should be front page news. The taxpayers need to know how corrupt the Naval Academy had become.

Posted by: Brad23 | January 27, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

I agree with brad23. This should be front page news. Doesn't the school have a "zero-tolerance" policy?

Posted by: mike963 | January 27, 2010 11:34 PM | Report abuse

It is shameful that even the Washington Post will run with something from a blog as biased as CDR Salamander. It would behoove you to go back and read some more of the blog to get a clearer vision of the bigot and sexist that is the blogger behind the posts. It would be hilarious to see you try and publish some of his rants as factual on WaPo.

Furthermore, you should all familiarize yourselves with MILPERSMAN 1910-146:

1. Policy
a. Processing is mandatory for the following:
(1) Positive urinalysis that was tested and confirmed
positive at a Navy Drug Screening Lab (NAVDRUGLAB) or other
DOD-approved lab. If the commanding officer (CO) determines the
urinalysis result was caused by administrative errors (e.g.,
faulty local chain of custody, evidence of tampering) or the
drug use was not wrongful (e.g., prescribed medication,
unknowing ingestion), then the member shall not be identified as
a drug abuser and the positive urinalysis is not a drug abuse
incident. When this determination is made the command shall
notify, via official correspondence, Navy Personnel Command
(NAVPERSCOM), Fleet Support Department (PERS-6) and the
command's immediate senior in command (ISIC) of the
circumstances that warranted such a determination.

Posted by: GoalieLax | January 28, 2010 1:36 AM | Report abuse

Hey Goalie, let's make the story about me!

Thanks for playing though. I highly encourage WaPo readers to do exactly what you say. They will find:
- A post last night where, again, I support President Obama's stand on the repeal of DADT.
- A long standing defense of women serving in the military, and if they are on facebook they will see just a few of the female servicemenbers on my friends list - not to mention all my regular female commenters.

Oh goodness; what a "bigot and sexist" I am. I guess I should just put on my hood, get in my truck, and go back to my single-wide.

PS: - They can even find a link to the MILPERSMAN too!

Posted by: cdrsalamander | January 28, 2010 7:55 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company