Quote of the Day
There's a glaringly obvious problem, THE problem that we are all missing here, and I just now got it:(link)
Suppose McLaren and Brunet had disagreed on some point? How would they have resolved it?
That's why you have three people folks. The only reason why you would not invite the third party to the table is if the decision that will come is a foregone conclusion. The whole argument of "Duh, two of us is already a majority" is an argument that can only come from the "two of us" knowing full well they won't disagree.
Amazon.com has been taking taking pre-orders for the Landis autobiography, written in the first person with Loren Mooney of Bicycling magazine, "Positively False". Here is a peek at the cover of the book slated to be published on June 26.
In case you missed last night's late developments, here is the summary of the now open dispute between Christopher Campbell, the arbitrator picked by the Landis team for the upcoming USADA Hearings scheduled to start on May 14, and the other two arbitrators Patrice Brunet and Richard McLaren who made a pre-hearing ruling in his absence.
USAToday SportsScope picks up the "No Campbell" flap, citing Hiltzik, Abrahamson and us, crediting subscription site Sports Business Daily for the lead. Writer Beau Dure says:
"Campbell's dissent makes the ruling sound like much more than the clarification Brunet's e-mail implies. He says the other two arbitrators issued a decision five hours and one minute after receiving a brief from the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. From the dissent: "It is doubtful that the Panel even had time to review USADA's brief."
32WLKY.com has something for those craving a little bittersweet nostalgia. They have posted a slideshow from Floyd Landis' 2006 Tour de France victory.
The RoadBike.com thinks that Floyd Landis would get better odds in Vegas than he'll get on Monday when his hearings begin in front of his arbitrator, plus two "USADA Henchmen".
Rant thinks that last night 's news about dissension within the arb panel in the Landis case may be a sign of more ominous things to come.
It’s not everyday you get to see a kangaroo court in action. Stay tuned, we’ll see if shining the spotlight on the process will ensure justice is done.
Potholes and Roadapples is very concerned about hometown boy Floyd Landis getting a fair shake at next week's hearing, but as with a train wreck you have to watch to see what will happen.
Triple Crankset has our "maiden" Floyd lashed to the tracks again with tungsten steel cables, and in the clutches of Snidely(USADA)Whiplash.
Luna Cycles writes largely about Basso in today's blog, but also tells readers to keep a sharp eye out for next week's expected "kangaroo court".Racejunkie's BS meter is off the scale concerning the Basso OP controversy, and RJ is afraid that the fallout from that far flung episode will land squarely on the shoulders of Floyd Landis as he prepares for his hearings now only 5 days away.
The Next Big Thing wants us to check back with him later today so he can tell us about the "lecture" he got from Floyd Landis.
Steve's Peeve's was going to cover the case closely, but has unwisely deferred to Rant and us instead. Hey, Steve, the water's fine, come on in!
Damian M gives us a plug, while talking about Basso.
League of American Bicyclists on May 1 gave Landis some support, but didn't mention us.
Discussion continues over at DPF on last night's bombshell revelation that one of the three arbitrators selected for the upcoming Landis case scheduled to start on Monday May 14th was excluded from pre-hearing deliberations.
A few folks think there is over-reaction to biased reporting and selective documents; the majority are pretty much appalled at what has been shown. In backup to what we said last week about the Olympics, some more research was done by a few posters, indicating The Club was hanging together while McLaren and Brunet were tele-conferring on the case:
ORG: The April 24 hearing was when Brunet and McLaren were in China with 16 WADA officials and all the olympic poohbahs for the sports accord conference
They were still there on April 25.
So not only did they run on April 30 at 5AM, five hours after USADA brief, they were only a few hours removed from a Beijing conference with all the WADA chiefs (not Pound, however) and top olympic officals.
Campbell was not at any of this.
So, how many WADA officials were in the room in China when they had the April 24 teleconference?
Yol: Further digging into the attendee list shows that there are alos a few other surprise guests, all having to do with the Landis case:
Verbruggen - VP of UCI, still the puppetmaster
McQuaid - Pres of UCI, the puppet himself
Richard Young, prosecutor for USADA but there in China on behalf of WADA.
So, lets get this straight. We have the two "majority" arbitrators, the prosecutor, two decision makers for one of the key appellate parties ALL over in China right before the Landis hearing gets underway.
Can any of you say "marching orders"?
I also found this interesting:
It looks like Pound, Brunet, McLaren served on an Ad Hoc Division of the ADRsportRED Tribunal, set up to hear requests surounding selections to the 2003 Canadian team. Wow.
Cycling Newbie makes some good points about the observation of the case by attorneys, who she thinks are having their professional analysis disputed by the partisan mobs. Folks aren't understanding how bad this looks to the people in the legal profession, because they are blinded by their rooting interests.
JR does some legal research and finds numerous US court cases that take a dim view of deliberately excluding an arbitrator from the decision making process. From Goeller, 1850:
“The opportunity to deliberate, and, if possible, to convince their fellows is the right of the minority, of which they cannot be deprived by the arbitrary will of the majority.”
An emailer sends us the following illustrations and captions, of the IOC meetings in China the other week:
Alleged to be Mr. Brunet, searching for the Blackberry in his pocket so he can respond to Mr. Campbell.
Thought for the Day
No oppression is so heavy or lasting as that which is inflicted by the perversion and exorbitance of legal authority.-Joseph Addison-