THIS WEEK IN PRO CYCLING
French lab focus of Landis hearing
On a day when the International Tennis Federation announced it would send drug test samples taken from the upcoming French Open to the WADA accredited lab in Montreal instead of the Laboratoire National du Dépistage du Dopage outside Paris, the LNDD’s credibility faced more harsh scrutiny on the other side of the Atlantic as the Floyd Landis arbitration hearing rolled on in Malibu, California.
While the ITF claimed its decision to swap labs was a question of finances — and not of competence — the Landis defense team continued to make its case that the LNDD wasn’t fit to test samples from tennis players, cyclists or anyone else. Wednesday also saw a lengthy discovery debate, with the Landis side claiming they had been denied key information needed to defend the 2006 Tour de France champion.
It added up to a plodding third day of testimony on the Pepperdine University campus. When proceedings finally closed 25 minutes past the scheduled 5 o’clock finish, only three of a possible 44 witnesses had been called through three days, and only one took the stand Wednesday.
Thursday promised to bring at least a slight change in pace. Testimony will start an hour earlier than the first three days, with LNDD analytical chemist Claire Frelat up first. USADA attorneys also announced they would call Greg LeMond, conceding they might have to interrupt Frelat’s testimony to accommodate the three-time Tour de France winner’s schedule.
Landis, 31, and his legal team are trying to convince the three-member arbitration panel that he did not use synthetic testosterone to win last year’s Tour. If he wins the case he’ll avoid becoming the first Tour champion in 100 years to be stripped of his title. A loss would result in a two-year ban from competitive cycling, plus a further two-year exclusion from riding on a ProTour team. If USADA loses, it would be its first defeat in a case of this kind since the agency was formed in 2000. The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency has a 34-0 in cases that have gone on to arbitration.
The lone witness on Wednesday was LNDD analyst Cynthia Mongongu, who carried out the carbon isotope ratio analysis on Landis’s stage 17 A sample from last year’s Tour de France, and then verified the results of the B, which were done by Frelat. Both returned positive readings, setting in motion the events that have brought the spotlight of the cycling world to Malibu.
The morning session began with the Landis team insisting Frelat be sequestered so she couldn’t listen to their line of questioning or Mongongu’s responses. No doubt the Landis side is hoping the pair contradict each other, casting doubt on the lab’s credibility.
With Frelat tucked away in another room, Landis attorney Howard Jacobs led off the cross examination of Mongongu, a native French speaker who first took the stand a day earlier. Jacobs mission seemed two-fold, calling into question Mongongu’s qualifications (she started at the lab as an intern in 2003), and the functionality of critical piece of equipment used in the analysis of the Landis samples that returned positive readings for synthetic testosterone. Mongongu said she made service calls at least 10 times.
Though there was no repeat of Tuesday’s lost-in-translation muddle that saw the original interpreter dismissed and new one brought in, day three moved along haltingly, as Mongongu frequently misunderstood questions or didn’t give the answers Jacobs or fellow Landis attorney Maurice Suh were looking for.
The liveliest morning exchange came during discussion of a sworn statement from Mongongu in which she accused Landis observers of “accosting” her during April’s reprocessing of B samples from last year’s Tour. USADA claims four of those seven B samples showed traces of exogenous testosterone.
The Landis side contended Mongongu’s failure to name the USADA observer in her complaint revealed bias. Mongongu contended she simply “needed to be able to concentrate on her work.” She resolved the issue by running a strip of tape on the floor behind her, and instructing that it not be crossed.
Jacobs also spent at least an hour addressing chain-of-custody issues, presenting a log sheet that showed time gaps in who at the lab was actually in possession of Landis samples. At one point Mongongu conceded that she’d taken possession of a sample at 11:20 and had it for just five minutes. But the ensuing entry was time stamped 12:45, and Mongongu was not able to explain the discrepancy. “No, I don’t remember,” she answered.
The reasoning here is that this lack of full accountability by the lab shows the possibility of manipulated testing procedures in order to get the reading it was looking for. At least that’s what the Landis side hopes the three-man arbitration panel that will rule in this case decides. The hearing is slated to run until May 23. It will be at least another two weeks before a verdict in rendered. No matter what that outcome is, it’s likely this is just a stop off on the way to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, whose ruling will be final.
Jacobs wrapped up his time on the floor by asking Mongongu about leaks to L’Equipe, France’s daily sports newspaper that has so frequently been privy to inside information from the LNDD. In April, it was L’Equipe that first reported that “several” of Landis’s B samples from last summer’s Tour had returned positive readings for synthetic testosterone.
Mongongu claimed she was unaware that L'Equipe had previously reported leaked information from LNDD, and then emphatically denied she was the source of those leaks. Mongongu did say that LNDD director Jacques de Ceaurriz was bothered by the leaks. “I can't quote him, but he was not happy,” she explained.
Throughout it all, Landis sat in the same seat he’s occupied from day one, again sporting a yellow tie. His mood seemed impassive most of the day, occasionally replaced by shrugs and smirks. During one recess session he said he was hoping to return home over the weekend to get some riding in, but the slow pace makes that unlikely. There has still been no ruling on a potential Saturday session, but with as many as 41 witnesses left to call, it’s hard to imagine taking two days off.
Lead attorney Suh took over the Landis team cross examination of Mongongu after the lunch break, and immediately turned attention to the computer log files that the defense is claiming show the overwriting of data relevant to testing results. Suh also tried to show that Mongongu made mistakes during her testing and had to double back and start over.
Suh’s cross-examination ended abruptly, when Mongongu claimed she required a special report to answer questions about the accuracy of a measurement. The Landis team didn’t have the report — or weren’t given it in time. That led to a lengthy sparring match between Suh and USADA lead attorney Richard Young. Young claimed if the Landis side had simply asked for the right documents they would “have in their hands what they were making all the fuss about.”
The arbitration hearing continues Thursday morning, and with LeMond slated to take the stand, cycling might actually get a little attention.
Photo Gallery
