# Ullrich done for good (DNA resutls in)!



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Cycling4all is reporting that the DNA analysis of Fuentes' blood bags thought to belong to Ullrich have confirmed that the blood is indeed his.


----------



## mr meow meow (Jan 29, 2004)

*velonews reported it as well*

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/11987.0.html


So... now that it appears Operation Puerto is legitimate then isn't Basso screwed? He did indicate that if the investigation into his involvment is renewed he'd be willing to give DNA. When the dust settles on this ...again.. we're gonna have fewer and fewer stars in the peloton.

That's no necessarily a bad thing


----------



## harlond (May 30, 2005)

Maybe I haven't followed OP closely enough, but doesn't the DNA evidence show only that Ullrich may have planned to commit a doping offense, not that he actually committed one? Is there evidence that he did more than plan?


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

harlond said:


> Maybe I haven't followed OP closely enough, but doesn't the DNA evidence show only that Ullrich may have planned to commit a doping offense, not that he actually committed one? Is there evidence that he did more than plan?


This isn't a criminal case. You don't need anywhere near that kind of proof to get your racing license revoked or even just to get ostracized by most of the Pro Tour teams because you're bad for the sport.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2004)

The other implicated riders will now have to give up their DNA.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

dagger said:


> The other implicated riders will now have to give up their DNA.


I bet there are any number of Astana, Tinkoff, and Discovery riders trying like hell to remember if they got everything put back in that they had taken out.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

mr meow meow said:


> He did indicate that if the investigation into his involvment is renewed he'd be willing to give DNA.


Basso said he'd give a DNA sample if ordered to by a national or international agency. That's a much higher threshold than just reopening an investigation.


----------



## mr meow meow (Jan 29, 2004)

*You're right*



asgelle said:


> Basso said he'd give a DNA sample if ordered to by a national or international agency. That's a much higher threshold than just reopening an investigation.


But wouldn't this be enough for the Italian federation to take the case off the shelf? Since OP now has a direct connection to one of the implicated it seems that this would be enough for the italians to investigate anew. 

In any case I think another black cloud is nearing for all implicated.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

mr meow meow said:


> But wouldn't this be enough for the Italian federation to take the case off the shelf?


All depends right? The reason WADA was created in the first place is federations use to "shelve" everything. Clearly certain federations have become tough on doping (France, foremost, but also now Germany, Belgium, Swiss) whereas Italy and Spain are still holding out somewhat. It probably all depends on someone within CONI wanting to catch Basso doping vs. the more likely scenario of many people wanting to make sure that doesn't happen.

Now if the UCI really wanted to walk the talk, they'd have all the likely suspects submitting DNA, pony up the money and get the tests done themselves. Then again, why would they do this? Tons of bad press and ruined stars would be the likely outcome.


----------



## Guruman (Dec 19, 2005)

*EPO found?*

Has there been any info released stating that the blood in the 9 bags matched to Jan contained EPO? Or any other doping products?

If none of those 9 bags of blood contain doping products...what conclusions can be drawn?


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Guruman said:


> What conclusions can be drawn?


That the only reason a gyneacologist in Spain who has admitted to doping athletes had Ullrich's blood in his possession is so that he could put it back in him for important races?


----------



## Guruman (Dec 19, 2005)

*Back in...*

Just because it came out doesn't mean it went back in...and it is the "back in" that is the doping offence...No?

Taking the blood out could indicate intent to put it back in and therefore dope...but it is only intent at best and not proof of doping...This is all assuming the blood is clean...if doping products are found the any of the 9 bags...intent is replaced with did...


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Guruman said:


> Just because it came out doesn't mean it went back in...and it is the "back in" that is the doping offence...No?


Yes, blood doping is banned under the WADA code.


----------



## jimcav (Jun 15, 2003)

*seems precarious still to me*

reports don't amount to much until all the details on chain of custody and testing are revealed. 
OP was thrown out as it violates no law in Spain, right? and it seems to me to run afoul of any other laws or cycling body there would need to be evidence of doping--ie a test on an athlete showing he doped. finding paraphanalia and even blood does not seem to rise to that. suspicious, sure, but maybe it was planted there like OJs glove.....because it is reasonable to say Jan was going to dope, does not mean he meant to or did. Maybe he gave blood and it was sold second hand for a nefarious scheme--not as reasonable, but not impossible. 

so my employer has a zero drug tolerance plan. if they find a pot at my friend's, a known pot-head, and my finger prints are on the baggie, that may look like i planned or intended something--but----doesn't matter, until they have my urine chock full of THC. 

not a great analogy but i don't see how this is anything more than a bit of scandalous news--it is proof of nothing


----------



## terzo rene (Mar 23, 2002)

The only statements that have come out to date have been that the quantities of exogenous EPO found in the bags was not a danger to health. So clearly there were doping products found in the bags generally, but no indication of whose or what else was found.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

jimcav said:


> cycling body there would need to be evidence of doping--ie a test on an athlete showing he doped.


You do not need to fail a dope test to be suspended for doping. For a similar case see Museeuw.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> You do not need to fail a dope test to be suspended for doping. For a similar case see Museeuw.


or even better, miller. Just because the vials were found in his home does not mean he had ever doped


----------



## JSR (Feb 27, 2006)

Ullrich might be screwed for an ancillary reason. He signed an affidavit that he had nothing to do with Fuentes. Now his blood is found among Fuentes' stuff. 

I'm pretty sure this is the crux of the German case against Ullrich. The charge is fraud, for having lied in the affidavit, not doping.

JSR


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

All the above mentioned better hope they have a nice big "absorbing" chamious in their shorts


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

the fraud charge was filed by a criminologist, Britta Bannenberg. It's for defrauding T-Mobile, but I haven't found a clear reference to whether or not the case is one in which T-Mobile are seeking damages. Anyone know how the case is structured in Germany? Banneberg is apparently a professor (criminologist): did she file a complaint on behalf of T-Mobile? I understand he could also face potential criminal charges for violating medical procedured as well. 

Amazing that one guy is going to be in and out of courtrooms all year while another is potentially going to win the Tour. I can't imagine tour organizers would want anything to do with Basso-two consecutive years of doping scandals. I hope they don't invite Discovery...


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*yes packing is as illegal as anything*



Dwayne Barry said:


> Yes, blood doping is banned under the WADA code.


the Eddy B method has been frowned upon for years


----------



## jimcav (Jun 15, 2003)

*is this about Jan--he is not riding, right?*



Dwayne Barry said:


> You do not need to fail a dope test to be suspended for doping. For a similar case see Museeuw.


what i meant was how can this amount to anything for him---i don't know German law--but here all he needs is a plausible way his blood got there, assuming it is his, was not tampered with, chain of custody etc. I understand they can do whatever they want with active riders--not that i agree with that. i say develop a good test, one that detects substances at a level that has scientific evidence of affecting performance. 
I might find out my tap water has 1 part per billion of lead if the technology can test at that level of detection, but it would be meaningless in terms of health.

jim


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

jimcav said:


> what i meant was how can this amount to anything for him---i don't know German law--but here all he needs is a plausible way his blood got there, assuming it is his, was not tampered with, chain of custody etc.


Well it effectively ends his career regardless of what he wants to do. It will be his second doping offense, so he gets a lifetime ban. Not sure this will ever happen unless he tries to take out a license with a National Federation. Museuuw was suspended for 2 years, even though he already retired.

Ullrich actually has it worse than most since this all came about because of a civil case in Germany. I don't know the standard of proof for this sort of thing in Germany but come on? There is only one reasonable conclusion; Ullrich was doping. Who know how the civil case will turn out, maybe he'll get by on some technicality or something. That certainly seems to be how these doping related matters end when they get in the court systems in Europe.


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

crossboy said:


> All the above mentioned better hope they have a nice big "absorbing" chamious in their shorts


----------



## percy (May 17, 2004)

I don't get too hung up on this from a purely legal perspective. He may or may not be found guilty by a court or other governing body, but that doesn't change my belief that he (and presumably quite a few others) lied, cheated, and generally acted in bad faith, thus violating the public trust that we (fans, sponsors, etc.) placed in them. 

At a minimum, we now know that Ullrich lied about not having any relationship with Fuentes. Contrary to some early speculation, we also now know it is possible to capture and identify DNA samples from the Puerto blood evidence. As well, at least in Ullrich's case, the investigators' inference about the meaning of the various code words used to identify the blood bags was correct. That certainly implies that their identification of other alleged Fuentes clients may also be correct.

In light of all this, the other implicated riders (Basso et. al.) have a pretty easy way to exonerate themselves: all they have to do is agree to a DNA test. If I was falsely accused of a crime or infraction and knew I could unequivoally prove my innocence with a DNA test, I would jump at the chance. Refusing to do so simply implies they may have something to hide, and claiming that it somehow violates their right to privacy isn't a particularly strong argument for celebrities that have to pee in a cup as a normal part of their job.

Because of this, as a fan, I choose to no longer root for riders that have been implicated in Puerto. Unfortunately, I can also no longer provide my support as a fan for teams (and therefore their sponsors) that have hired those riders.


----------



## RHRoop (Nov 1, 2006)

*European courts*

A few people made good points about what Ullrich might ultimately be charged with. That he gave blood may not be a criminal offense inspite of what his intentions may have been.

The legal jurisdiction of the courts in question may also come into play. If he is charged in Germany since he was licensed in Switzerland and likely gave the blood in Spain it may be challenging for a prosecutor to hang the charges anywhere. Especially since the offenses were not technically against any Spanish laws at the time.

This does of course raise the bar for other implicated riders. Basso in particular or at least for his dog. Will public opinion alone be enough to pressure him and Discovery to submit to testing? If he has nothing to hide then one would think he would willingly or voluntarily submit if only to clear his good name. How likely is that to happen?

The only other thing I would like to see come out of this is some of the other athletes implicated outed. It isn't right that cycling is taking the brunt of this when most people acknowledge that football and other sports are also dirty.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

RHRoop said:


> The legal jurisdiction of the courts in question may also come into play. If he is charged in Germany since he was licensed in Switzerland and likely gave the blood in Spain it may be challenging for a prosecutor to hang the charges anywhere. Especially since the offenses were not technically against any Spanish laws at the time.


The tests were done as part of a civil case in Germany where, if I understand correctly, Ullrich is charged with some sort of fraud. He signed a statement for T-mobile where he said he didn't have anything to with Fuentes. This obviously suggests otherwise.


----------



## rodster (Jun 29, 2006)

We'll see how it plays out, whether he gets charged with a crime, gets sued by T-Mobile or any of his sponsors.

What I wonder/question is this. The reports say that 9 bags of blood were consistent to Jan's DNA. Does this strike anyone else as excessive?

I wonder what size bags these were. Your standard "unit" of blood or some smaller/larger qty? Over what period of time was this blood withdrawn? What's the shelf life of the withdrawn blood? Was it 100% Jan's blood or was some of it Tyler's twin's blood?

With regard to a tranfusion, what qty is pumped back in for your typical blood boosting? How long before you could do it again?


----------



## danielc (Oct 24, 2002)

*Timely retirement...*

When I first read about Ullrich's retirement in February, I had a notion that something like this was going to happen down the road. It seemed that he had no way out of it and it was a matter of time that a DNA test would link him to some bags of blood. Realizing this, retirement was the best way to honorably bow out of the sport and maintain some of his credibility and accomplishments. In light of a potentially new business selling bicycles bearing his name, this was not a bad idea at the time.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

rodster said:


> I wonder what size bags these were. Your standard "unit" of blood or some smaller/larger qty? Over what period of time was this blood withdrawn? What's the shelf life of the withdrawn blood? Was it 100% Jan's blood or was some of it Tyler's twin's blood?
> 
> With regard to a tranfusion, what qty is pumped back in for your typical blood boosting? How long before you could do it again?


Those are all interesting questions that would make for a great read. Maybe Ullrich and Fuentes should get together and write a book. Hamilton could do the forward


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Those are all interesting questions that would make for a great read. Maybe Ullrich and Fuentes should get together and write a book. Hamilton could do the forward


LOL, that would probably pay their lawyer fees and then some!


----------



## Guruman (Dec 19, 2005)

*missed that...*

I missed reading where Jan had signed an affidavit stating that he had nothing to do with Fuentes. That said, I agree with other posters that this and his effort to block the use of his DNA sample to compare against the recovered bags of blood really is the knockout punch that will put him out of cycling: riding, coach, managing, whatever...for life.

I just hope that the next thing we read about Jan is not as we read about Pantani...


----------

