is dubious at best that he tested positive for anything.
In October 2005 UCI appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman to investigate the handling of urine tests by the French national anti-doping laboratory, LNDD. Vrijman was the head of the Dutch anti-doping agency for ten years, since then he has worked as a defense attorney defending high-profile athletes against doping charges. <11>. Vrijman's report exonerated Armstrong<12> and said that the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of international anti-doping control testing," and may also have been against the law. <13>. The report said that tests on urine samples were conducted improperly and fell so short of scientific standards that it was "completely irresponsible" to suggest they "constitute evidence of anything."<14>. The recommendation of the commission's report was that no disciplinary action whatsoever should be taken against any rider on the basis of the LNDD research. It also called upon the WADA and LNDD to submit themselves to an investigation by an outside independent authority.<15> The World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) rejects UCI's stance on Armstrong's alleged drug abuse and considers legal action.<16>
In June 2006, French newspaper Le Monde reported claims made by Betsy and Frankie Andreu during a deposition that Armstrong had admitted using performance-enhancing drugs to his physician just after brain surgery in 1996. Armstrong's statement also suggested that Betsy Andreu may have been confused by possible mention of his post-operative treatment which included steroids and EPO that are routinely taken to counteract wasting and red-blood-cell destroying effects of intensive chemotherapy.<1> The Andreus' testimony was related to litigation between Armstrong and SCA Promotions, a Texas-based company that was attempting to withhold a $5-million bonus; this was eventually settled out of court with SCA paying Armstrong and Tailwind Sports $7.5 million, to cover the $5-million bonus plus interest and lawyers' fees. The Andreau's allegation was not supported by any of the eight other people present, including Armstrong's doctor Craig Nichols <2>, or his medical history, although according to Greg LeMond there exists a recorded conversation in which Stephanie McIlvain, Armstrong's contact at Oakley Inc., said to Greg LeMond, "You know, I was in that room. I heard it."<3>. Why LeMond was recording this conversation is unknown, and LeMond has been embroiled in his own disputes with Armstrong.
But wait:
LeMond later issued an apology to Armstrong, saying he was "a great champion" and that his critical remarks on Armstrong's links to Ferrari had been taken out of context.
I (actually he doesn't) don't have to prove he did not do anything wrong. You have it backwards here.
What do they have to gain? Who knows, perhaps they don't like being relegated to the second tier of Tour de France winners as they were being bested by an order of magnitude. Who knows, they have made UNSUBSTANTIATED claims. Where is LeMond's recording if it will prove his case?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
