Back to the topic at hand. All the quotes in the articles relate to examinations prior to the test and yet seem to be vaguely interpreted as meaning she was examined post test.
“Brentina was thoroughly examined by a panel of three veterinarians per our selection process prior to entering quarantine in Germany,” said Dr. Rick Mitchell. “Furthermore we had the opportunity to observe this mare training twice daily for six weeks, and we evaluated the soundness of all the team horses on a daily basis. There was never any question during that time or now about any aspect of her soundness.”
Dr. Mitchell also explained that per the IOC rules, he evaluated each of the three horses one hour before their dressage test because a replacement was available up until that time. Brentina never demonstrated any evidence of soreness and lameness, and passed the horse inspection prior to the competition without any question.
If you read the articles carefully, in particular the quotes, all they say is that the vets are SAYING post test that they had no concerns about soundness before or now because they examined her prior to the test.
Sloppy journalism aside, none of the quotes support the statement that the mare has been examined post test and found to be sound. Obviously, they aren’t obliged to say anything more about that but the fuzzy language in the articles is confusing. If the mare was examined post test and found to be sound, why not say so.