- HOT TOPICS:
- An American start for the Giro? •
- 2010 Routes: Giro | California | TdF •
- LA doc guilty on all counts
USADA chief says Jeanson deal reflects 'most likely outcome' of case
The head of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency said Thursday that the agreement reached with Canadian Geneviève Jeanson reflected “the most likely outcome” of a case involving her positive EPO test in 2005, even if she had appealed her case to the sporting world’s highest court.
USADA general counsel Travis Tygart told VeloNews that even though Jeanson might have faced a lifetime ban from competition for what was technically a second violation, there was reason to believe that the International Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne would not have given the cyclist more than a two-year suspension.
Jeanson and USADA officials reached an agreement last week to stop the agency’s pursuit of the case in exchange for her acceptance of a two-year suspension. She held a U.S. license and was, therefore, subject to U.S. anti-doping rules.
Jeanson tested positive for EPO at Pennsylvania's Tour de ‘Toona in 2005. Because she had already been suspended for missing a post-race drug test at a World Cup in 2004, the EPO positive counted as a second offense, making her eligible for a lifetime ban.
But Tygart said a lifetime ban was by no means a foregone conclusion.
“We knew based on the rules and the case law that had this gone all the way to the International Court (of Arbitration for Sport), a two-year suspension was the most likely penalty,” Tygart said. “Arguably, her first violation – missing a post-race test – might not even have been a violation in the U.S.”
Tygart added that Jeanson had even tested negative on blood and urine tests admitted prior to the 2004 edition of Fleche-Wallonne, making a lifetime penalty even less certain.
The 25-year-old Jeanson’s career has included remarkable performances, but has also been marked by frequent doping allegations. In addition to the 2005 positive and the missed test in 2004, Jeanson was found to have an elevated hematocrit level just before the 2003 world championships in Hamilton, Ontario. Later that same year, Jeanson was named in court documents submitted by Montreal orthopedic surgeon Maurice Duquette in a case in which the physician was convicted of administering performance-enhancing drugs to athletes.
While Duquette specifically named Jeanson, he later recanted that statement in a letter to the rider’s attorney, adding that he had never given her anything other than the local anesthetic Marcaine.
Upon reaching the agreement, Jeanson issued a press release suggesting that part of the reason USADA had offered the deal was that she was ready to mount a strong challenge to the veracity of the test that she failed. Jeanson failed a urine-based EPO test developed at France's national anti-doping laboratory at Châtenay-Malabry.
Tygart dismissed suggestions that Jeanson had a strong enough case to put the existing test into question.
“We’re confident in the method,” Tygart said. “I really can’t imagine that if anyone could make a strong challenge to the test that they would be willing to accept a two-year ban.”
Jeanson had promised to produce evidence from Belgian researcher Joris Delanghe, who successfully challenged the positive EPO test of triathlete Rutger Beke. Beke tested positive for EPO at Belgium's Knokke Triathlon in September of 2004.
Delanghe was prepared to testify that, like Beke, Jeanson’s positive was an example of exercise-induced proteinuria, which could trigger a false positive.
Tygart was quick to point out that the Beke case was something of a procedural aberration, in that it had not been heard in front of a court that had signed on to the World Anti-Doping Code.
“This was a case heard in front of a court in the regional Flemish court in Belgium,” Tygart said. “We’ve tried to get the evidence from that case, just to examine the data, and we can’t even get our hands on it.”
Tygart added that because the case was heard in a local court, the World Anti-Doping Agency had no right of appeal, something that would have occurred in Jeanson’s case.
“The Beke case gets mentioned a lot,” Tygart said, “but no one’s actually seen the test results. No one has really been able to challenge the witness. Not having seen the data, I can only say that the decision reeks of the old (pre-WADA) system, where top-level elite athletes are treated differently than the rest. Hopefully those days are behind us.”
