Friday Hearings: First Update

I’ve had the video feed from the Floyd Landis hearings going on my computer, but the audio never kicked in, so I’ve been following today’s action via the summaries over at Trust But Verify.

From what I’m seeing right now (nothing), and hearing (equally nothing), now’s a good time to give a quick update on what’s been going on. Maurice Suh picked up with his cross-examination of Dr. Christiane Ayotte from the Canadian anti-doping lab in Montreal. Suh is on form and doing an excellent job of taking apart Ayotte’s testimony from yesterday. There are many good exchanges that illustrate it, but it’s easier just to link to the whole thing.

USADA attorney Matthew Barnett seems to be making objections from time to time, probably when the answers are veering into territory that is unfavorable to USADA. Suh smacks him down several times, telling Barnett (in effect) no more walking objections.

[Walking objections, as Judge Hue referred to them in one of his commentaries at TBV, are a way of leading the witness to respond how you want them to, without saying specifically, “You need to tell them X and Y and Z.” But by the way the attorney phrases his objection, the person testifying understands what the talking points are.]

Ayotte’s cross examination has been suspended so the testimony of another LNDD staffer, Dr. Corinne Buisson, who is listed as an IRMA supervisor, can take place. Buisson apparently has a plane to catch. It’s not clear whose witness she is, but Maurice Suh is the lawyer questioning her at the moment. Could she be a Landis witness? I guess we will find out soon enough.

In following Buisson’s testimony, Maurice Suh has been questioning her over the training of both Cynthia Mongongu and Claire Frelat, the two analytical chemists who testified earlier this week. Buisson’s answers appear to be bolstering the Landis case, as they show little training for Frelat, beyond reading a Standard Operating Procedure manual followed by some practice with the help of her co-worker.

Suh makes some headway, also, in highlighting a problem with the IRMS instrument’s software when it’s run on the old operating system OS/2.

q: you understand the auto background is an algorithm.
a: the calculation of the noise, yes.

q: how would you know more accurately than the computer to remove background?
a: you don’t take it out background. you reposition it correctly?

q: why do you adjust it manually?
a: when you have data, you look at the 2/1 trace and then the s/w places references points that are supposed to be there, the s/w does that, and we need to make sure the reference points are not on a peak area because a peak is by definition is not background noise. So the point of references picked by the s/w are positioned correctly with regard to the background. The representation of the noise is done with a line passing through the points of reference. We need to ensure the line corresponds exactly with the baseline of the chromatogram. It’s rare that it happens by itself with the OS2 software.

q: it’s rare that the os/2 software does this by itself.
a: ??

After that, Suh asks questions that appear to back up the Landis observers’ claims after the April testing of the additional B samples. This appears to be an interesting day, testimony-wise, minus the fireworks.

Overall, Team Landis has been doing well today, punching some holes in USADA’s case. One question I’ve been wondering about is exactly when Team Landis gets to start presenting their case and calling their witnesses. With only three or four days of hearing time left, I would think they should be allowed to present their case soon. Otherwise, it’s going to be a strange sort of proceeding. Perhaps Dr. Buisson is the beginning of the Landis side’s presentation. If not, when will they be allowed to begin?

The later they’re allowed to start presenting their own case, the less fair this arbitration hearing is going to be perceived (or actually be). Stay tuned, there’s more excitement to come from the Floyd Landis hearings.