Thursday, September 20, 2007

AP/Pells says Guilty, publication today

AP/Eddie Pells claims to have gotten some documents with a 2-1 Guilty verdict.

According to documents obtained by AP, and to be made public later Thursday, the vote was 2-1 to uphold the results, with lead arbitrator Patrice Brunet and Richard McLaren in the majority and Christopher Campbell dissenting.


The apparently voided the T/E, but accepted the IRMS/CIR results. We await the details of the decision to see how this was justified.

The CyclingNews also reports that Landis has lost his year long fight against doping charges. CyclingNews spoke to Pat McQuaid who had this to say:

It is true, we have been on to USADA and others about it," McQuaid said. "We can confirm that Pereiro will be the winner of the 2006 Tour de France, and that Floyd Landis will get a two year ban." There has been no official statement on the start date of the ban, but McQuaid speculated it would run from the end of the 2006 Tour.

10 comments:

The D. said...

I just got the e-mail about this from a friend...unbelievable. I am in shock.

atown, tx. said...

www.cyclingnews.com
"Still, in the end, the case was about the science -- for both the Landis and the USADA sides -- with the arbitration panel determining that the facts were not enough to call the findings of the tests into question."

so if facts are not enough what is?

Julie said...

Once again, "sources" say...

bill hue said...

You need no longer wonder what Dr Botre's opinion about IRMS testing protocol was. The decision has to be that the IRMS proceedures were performed within International Laboratory Standards, as blessed by the Panel's "independent" (but WADA employed nontheless) "expert".

I have said it before, in a "real" court, in Europe or in North America, the flaws identitfied by all 3 Panel members would cause the case to be dismissed before the fact finder would apply the standard of proof.

Sad day for justice. Great day (and vindiction) for WADA, the Federations and USADA.

Same as it ever was.

Rob said...

Hopefully this is just jumping the gun on the press's part. If this is confirmed then I have two words for the USADA: Lame Asses.

Professional Athletes have no rights and sloppy marginal work is acceptable.

Sacky said...

1. Here's a write-up at MSNBC which actually does a good job of presenting the defense arguments:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20889737/

2. I call bullshit on throwing out the easy test but not the hard ones.

3. Anybody wanna buy a bike? I find this to be very discouraging.

Michael said...

Check this out from Velonews:

Kellie Power, spokeswoman for Landis's lawyers, told Reuters that they had yet to receive any notification of the verdict.

HOW DOES THIS STUFF GO PUBLIC BEFORE LANDIS GETS OFFICIAL WORD???

Also read the following in the ESPN article (I think it was the ESPN Article):

The majority repeatedly wrote that any mistakes made at the lab were not enough to dismiss the positive test, but also sent a warning.

"If such practises continue, it may well be that in the future, an error like this could result in the dismissal" of a positive finding by the lab.

WTF?? Why not this one? Landis got screwed. The Arbs admitted that the lab screwed up the T/E test. According to WADA, no other tests should have been performed.

Guess now we know why we haven't heard about the Mayo B sample,'eh?

Jeffnova said...

For the arbitrators to find such a result, they must have had to disregard all facts and reason in their opinion.

The mental gymnastics performed in the opinion should be legendary.

Julie said...

I know in the appeal the case basically starts all over again. Will there be any review of this panel's apparent procedural errors(the "indepenent" expert, etc)?

wschart said...

Any appeal to CAS starts anew, unlike a criminal appeal in the US. It would simply be a new trial, starting from scratch. Any procedural irregularities of the arb panel would not figure at all.