Another case of misguided youth who will probably feel Roger's wrath again....http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2877555

Suspended Bengals receiver Chris Henry failed a court-ordered drug test and will have to serve 88 days in jail, a prosecutor said Monday.

Kenton County (Kentucky) Attorney Garry Edmondson said that Henry tested positive for opiates and he will be forced to serve jail time.

Henry's failed drug test was first reported by WKRC-TV in Cincinnati.

Henry is on probation in Florida. It's unclear whether the reported drug test results will force him to serve jail time there.

The Bengals told ESPN's Bob Holtzman that they expect to release a statement regarding Henry later Monday.

Henry, who has been arrested four times since December 2005, has been suspended for the first eight games of next season for violating the NFL's conduct policies. He spent two days in jail last January after pleading guilty to letting minors drink alcohol in a hotel room he had rented.

Henry received traffic tickets on March 25 for driving with a suspended license, failing to use his turn signal and a seat belt violation. He was allowed to go into a license intervention program to settle the charges.

Henry is permitted to work out at the Bengals' facilities in the offseason and participate in training camp, including preseason games. He won't be allowed to practice with the team when the regular season begins. He will be reinstated after the eighth game if he stays out of trouble.

"I must emphasize to you that this is your last opportunity to salvage your NFL career," NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell wrote Henry when he suspended him. "I urge you to take full advantage of the resources available to support you in that effort."

D'oh(pe)

_________________
@audioidkid

What was the drug? Codeine and morphine are both opiates, then again it could be heroine. The Bengals are going to be in the Penitentiary Bowl.

It's somewhat amusing that a radio station releases this info ahead of an official announcement from the court system. It's even more amusing we now have a prosecutor backtracking on previous comments. And the "preliminary test positive" "Final test negative" comments from Henry's attorney are also amusing.

I don't know anything about Henry's drug tests. What I do know is to be wary of any court official or prosecutor who leaks something to the media and to beware of any attorney or agent who feels the need to discuss someone's case in the media, instead of in court.

Rather than focusing on Henry, though, my questions are these: How reliable are drug tests anyway? How does one trust any lab or labs that deliver one "negative" and "one positive" out of the same sample batch taken at the same time? And just how tight is the "chain of custody" of urine samples? With all the questions surrounding the methods of doping agencies in other sports, faulty laboratory processes and "dirty" lab equipment, repeated errors from some labs, and loose chains of custody, the answer to these questions of laboratory quality are "not so much".

How is that any different to ESPN breaking a story from 'sources close to the situation'?

It's a significantly different situation when a leak comes from an officer of the court. This was a drug test related to his ongoing probation on his previous criminal sentences. Had it been a standard NFL drug test or some other story, then it would have merely been a situation in which an insider leaked information. But in this case, if an officer of the court (any of the involved attorneys) leaked information to the media involving a pending case, the judge likely won't be pleased and that attorney is risking potential disciplinary action.