Topic: News: Chris LeRoux Ruled Ineligible

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Pete,

There isn't anything to mediate. USADA's position is that no matter what mistakes or improper actions it has taken, that it has supreme unquestionable authority to do whatever it wants. I do not know if I want to compete again. Sometimes I think I will at some point and sometimes I think I won't.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

The USOC and USADA lawyer seemed to have come together against me now. The USOC lawyer has said that "they messed up" and provided "a terribly worded retirement policy." He has left the USAW holding the bag for changing my status without formal notice and simply ducked the issue of whether they were told to do it by USADA. He has admitted that my pointing out their rule violations, which he won't admit are rule violations, has resulted in them being out to get me- retaliation, something expressly forbidden in their own rules. While I have been told selection for OOC testing when you are in the program is random, he claims it is not and that they will be "coming to get me right away." A few days ago, he agreed with me that according to USOC rules, they can not force me in the OOC program when I am currently not even a member of the USAW (and haven't even competed in more than a year) as the rule they are citing to force me in the program says they can test any "eligible" athlete and I am not eligible since I am not a USAW member. However, while he says they can't do it, he also says if I refuse to cooperate now that they have put me in the program anyway that I will be declared to be refusing testing and if I refuse long enough will be declared positive. I don't understand this contradiction and I don't think they do either.

He also claims that an expired membership in the USAW means I am retired, if I intend to compete again. If I do not intend to compete again, not being a member is not being retired according to them. So, he says "You have to know if you are going to compete again" and that this decision affects what it means if you are not a member or not. I have said all along that I do not know if and when I will ever compete again and am only protecting my right to do so when and if I choose and my rights to have them follow the rules as they were told to me in writing. This is their effort to manipulate the rules to force me in the OOC program for six months before I couple compete at any level. Basically, they are saying that if I don't pay my USAW membership dues immediately and/or cooperate with testing regardless of whether I am a USAW member that they will claim that means I am retired- never mind that there own rules say I must formally retire in writing to be retired not just fail to pay them cash. He has stated that I am trying to take advantage of a hole in their rules and using technicalities to duck testing- never mind that they wrote the rules, never mind that they are trying to change them after the fact, and never mind that they are clearly the ones trying to manipulate them in any way they can figure out to justify their retaliation against me. He said that the rules need to be changed to eliminate this hole that he claims does and doesn't exist depending on my intentions.

They claim I have no right to appeal their changing my eligibility status without formal notice although they are leaving me with the option of pursuing the matter against the USAW who they blame for those actions. Their statement is that this will get me nowhere because I can not cite damages. I have always said that when I retired and when I came back from retirement, they offered me the choice of competing domestically without the hassle of being in the OOC program or being in the program and being eligible for trips and money. I made my choice on that information to just compete domestically. Now, they say that wasn't really the choice and I have to be in the program no matter what though it is now too late to gain the benefits (Olympic Team). I have constantly said that if properly informed of this choice I would have chosen to be in the program and get the benefits of being in the program. He said I was "talking out of both sides of my mouth" when I say this. It seems clear enough to me and especially since he is supposed to be my representative or helper or something, I am pretty upset that he is calling me a liar when telling the simple truth about my lack of knowledge of specific competition plans but desire to keep my options open. The bottom line is that if they had properly informed me of their policy and/or properly enforced it at the time I came back from retirement, I would now be eligible to try out for the Olympic Team if I wanted to.

They think they can do whatever they want, change the rules, interpret them differently depending on my "intentions" and basically do anything to accomplish their goals. Its a classic case of an organization whose entire existence is to enforce the rules feeling they can violate any rule since the "ends justify the means." Their bottom line is that "They are holding all the cards." I am unsure what I will do. I do not wish to cooperate with what I feel is an incompetent bureaucracy trying to strip me of my freedom to make my own decisions and which is retaliating against me for pointing out that they aren't following their own rules. But, it seems they really can just do whatever they want regardless of the rules and will be able to say I am positive for a drug test because I refuse to cooperate with them when I am not even an active, eligible athlete. I am trying to find a lawyer.

[Jim Storch]

Absolutely disgusting!

[Matt Erdman]

That is really sad. Any idea what your own lawyer would cost? I can't image that it would be pretty. Though sometimes a good lawyer can write a letter and clear up a lot of things.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Matt,

Whatever a lawyer would cost to hire, I can't pay it.  If we are unable to settle the matter to my satisfaction peacefully, I would then refuse to comply with what is clearly an improper demand to be tested. They would then publicly announce me as refusing to comply/positive, which would equate to libel given that they have no authority to test me. At that point, I believe a lawyer will take my case on contingency and sue the pants off them. I am also asking the ACLU for assistance.

[John Bologna]

Chris,

I have been following your case the past couple of months and the actions of USADA show that they lack creditability. When I ran the American Open in 2001 the woman from USADA threatened to cancel the competition just prior to the 1st session. Only two other people besides myself know about this. If you want the details on what happened contact me directly.

It has been my opinion from the outset that WADA/USADA are concerned primarily with their power. It is all about them and not the welfare of the athletes. The problems with testing notification date to the case of Henry Marsh (this is pre WADA/USADA). As you have pointed out they do not like it when they are questioned. They have and will do anything they can to make it VERY difficult and COSTLY for anyone to appeal their decisions. They know that the athletes do not have the resources and support system to properly defend their cases.

Dick Pound had said that they want to eliminate the need for the B sample since it was almost never different from the A results. In addition he wanted them to lower the burden of proof to non analytical positives being all that was needed to declare an athletes positive. What about the Dubin Commission hearings? What does this say about creditability and motives? Problems with testing, paperwork and procedures? Look at the Butch Reynolds case. Also what happened during the international training week in November 2001 prior to the OWG points out an extreme lack of professionalism, respect for protocol and the athletes on WADA's part. Again, if you want the details on this situation contact me directly. 

While some of these situations pre date WADA/USADA they point out a side that has not seen the light of day. Double standards and hypocrisy? Look at the 2002 Olympic Winter Games. SLOC got to keep the money from the company who bought the rights to be the official supplier of supplements. The breakman on USA 1 (bobsled) got DQ'd after using a sample that the company provided.  Dick Pound was quoted in USA as saying that he thought that it was a bad idea for SLOC to have a supplement company as an official supplier. However he did nothing to sanction SLOC instead putting the entire blame and responsibility on the athlete.

I could go on for a very long time but enough for now. I do not want anyone reading this to have the impression that I am endorsing drugs. I AM NOT NOT NOT! I just have a problem with the abuse of power, lack of respect and grandstanding on their part an example of which is a case involving a 14 year old (not in wl). He was on the first level of the national program. For his first NAN test they came to his house at 3:30AM. For his 2nd they went directly into his classroom and announced that they were there to test him for drugs. What about going to the office (isn't it common policy for all visitors to report there first??) and asking the principal to escort him from class?   

Hang in there and pursue your case. You have my best wishes.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

John et al,

I appreciate the support. There is a teleconference scheduled for Tuesday for the USOC Ombudsman, the USADA lawyer, my coach John T. Thrush, and myself. I have a settlement offer in mind. Cross your fingers that they will see reason.

Thanks,

Chris

[John Bologna]

Chris,

Your situation is one of many problems over the past 25 years. the testers like to claim they are working for the greater good of mankind, etc yet their lies continue. WADA/USADA need to be held accountable for their actions but many people choose to stand by and allow these abuses to continue.

When the era of "modern' testing started around 1983 many of these concerns were raised but nothing was done. For some reason WADA/USADA have been given the authority to govern sports while being accountable to no one.

One of the goals when testing first started was to get it into the realm of public opinion and it was thought that getting around the issue of athlete's rights could be done by making testing in effect a condition of employment. The first concern was not the health and performance of the athletes. I do not think that drug use/testing should be the primary focus in sport. To do so would assume that it is simply a matter of taking something and you will become a champion. We have many more concerns that need to be addressed.

When testing began athletes were encouraged to use vitamins, natural and herbal supplements. When the problem of banned metabolites ( if you had an injection of Novocaine at the dentist you would test positive for cocaine) was discovered after an athlete tested positive at the Olympic trials (not wl) in 1988 they would answer no more questions on the subject. Once again the whole process continued without question.

Have the courage to stand behind your convictions and pursue your case because you are in the right. Do not be denied in your pursuit of justice as WADA/USADA need to be held very publically accountable. They have no problems putting an athlete front & center, maybe it should be their turn.
 
"Just because you are one and they are many doesn't mean they are right" Steve Prefontaine