Originally Posted by
AzTallRider
Actually, I believe all they need to do is to prove (to the standards the jury chooses to apply when directed to do so by the judge) that he deliberately violated the terms of the contract by using, and/or conspiring with others to cause the use of, PEDs. No need to prove that USPS funds were specifically used to purchase the drugs.
But I would guess that the consequences of these two things are different. Used PEDs when the contract said you wouldn't? Set damages, slap on the wrist (ouch). Used USPS/US Government money to purchase controlled substances? Probably a bigger deal to the sentencing judge.