Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Malibu, Day 9 - Morning

To the relief of many, the last day of the Floyd Landis / USADA hearing has arrived. Dr. Simon Davis will be again on the witness stand this morning. USADA will probably present Dr. Brenna as a rebuttal witness. Today's session is scheduled to start at 9:30am, in about 20 minutes.

9:25am, we've got live audio and video. Arlene and Paul Landis, as usual, one of the first attendees to take their seats. People filing in slowly. USADA's lawyers are present. Chatter and laughter in the room.

The panel members have now arrived, and my live feed is gone, so for the time being, I'll follow TBV's coverage.

By the time I got the live feed back at around 10:30am, Young appeared trying to contradict Davis on a sworn statement from February, but without luck. Jacobs has now started questioning Davis. McLaren looks distraught. Davis is excused, 15-minute recess.

USADA's case is going down the drain. Who expects miracles from Dr. Brenna ? Hands up ! So far, Landis won on the science portion, while USADA is focusing too much on the credibility portion, which in my opinion, carries far less weight, if at all. Seems like USADA is in the saving-face phase. Right now I doubt that Dr. Brenna will be called.

The hearing resumes, and I doubted wrong: Young is calling Dr. Brenna. Let's hear it. Dr. Brenna explains how he is able to identify the internal standard; he thereby contradicts Meier-Augenstein's statement that LNDD didn't know how to identify the internal standard. Brenna also believes there are no issues with linearity or lack thereof. duckstrap comments over at TBV:

Brenna appears to be comparing the GCMS chromatograms to alternative GCMS CGs. These are similar, as expected because the chromatography conditions are similar. What is not similar are GCMS CGs that should lead to peak identification, and the IRMS CGs that produce the CIR values. These chromatography conditions are not similar to the GCMS. These are the ones that need to match, and they do not, by a mile.

[Correcting himself] What Brenna was referring to was the retention times of the internal standards for the IRMS results, which, again should be internally consistent. What is not consistent is still the comparison between the IRMS and the GCMS, which is on, e.g. USADA 168 corresponding to the IRMS report on USADA 169.

I have the impression, Brenna is just trying to weasel his way out, like "if memory serves [hint at foggy memory], the value was 1.174 [aah, memory is back]". Suh will call Dr. Davis after the cross-examination of Dr. Brenna, but first: lunch break. Hearing to be resumed 1:15pm.

No comments: