Amsterdam, Netherlands – Lance Armstrong called it a “witch hunt” from the very beginning, saying a French newspaper used dubious evidence to accuse him of doping – even charging that lab officials mishandled his samples and broke the rules.
According to a Dutch investigator’s findings released Wednesday, he may have been right.
The report, commissioned late last year by the International Cycling Union, cleared the record seven-time Tour de France champion of allegations that he used performance-enhancing drugs during his first win in 1999.
It said 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.”
The investigation also concluded the French laboratory that handled the samples and the World Anti-Doping Agency “violated applicable rules on athlete confidentiality by commenting publicly on the alleged positive findings.”
The report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss possible legal and ethical violations by WADA, which is headed by Dick Pound, and to consider “appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations.”
The French sports daily L’Equipe reported in August six of Armstrong’s urine samples taken in 1999 came back positive for the endurance-boosting hormone EPO when they were retested in 2004.
In a statement, Armstrong said he was pleased the investigation confirms “what I have been saying since this witch hunt began: Dick Pound, WADA, the French laboratory, the French Ministry of Sport, L’Equipe, and the Tour de France organizers … have been out to discredit and target me without any basis and falsely accused me of taking performance-enhancing drugs in 1999.”
The ICU appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman last October to investigate the handling of the urine tests by the French national anti-doping laboratory. Vrijman said his report exonerates Armstrong completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France.
“It’s clearly everything we feared,” Pound said of the findings. “There was no interest in determining whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or not. … I don’t know how a Dutch lawyer with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading laboratories in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong is totally exonerated seems strange.”
