Detailed article about Puerta's defense

Sure, this is old, and maybe I missed it in the news, but I hadn't seen this detailed article about how Mariano Puerta believes he tested positive for drugs after the French Open:

In his defense, Puerta claims the etilefrine entered his system when he unknowingly drank from a glass his wife, Sol, had used. Mrs. Puerta testified she has taken etilefrine, which can be purchased in Argentina and Spain over the counter without a prescription, since about the age of 15. She testified she uses about 20 drops of an odorless, colorless, liquid version of the drug in water, primarily during menstruation or times of stress, including when her husband is playing important matches. On the morning of the French Open final, Mrs. Puerta testified she began menstruating and took etilefrine at about 7:30 a.m. in the hotel.

The couple arrived at Roland Garros later in the morning. After Puerta practiced prior to the 3 p.m. final, he joined his wife, her brother Diego and his wife and their mother at a table in the player lounge where Puerta drank coffee and mineral water.

At some point, Puerta said good-bye to his family and left the table to change in the players' locker room, however his coach told him he was too early and had more time before taking the court for the final, so Puerta returned to the table where he had been sitting with his family.

Sometime after Puerta left to visit the locker room, his wife testified she sat in the chair previously occupied by her husband and poured about 20 drops of etilefrine into a glass of water on the table she believed was her glass and not her husband's glass. She believed she drank the entire contents of the glass and left the table, accompanied by her sister-in-law, to use the restroom. While his wife was in the rest room, Puerta testified he returned to the table, which by that time was occupied only by his mother-in-law. Puerta poured some of the bottled water he was carrying with him into what he believed was his empty glass, however both Puerta and his wife testified they now believe that glass still contained small amounts of the etilefrine his wife had poured into it while her husband was in the locker room and both claim that is how the etilefrine entered his system.

In its ruling, the three-member Tribunal suggested Puerta's story was not completely credible.

"We are concerned that the evidence of the player and his wife concerning the contamination of the player’s glass with effortil is not reliable. We do not say that it is deliberately misleading but we do not accept on the balance of probabilities that it is the complete or correct explanation of how etilefrine entered the player’s body," the Tribunal wrote. "We considered carefully the demeanor and narrative of the player and Mrs. Puerta. We are concerned that her account and that of the player constitute a self-serving speculative theory derived from the necessity of explaining the positive test as required under the Code and the Program. The events they describe are not commonplace and not such as to be likely to happen in the ordinary course of life. Even though the table was small, we do not see any reason why Mrs Puerta would use a glass which corresponded to the chair on which her husband had been sitting, rather than the glass she herself had been using. We are concerned that if the player and Mrs Puerta were sure of their account concerning the transmission of effortil to the player via the glass in question, they would have put that account forward much sooner than they did."

Aside from the fact the story contains a series of coincidental events, the Tribunal's skepticism

Thanks to Tennis Week for this info.