How Prof McLaren, WADA and IOC influenced public and CAS court

IOC Executive committee apparently intends to appeal the award of the CAS by which 28 Russian Athletes were acquitted to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. It would be a good opportunity to explain how and why Prof. McLaren, WADA and IOC concealed exculpatory evidence so far.

If Prof. McLaren, WADA and IOC would have disclosed the facts which are in their possession from the beginning in a regular procedure to the athletes, the defense and the public, it would have been evident since the publication of the second McLaren report on 9 December 2016 that most of the athletes mentioned on the so-called duchess list are innocent. Instead of this Prof. McLaren, WADA and IOC influenced if not even manipulated the assessment of disciplinary commissions, arbitrators and public opinion

IOC claimed in its media release of 9 December 2016 that

all the samples of all Russian athletes who participated in Sochi will be re-analyzed. https://www.olympic.org/news/statement-of-the-ioc-regarding-the-independent-person-report

WIESCHEMANN | Rechtsanwälte – as defense of athletes concerned – addressed the same questions by letter of 23 January, 23 February, 16 May, 18 May and 19 October 2018 to the IOC Oswald Commission and requested the retest of blood samples of the athletes. WIESCHEMANN | Rechtsanwälte received no answer on this issue during 2017.

IOC informed WIESCHEMANN | Rechtsanwälte for the first time on 24 October 2017, five Days before the hearing that

The blood samples collected on the occasion of the Olympic Games Sochi 2014 were not subject to examination or reanalysis neither within the context of the McLaren Report nor within the additional investigations conducted by the Disciplinary Commission. We confirm that the IOC limited its investigations to the urine samples.

The question whether the blood samples were not tested was discussed on three different occasions within the CAS hearing in which IOC representatives upheld their version.

After CAS issued the operative part of the decisions on 1 February 2018 WIESCHEMANN Rechtsanwälte received on 19 March 2018 the confirmation that different to former statements all blood samples from Russian Athletes collected on the occasion of Sochi 2014 were re-tested especially on the three substances of which the “Duchess Cocktail” allegedly consists – with negative result.

We are willing to admit that the detection window for steroids in blood is potentially shorter than in urine and the value of both test procedures may be different. But considering the number of samples collected and their distribution on different dates during the Olympic Games, make it imperative that one the samples should have been positive if the approach that the athletes had taken the cocktail were true.

In addition, the question which worth this evidence has belongs exclusively to the members of each disciplinary commission and the panels of Court of Arbitration for Sport.

The samples are shown here

blood samples collected Sochi 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nearly each day a sample was collected and on some days up to three or four. The existence of the negative results were not subject of the second Mclaren report and were neither disclosed to the athletes, the defense and CAS panel and – as far as we know – not even to the International Federations and their disciplinary Commission which provisionally suspended some of the athletes.

Secondly, the chain of custody of Sochi laboratory was first time discussed within the CAS hearing after the defense brought the existence to light. The chain of custody is in possession of IOC since 2014 but neither IOC Oswald Commission nor Prof. McLaren was interested in it´s assessment. However, it demonstrates that nearly half of the samples from athletes mentioned in so-called duchess list arrived at the laboratory and were processed not – as Dr. Rodchenkov claimed- in the night time, but during the day under the observation of international observers which made it impossible to swap them.

reception and analyse samples Sochi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To say it very clear: Among samples which were processed during the daytime were some samples on which Prof. Champod observed “multiple T-Marks” from which he believes that they indicate use of a tool to open the bottles.

Both, the negative blood samples and the chain of custody, corroborate very clear that the Story of Sochi 2014 must have been different to the story told by Dr Rodchenkov.

In fact, by concealing the two facts, Prof. McLaren, WADA and IOC manipulated the assessment of disciplinary commissions, arbitrators and public opinion.

It is not our duty to speculate or to decide whether they did it willingly or unknowingly, but it is evident, that the factual basis of the allegations would be refutable very early. The athletes finally acquitted by the Court of Arbitration for Sport have been cheated for two years of their career and their attendance to the Olympic Games 2018.

And a third fact: Meanwhile WIESCHEMANN | Rechtsanwälte had access to a few, not many data of the Laboratory Information Management System LIMS of Moscow laboratory from which WADA and IOC explained that they were reliable basis to not “invite” Russian athletes to Olympic Winter Games 2018. In fact, the data were absolutely correct and give no reason for any concerns of any irregularity in the past.

The defense was criticized by parts of media when it pointed out that most of the allegations of Dr Rodchenkov are inconsistent and rather wrong conclusion than knowledge.

The basic problem of Dr Rodchenkov´s witness statements is still that he obviously never distinguishes between his experience-based knowledge, the version of “the plan” he allegedly knows about and his conclusions from what he believes “the plan” must have been. In his narration everything is similar and indistinctive, and everything sounds like facts.

However, the CAS panels http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Award__5379__internet.pdf apparently comes to the same result:

Some examples:

Rodchenkov claimed that he received messages to identify samples to be swapped “from maybe 10.00 a.m. (para. 308 of the award) “ whereas the competitions in Sochi 2014 ended not before 13.30 and no sample could have been collected before at 10.00 a.m.

Rodchenkov  made false entries in his diary from which a some are mentioned in para 313

Rodchenkov  (para 317) never

– distributed the cocktail,

– seen an athlete taken the cocktail,

– witnessed instructions being given to coaches or athletes

– seen an athlete give a clean urine sample

– seen and athlete tamper with a doping sample

– did not indicate whether a benefit/risk analysis of the cocktail was ever undertaken.

Rodchenkov had no information about who transported the cocktail and how or and in which form the cocktail was transported and administered. (para. 320)

In fact, his allegation came from double hearsay and as such its probative value is very limited (…) and even if it is accepted at face value, the alleged statements reflects merely an intention (on Ms Rodionova´s part) (para 753)

Insofar  Dr Rodchenkov made specific statements (para 571.)  regarding the athlete the panel did not rely on his testimony. It was evident, that Dr Rodchenkov lied.

By his testimony Rodionova allegedly brought him samples of clean urine and samples for wash out tests (para 575.) In fact the athlete could demonstrate by his passport and ADAMS whereabouts that at that time – in contrast to the allegation of Dr Rodchenkov – the athlete was abroad for nearly two month, Abu Dhabi and Australia. (para 584).

In fact, his allegation came from double hearsay and as such its probative value is very limited (…) and even if it is accepted at face value, the alleged statements reflects merely an intention (on Ms Rodionova´s part) (para 753)

What the plan was and what role Dr Rodchenkov actually had in it is still not cleared up. But it is very doubtful that he has been the “mastermind of the Sochi plan”.

Share Button