DatBTrue is alive and not going to jail

roasthawg · Mar 31, 2018

I thought it was common knowledge that dat was Tom. Either way, still doesn't explain who was making the peptides. Hope everyone involved beats their case.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Marky Boy · Mar 31, 2018

The guy was smart enough to play thousands of people and make a shit load of money from it. Let’s be serious, that’s why sponsors exist. To make a ton of money off us BBs who seek Gear.

I applaud the guy to the extremes he went and the shit he wrote. Was all just a gimmick to get your money.

The source was probably China..where most stuff comes from lol. It’s not hard to find legitimate stuff over there. I see the problems importing it though

tokon · Mar 31, 2018

pesty4077 said:
The minute I read that the DEA and FDA said it wasn't worth prosecuting him, I knew he turned. He had to large a scale not to prosecute. I hope everyone cleans their closets. Guaranteed he turned all these big named people in. When a lawyer asks for immunity, it means snitch.

100% correct.

j2048b · Mar 31, 2018

I wonder how the new forum is taking all this ? Yeah there was a new forum that went up after he shut down, supposedly.the forum was done by a bunch of the guys from.his forum....

Very interesting, i was on there for years, had a few q's answered, almost hired the main nutrition guru over.there but never bought anything

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

someday · Mar 31, 2018

RamboStallone said:
Snitched is probably the wrong term, cooperating. That's when you ask for immunity, when you cooperate. And this is usually to take down soemthing bigger then the offender. So idk, only time will tell, if we ever know.

Not sure it's really fair to say unequivocally that's the case. I know you are involved in the pep game, so know some stuff I don't. However, having been through the Fed system for 3 years on the same types of charges as listed (my case was embezzlement, but Feds use those charges VERY broadly for a wide array of offenses that they don't have a specific law for), I can say it is very likely he didn't need to cooperate in the sense you are talking about. The Feds have a 93% conviction rate, they aren't going to the push the case unless they know they can win. Also, if peps aren't a scheduled drug carrying a mandatory minimum, than sentencing would be very light for a non-violent first time offense. I know they list all those possible long terms in their releases, but those are meaningless. Feds go off a pretty simple points system that adds and subtracts for type of offense, if you have a record, etc. The other pep distributor Big Tex mentioned had basically the same charges levied against him as me, I ended up with 24 months and that was simply because of the amount of $$$ involved. Judges can also vary from the recommendations of the point system as they listen to victim impact statements (in a pep case, no one would be present to speak against him or her), family and friends support statements, life circumstances, etc. My case judge deviated down from recommendation given by AUSDA (thank God). Now where it is far more clear that someone is a snitch is when a controlled drug charge is involved and a mandatory minimum....we all knew at the camp I was in when someone was a snitch because they were doing 3 years on a 5 or 10 yr mandatory. That was the only way at that time (2011) to get around that sentencing. I didn't give a shit about anyone's stories in there as almost all of thm were innocent apparently

. Plus many of them thought I was a cop since I came in at a pretty large 260# and a near flat top.

My only point here is keep an open mind....there is nothing out of the realm of possibility regarding what I read about Dat's circumstance to say they simply felt it was not a good use of their resources. Go back to what the article states....

For Drug Enforcement Administration officials, the problem lies with the weak wording of the laws that currently govern peptides.

“If I catch you with heroin, it’s a controlled substance and illegal — that’s easy,” said Douglas W. Coleman, the special agent in charge of the D.E.A.’s Phoenix Division. “If I find human growth hormone, I have to build a case to show that it’s significantly outside what it can be prescribed for.

“Peptides are more difficult still. There’s really no legal foothold.”

aphextwin · Mar 31, 2018

Of course he was going to snitch. Most people would if they knew they were going to butt fucking prison.

RamboStallone · Mar 31, 2018

someday said:
Not sure it's really fair to say unequivocally that's the case. I know you are involved in the pep game, so know some stuff I don't. However, having been through the Fed system for 3 years on the same types of charges as listed (my case was embezzlement, but Feds use those charges VERY broadly for a wide array of offenses that they don't have a specific law for), I can say it is very likely he didn't need to cooperate in the sense you are talking about. The Feds have a 93% conviction rate, they aren't going to the push the case unless they know they can win. Also, if peps aren't a scheduled drug carrying a mandatory minimum, than sentencing would be very light for a non-violent first time offense. I know they list all those possible long terms in their releases, but those are meaningless. Feds go off a pretty simple points system that adds and subtracts for type of offense, if you have a record, etc. The other pep distributor Big Tex mentioned had basically the same charges levied against him as me, I ended up with 24 months and that was simply because of the amount of $$$ involved. Judges can also vary from the recommendations of the point system as they listen to victim impact statements (in a pep case, no one would be present to speak against him or her), family and friends support statements, life circumstances, etc. My case judge deviated down from recommendation given by AUSDA (thank God). Now where it is far more clear that someone is a snitch is when a controlled drug charge is involved and a mandatory minimum....we all knew at the camp I was in when someone was a snitch because they were doing 3 years on a 5 or 10 yr mandatory. That was the only way at that time (2011) to get around that sentencing. I didn't give a shit about anyone's stories in there as almost all of thm were innocent apparently . Plus many of them thought I was a cop since I came in at a pretty large 260# and a near flat top. My only point here is keep an open mind....there is nothing out of the realm of possibility regarding what I read about Dat's circumstance to say they simply felt it was not a good use of their resources. Go back to what the article states....

For Drug Enforcement Administration officials, the problem lies with the weak wording of the laws that currently govern peptides.

“If I catch you with heroin, it’s a controlled substance and illegal — that’s easy,” said Douglas W. Coleman, the special agent in charge of the D.E.A.’s Phoenix Division. “If I find human growth hormone, I have to build a case to show that it’s significantly outside what it can be prescribed for.

“Peptides are more difficult still. There’s really no legal foothold.”

You make some very good points. Thanks!

1bigpapapump1 · Apr 1, 2018

someday said:
Not sure it's really fair to say unequivocally that's the case. I know you are involved in the pep game, so know some stuff I don't. However, having been through the Fed system for 3 years on the same types of charges as listed (my case was embezzlement, but Feds use those charges VERY broadly for a wide array of offenses that they don't have a specific law for), I can say it is very likely he didn't need to cooperate in the sense you are talking about. The Feds have a 93% conviction rate, they aren't going to the push the case unless they know they can win. Also, if peps aren't a scheduled drug carrying a mandatory minimum, than sentencing would be very light for a non-violent first time offense. I know they list all those possible long terms in their releases, but those are meaningless. Feds go off a pretty simple points system that adds and subtracts for type of offense, if you have a record, etc. The other pep distributor Big Tex mentioned had basically the same charges levied against him as me, I ended up with 24 months and that was simply because of the amount of $$$ involved. Judges can also vary from the recommendations of the point system as they listen to victim impact statements (in a pep case, no one would be present to speak against him or her), family and friends support statements, life circumstances, etc. My case judge deviated down from recommendation given by AUSDA (thank God). Now where it is far more clear that someone is a snitch is when a controlled drug charge is involved and a mandatory minimum....we all knew at the camp I was in when someone was a snitch because they were doing 3 years on a 5 or 10 yr mandatory. That was the only way at that time (2011) to get around that sentencing. I didn't give a shit about anyone's stories in there as almost all of thm were innocent apparently . Plus many of them thought I was a cop since I came in at a pretty large 260# and a near flat top. My only point here is keep an open mind....there is nothing out of the realm of possibility regarding what I read about Dat's circumstance to say they simply felt it was not a good use of their resources. Go back to what the article states....

For Drug Enforcement Administration officials, the problem lies with the weak wording of the laws that currently govern peptides.

“If I catch you with heroin, it’s a controlled substance and illegal — that’s easy,” said Douglas W. Coleman, the special agent in charge of the D.E.A.’s Phoenix Division. “If I find human growth hormone, I have to build a case to show that it’s significantly outside what it can be prescribed for.

“Peptides are more difficult still. There’s really no legal foothold.”

You make valid points. Like the saying goes, there's 3 sides to every story, theirs, his, and the truth

tokon · Apr 1, 2018

someday said:
Not sure it's really fair to say unequivocally that's the case. I know you are involved in the pep game, so know some stuff I don't. However, having been through the Fed system for 3 years on the same types of charges as listed (my case was embezzlement, but Feds use those charges VERY broadly for a wide array of offenses that they don't have a specific law for), I can say it is very likely he didn't need to cooperate in the sense you are talking about. The Feds have a 93% conviction rate, they aren't going to the push the case unless they know they can win. Also, if peps aren't a scheduled drug carrying a mandatory minimum, than sentencing would be very light for a non-violent first time offense. I know they list all those possible long terms in their releases, but those are meaningless. Feds go off a pretty simple points system that adds and subtracts for type of offense, if you have a record, etc. The other pep distributor Big Tex mentioned had basically the same charges levied against him as me, I ended up with 24 months and that was simply because of the amount of $$$ involved. Judges can also vary from the recommendations of the point system as they listen to victim impact statements (in a pep case, no one would be present to speak against him or her), family and friends support statements, life circumstances, etc. My case judge deviated down from recommendation given by AUSDA (thank God). Now where it is far more clear that someone is a snitch is when a controlled drug charge is involved and a mandatory minimum....we all knew at the camp I was in when someone was a snitch because they were doing 3 years on a 5 or 10 yr mandatory. That was the only way at that time (2011) to get around that sentencing. I didn't give a shit about anyone's stories in there as almost all of thm were innocent apparently . Plus many of them thought I was a cop since I came in at a pretty large 260# and a near flat top. My only point here is keep an open mind....there is nothing out of the realm of possibility regarding what I read about Dat's circumstance to say they simply felt it was not a good use of their resources. Go back to what the article states....

For Drug Enforcement Administration officials, the problem lies with the weak wording of the laws that currently govern peptides.

“If I catch you with heroin, it’s a controlled substance and illegal — that’s easy,” said Douglas W. Coleman, the special agent in charge of the D.E.A.’s Phoenix Division. “If I find human growth hormone, I have to build a case to show that it’s significantly outside what it can be prescribed for.

“Peptides are more difficult still. There’s really no legal foothold.”

Good points from someone with knowledge of the process.

rAJJIN · Apr 1, 2018

I thought tom was short for "the other me"

DatBtru use to post here often. He pretty much ran the peptide forum
with his posts and following.
I think he later moved on and opened up a site of his own.

Athlete · Apr 2, 2018

Reading this now with the new information, I think I know what he meant to say.

"Thirteen months ago I was diagnosed with a very serious health issue. The prognosis is poor. As a consequence the forum will permanently close this week."

Meaning:

"Thirteen months ago there was an investigation. Most likely I'm fucked. As a consequence the forum will permanently close this week."

heroish · Apr 2, 2018

I was a regular at DBT and I had a lot of respect for Dat. This does taint things and it is incredible how he played on people's need to believe in something bigger / better. Clearly a very intelligent man.

I am very curious to see if any pictures of him start to surface. I still have some respect for him as he put out a lot of good information even non-peptide related.

heroish · Apr 2, 2018

Athlete said:
Reading this now with the new information, I think I know what he meant to say.

"Thirteen months ago I was diagnosed with a very serious health issue. The prognosis is poor. As a consequence the forum will permanently close this week."

Meaning:

"Thirteen months ago there was an investigation. Most likely I'm fucked. As a consequence the forum will permanently close this week."

I wonder if there was ever more to his illness. He spoke about it a lot and for a long time. He mentioned CFS as a result and posted a lot of related studies.

Hard to seperate fact from fiction though.

hemipower · Apr 2, 2018

Not at all surprised he was "Tom" ... but he did contribute a LOT to peptide information in the beginning of its rise to popularity...

buschris · Apr 8, 2018

Everything I know and have learned, I learned from reading his material. He pretty much put peptides mainstream! So, peps are illegal? I'm calling BS on that. We'd all be in the pen

MyNameIsJeff · Apr 8, 2018

buschris said:
So, peps are illegal? I'm calling BS on that. We'd all be in the pen

:banghead:

kingtung · Apr 9, 2018

Boys what where the peptides Dat emphasised on most?

I remember pulsing > bleed for GH.

But anything else that sticks out like "sour apples".?

Would love if we can make a compilation of it all.

nothuman · Apr 9, 2018

Like him or hate him, hard to argue he knew more about peptides than anyone

kingtung · Apr 9, 2018

nothuman said:
Like him or hate him, hard to argue he knew more about peptides than anyone

He was a scholar in the field bro; i have an academic background, you can tell he channeled his 'barrister' mind (he was addmited in Arizona 1992), into more of occupational health/longevity mindset.

I doubt he did it for greed/money (he was genuine, his forum was with over thousands of posts by himself), on top of that him being a barrister, it would be make no sense for him to rat on something that doesnt have scrutiny yet.