Landis files with CAS

iainf72

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/13495.0.html

I thought he'd left it, but wrong again. What I have read is if CAS ruled against him he'd "do a Hondo" and take it to a court of law. The US legal system would require him to try every avenue before going there so he'd have to do CAS.

Kléber

I wanted what made the lawyers, who have earned hundreds of thousands of dollars from this story, recommend going to the CAS?

iainf72

Lawyers have a right to make a living you know.

They don't NEED Floyd's business now they've got the entire Kazak economy bankrolling Vino's "too much blood in my thighs" defense.

drenkrom

Whichever way I look at it, I just don't get this. He's already spent pretty much all the money he ever won racing his bike on his first defense. Now he's going to put some more in, probably from loans or other 25$ photo ops. Even if he was to win and CAS was to declare the whole anti-doping system null and void, there is no way he'll ever recoup his losses. Those who believe he's innocent will always see him as the winner of the 2006 Tour and those who don't will always see him as a doper, whatever the verdict. What on Earth is there to be gained?

Let's just hope CAS are a tad more zippy than the USADA panel and this sad story can be put out of its misery soon.

Trev36

iainf72 wrote:

I thought he'd left it, but wrong again. What I have read is if CAS ruled against him he'd "do a Hondo" and take it to a court of law. The US legal system would require him to try every avenue before going there so he'd have to do CAS.

What (or who's) court of law would he take it to??
It's a French race and the offence was done in France.
The AAA hearing in the USA as the national body of the rider where his licence is held.
So in Floyds case the USADA v's Landis.

The CAS (court of abitration for sport) is based in Switzerland, so assuming the hearing would be there.

So who's court of law could over rule?? Is that just another American thing where they think their courts rule the world or something??

Wouldn't it have to be a French court that could be used to overthrow a ruling and declare him a winner of a French owned race. (given the offence was on French soil) ????

iainf72

Trev36 wrote:

[
What (or who's) court of law would he take it to??
It's a French race and the offence was done in France.
The AAA hearing in the USA as the national body of the rider where his licence is held.
So in Floyds case the USADA v's Landis.

Wouldn't it have to be a French court that could be used to overthrow a ruling and declare him a winner of a French owned race. (given the offence was on French soil) ????

No. I believe it's the US Supreme Court. And the action would be taken against the USADA. Something along the lines of they couldn't give a ban based on the evidence provided by the lab. TBH, the ADA won't fare well if that did happen but it's unlikely to do much other then prove a point.

Radsman

Well, if you take Floyd at this word (which may he hard to do), he cares more about making a point (that the anti doping system is flawed) than anything else. Otherwise, he would be better off going silently into the dark...by the time this gets settled his two years will be up anyhow. It is doubtful that he would race in 2008 TDF no matter what happens.

top_bhoy

Remind me - what is the basis of this appeal? I'm trying to remember if the last one was based on having/not having a +ve test or on a technical point of error ie bad administration, by the accredited lab. Its all getting so confusing

iainf72

Top_Bhoy wrote:

Remind me - what is the basis of this appeal? I'm trying to remember if the last one was based on having/not having a +ve test or on a technical point of error ie bad administration, by the accredited lab. Its all getting so confusing

The basis was that the test was so badly performed you could not take the results seriously.

They did say the initial T:E test could not be used because it was so full of errors and while the testosterone + was also not done according to the standards they'd hope for from a WADA lab, the results stood.

Radsman

I believe the general issue is that the testers did not follow appropriate procedures and thus the test results can't be held up as evidence of dopingh (not far so off from the Landaluze case but that was a clear broach of procedure)

Radsman

personally, I think he has a better chance with CAS than USADA (because the whole process became very politcized (thanks partly to Floyds media campaign).

top_bhoy

Innocent or guilty, whatever chance he had I feel went out the window when his manager made public the Lemond conversation. A clear attempt to knobble the witness and the information revealed could only have been passed on from Landis himself!!

iainf72

Radsman wrote:

personally, I think he has a better chance with CAS than USADA (because the whole process became very politcized (thanks partly to Floyds media campaign).

CAS operate differently too - Floyds team will select an arbitator, the USADA the same and the other 2 can select the 3'rd one. In the USADA system they appoint 2 of them and the accused gets one.

Apparantly they're eyeing up a guy called Jan Paulsson to be the Landis selected one. He sounds like an interesting guy because he's got no interest in sport at all and is just interested in making sure the rules are followed - He was on the Landaluze case.

OffTheBackAdam

Either he's absolutely mad, or he really is innocent.
Either way, his top-flight career is probably over, and if he loses, then he's in the poor house for the rest of his life.
It'll take more than a few autographs at $15 a time to pay for this.

Monty Dog

How can he be innocent when he's produced a shred of evidence to prove that the synthetic T in his samples didn't exist? He's only trying to use a technicality in that the second test results are inadmissable because the first test procedure was flawed. However, under 'absolute liability' in the eyes of drug testing he's guilty of the presence of anything that shouldn't be there - and he's not produced any evidence to suggest otherwise.

andyp

It's a good point Monty and one that appears to have been lost in the FUD the Landis camp have created around the case.

Landis ought to be mindful of the wording of the CAS ruling in the Landaluze case;

"The panel has considered that the non-compliance with this standard constituted a procedural flaw serious enough to cause the invalidation of the anti-doping test," said CAS in a statement.

"Even though Inigo Landaluze benefited from this flawed procedure to be acquitted, the CAS decision does not constitute a declaration of his innocence."

Which I read to mean, he got off on a technicality and cannot explain the presence of exogenous testosterone in his sample.

jimmythecuckoo

Let it go Floyd... you are embarrassing yourself now.

iainf72

andyp wrote:

Which I read to mean, he got off on a technicality and cannot explain the presence of exogenous testosterone in his sample.

Indeed, but the Landis camp isn't going for this kind of thing. They've going for "the testing was so poorly performed you cannot trust the results" which the first arb panel agreed on the T:E ratio.

LNDD did the half baked testing on Landaluze too - And the labs boss didn't even seem to take note of the criticism. Mind you, he does wear a tie with a short sleeved shirt....