Hardy’s lawyer answers supplement maker’s charge in doped swimmer case
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
Swimmer Jessica Hardy‘s lawyer, Howard Jacobs, wrote me after seeing the Wednesday blog entry in which nutritional supplement maker AdvoCare disputed findings of the arbitration panel that cut in half Hardy’s two-year doping suspension for use of a steroid in an allegedly contaminated AdvoCare product.
Jacobs, in turn, is disputing some of AdvoCare’s statements.
His response is below.
But, now that both sides have had their say, I am going to let this be the last word from either party until the lawsuits each has filed against the other are resolved.
I am not going to be party to -- as Jacobs ironically noted -- an attempt to try the case in the media.
E-mail from Howard Jacobs:
AdvoCare, after acknowledging that it did not see or hear any of the evidence presented to an independent tribunal of three highly noted and experienced arbitrators (including one retired judge), states that it ‘believes that the arbitration was severely flawed and the panel’s finding regarding the purity of AdvoCare’s products is not supported by the facts or evidence.’ The only thing that is ‘severely flawed’ is AdvoCare’s attempts to disparage factual findings of an American Arbitration Association (‘AAA’) proceeding in which it did not participate. Furthermore, the AAA arbitrators were correct in their refusal to allow AdvoCare to force its way into a contractual arbitration proceeding between Jessica Hardy and USADA. Anyone who wishes to read the AAA decision can readily find it on USADA’s website, and make up their own mind about the facts and the evidence that were presented. It should be evident to anyone who reads the opinion that the scientific evidence was fully vetted through vigorous cross-examination by USADA, who has significant expertise on these issues; after full consideration, the independent arbitration panel accepted Jessica Hardy’s evidence of supplement contamination from two completely independent laboratories as being ‘scientifically valid to show the presence of clenbuterol in the Arginine Extreme product.’ AdvoCare will have every opportunity to present its arguments to a jury in California, should it choose to do so. Unlike AdvoCare, Jessica Hardy will not attempt to try that case to the media.
-- Philip Hersh
