Not benny - David Howman. His feelings are hurt poor baby.
1 Like
Aw poor Howman, it must be so terrible for him to get all this money, trips, freebies and talking circuit, and having to be accountable too…diddums…
21 Likes
Why would you care that you were being blamed if your conscience is clear.
He doesn’t seem to care re what our guy’s went through and the outcome, coz the AFL, NRL, ASADA all learned from the exercise.
FARKER
(I hope all who are blaming him, keep on blaming him, as it is irking him. Hence the article)
17 Likes
Could try the IAAF, where he has a position with his old AFL mate Clothier, in the IAAF Integrity Unit.
You could ask him if WADA would have appealed absent the Australian Government grant of $100k.
Who says politics and sport don’t mix?
Also, could he supply the information that the former ASADA CEO neglected to provide to an Australian Senate Committee as to the health and performance enhancing effects of TB4?
14 Likes
Could also ask him about the background to that substantial Russian voluntary contribution to WADA under his watch ( as documented in the WADA Executive Committee report of 11 May 2013). That sort of integrity would make him suitable for the IAAF.
5 Likes
CONTACT US
Telephone: +377 99 99 64 00
Email: [email protected]
Athletics Integrity Unit
1st Floor
6 Quai Antoine 1er
MC 98007
Monaco
Surely someone can find or figure out an email. Need to send him Bruce’s stuff.
1 Like
Hope that flog cops it for the rest of his life!
6 Likes
Strange how Howman is bleating like a baby - At the end of the day the EFC34 were convicted on the basis of a guess - Nothing more or nothing less.
16 Likes
This is the best guess as to the reason Dank refuses to tell us where he purchased the thymosin from. He went after cheap thymomodulin from China to increase his own profit margin, and ignored or didn’t know that Chinese thymomodulin is a different blend. It explains why he has been uncooperative to the point of ruining his own life.
The saga was a saga because he wanted to make some extra cash and purchased the wrong stuff, clearing the way for ASADA, WADA & the AFL to run their wrecking ball through our club. What a bunch of farkers.
4 Likes
What a self-serving kant.
And special mention to The Age for still insisting on rubbing it in to Essendon supporters at every opportunity…
9 Likes
I love the way Howman says the AFL tribunal got the burden of proof “just slightly wrong”, and somehow respected ex judges had less idea than the CAS gravy train panel members.
I would love for that phrase “slightly wrong” be put to the test and the actual burden of proof that was used by CAS was forensically examined, given there is no meaningful or just appeals process for CAS’s interpretation of “comfortable satisfaction”.
It should be incumbent on our parliament to investigate the justness of international tribunals our citizens are subject to, given especially that this was an entirely domestic matter.
18 Likes
Lol. The judges got the burden of proof wrong.
When specifically was the alleged substance administered? - Don’t know.
Which players got how much? - Don’t know.
Did anyone see the actual alleged substance?
Anyone? - No.
Did anyone ever even mention the alleged substance? - No.
But you’re comfortably satisfied all 34 took this substance that no-one saw or talked about.
Oh, yes.
Quite comfortably.
43 Likes
As Chip Le Grand wrote in the updated 'The Straight Dope, “The biggest anti-doping case… determined by a best guess.”
10 Likes
Howman’s office within walking distance of the Casino? Seems appropriate.
4 Likes
it wouldn’t the only thing that would happen then is more of the same
yeah right who would believe that ??? when they took 34 out for 2 years with no positive tests at all!! (yes we did only serve a year but they got the full penalty)
6 Likes
J34 did a forensic analysis of the standard of proof in the Essendon case, I think by Kim Sawyer.
You could also compare the approach of CAS in the Levkov case and the Essendon case.
7 Likes
Sloppy by Howman- he should have said the AFL got the standard of proof just slightly wrong.
3 Likes
Did you say “Dr Kim Sawyer” - J34 symposium
5 Likes
Bruce Francis has a bit to say about Howman:
DOCUMENT 2: WHY DAVID HOWMAN SHOULD NOT BE ON THE INTEGRITY REVIEW PANEL
Newspaper reports, immeasurable blogs and social media comments indicate that many athletes and many Australians: are opposed to:
WADA being able to appeal decisions made by Australian tribunals and courts;
Australian athletes being subject to Swiss law; Australian athletes having to self-incriminate; Australian athletes having to prove their innocence; untested hearsay evidence from crooks being used against Australian athletes; the incestuous WADA/CAS selecting two panellists on CAS panels; Australian taxpayers’ money being given to WADA to challenge Australian court and tribunal decisions.
As a former director-general of WADA, David Howman can’t be objective in
discussing these issues on the Integrity Review panel. Howman has a clear conflict of interest. To paraphrase Sir Frank Packer’s 1962 comments complaining about the New York Yacht Club, complaining to Howman about WADA is like complaining to your mother-in-law about your wife.
WADA relied upon tainted evidence collected by ASADA in a corrupted investigation WADA director-general David Howman ignored precise details of the tainted ASADA evidence that I gave him. (See Document 5C).
WADA argued that Dank introduced a team-based supplements program at Essendon. Incomprehensibly, the panel accepted the following ASADA prepared table was a ‘team-based’ programme in which every player received the same substance but in different dosages.
Substance No of Players
AOD-9604 injections
Cerebrolysin Injections
AOD-9604 Cream
Colostrum Tablets
Comfrey Paste
Lact-A-Way
Lube All Plus
Melanotan II
Melatonin
Traumeel Injections
Thymosin Injections
Tribulus Tablets
Amino Acid Injections
Vitamin B IV Drips
Vitamin C IV Drips
- As WADA did not submit any evidence questioning the validity of the above table, it was dishonest for WADA to claim it was a ‘team-based’ programme.
6.As there was only evidence that eight players were administered ‘Thymosin’, it was an act of sheer bastardry for David Howman to charge the other 26 players with being administered Thymosin Beta-4. Clearly, those 26 players were wrongly convicted through a rogue decision. (See document 5)
- David Howman not only defamed Hird and the support staff but tried to influence the Court of Arbitration for Sport panel prior to the hearing. On 29 November 2015, The Age newspaper published comments from David Howman viz:. “Quite simply, if the BALCO cases it had been decided under the principles followed by the AFL tribunal, none of the BALCO people would have been sanctioned.”
“For us, the key issue [in appealing the AFL tribunal finding] was: Can
investigations be done in a way that BALCO and a whole lot of other previous
cases were run, or is there going to be a significant change due to the way the
AFL tribunal decided it?”
“The standard of proof that was used in the cases that led to the first non-
analytical sanctions through BALCO was quite different to (sic) the proof used in the AFL tribunal. So we are trying to find out what the correct standard is under the [WADA] Code.”
My Comment: This was an unacceptable urging/demand by Howman for the Court of Arbitration for Sport panellists to judge the Essendon players on the same criteria as those ‘involved’ in the BALCO scandal.
There was no similarity between BALCO and Essendon. In the BALCO cases,
Marion Jones and Tim Montgomery’s coach Trevor Graham sent a syringe
used by Montgomery to the authorities. Subsequently, Montgomery admitted
to using steroids and Marion Jones and admitted using performance enhancing
drugs. Baseball brothers, Jason and Jeremy Gambi both admitted using
steroids. On the other hand, no Essendon player admitted being administered a
banned substance and no Essendon official admitted to administering a banned
substance.
- In October 2015, the Herald Sun and The Australian, newspapers, published comments by Howman as follows:
“Essendon support staff are the ones you should be wearing the blame for the club’s supplements scandal, not the 34 past and present players who are set to face the court of arbitration for sport next month.”
“Howman, speaking to The Australian, couldn’t directly reference the Essendon case, that likened the support staff to ‘the team doctors on the Tour (de France)’”
“The bad guys are the ones advising or cajoling athletes to break the laws,”
“I don’t know who they are in that whole scenario, except it looks pretty obvious that they are members of the support staff.”
“I don’t want to name them because I don’t know sufficient detail but it is a bit like the team doctors on the Tour (de France) who were pushing the stuff that to the teams in such a way that they were the responsible guys, and the guys on the teams were being told you have got it take it to stay on the team.”
My Comment: Howman’s statements were so damaging, he should have been sacked instantly and should never have been allowed to work with an anti-doping agency ever again.
The Essendon support staff did not cajole the players to break the law.
No Essendon player was told to take a substance, banned or permitted, to stay
on the team.
At the time of Howman’s comments no player had been found guilty of being
administered a banned substance.
No Essendon support staff member has ever been found guilty of administering a banned substance to an Essendon player.
Howman said “I don’t know sufficient detail”, which begs the questions, why
did he defame the Essendon support staff and why did he appeal the AFL anti-
doping tribunal’s not guilty decision?
WADA incorrectly claimed that Stephen Dank was found guilty of administering
Thymosin Beta-4 to Penrith rugby league player Sandor Earl. WADA was guilty of misconduct, some say corruption, in presenting evidence that it must have known to be wrong.
On 14 October 2015, four weeks before WADA began the presentation of its case to the CAS panel, the NRL Anti-Doping tribunal found Earl guilty of use of CJC-1295; possession of CJC-1295; trafficking in Somatropin; trafficking in Clenbuterol; and attempted trafficking in Testosterone. It is inexcusable that WADA offered false evidence of Dank administering Thymosin Beta-4 to a WADA affiliated athlete. WADA was guilty of corruption in presenting evidence that it must have known to be blatantly wrong.
Even the ASADA website, in its Register of Findings, refers to Earl as having been found guilty of anti-doping violations in relation to four substances, none of them Thymosin Beta-4.
The second inexcusable aspect of the first strand in the cable is the accusation against Dank is based on the purported content of a text that has been altered from the original text. The actual text sent by Dank to Dean Robinson on 2 August 2011, states: “Hi mate. Just in consult for shoulder reconstruction. This case will be of interest to you. We are utilising Thymosin post surgically for one shoulder but prophylactically for the other. Thymosin is so effective in soft tissue maintenance.”
WADA submitted the following altered version of the text’s contents to the CAS panel, implying that Earl’s name was mentioned in the text. “On 2 August 2011, Mr Dank, in a text message to Mr Robinson, referred to his use of Thymosin for Mr Earl (my emphasis), adding Thymosin is so effective in soft tissue maintenance.”
WADA corruptly inserted Earl’s name into the text to advance the case against the 34 Essendon players. Such action was perjury.
Dank could not have been referring to Earl as claimed by WADA. In numerous
interviews, Earl told the public that he had both shoulders reconstructed in May and June 2011. Dank’s 2 August 2011 text referred to a patient in his mid-40s, who had only one shoulder reconstruction.
WADA lied about Dank testing for evidence of Thymosin Beta-4 being in the blood. There were no such tests at that time. Dr De Morton said it was sinister to test for IGF-1. He did not mention Thymosin Beta-4, as claimed by WADA.
WADA omitted exculpatory evidence which would have ended any doubt that the players were administered Thymomodulin and not Thymosin Beta-4. Inter alia, WADA didn’t table evidence that Dank and Melbourne Football Club doctor Don Bates exchanged texts for eight months from mid-2012. The texts showed that Melbourne was running a supplements regime by July 2012, which included Thymomodulin, Cerebrolysin and AOD-9604. It is illogical that Dank would use, as determined by the CAS panel, Thymosin Beta-4 at Essendon, and then change to Thymomodulin at Melbourne. Inter alia, the text messages included:
Dr Bates to Dank: “Sorry, you still up. Trengrove is not going to Darwin [for the 21 July 2012 match] so I don’t need the Thymomodulin for tomorrow.”
Dr Bates to Dank: “When can we book guys for injections. We will need to give
them times. Don.”
I sent 12 emails to Mr Howman and never received a reply.
On 20 May 2015, I sent David Howman a 13-page summary letter about AFL and ASADA corruption.
On 11 November 2015, I sent David Howman my 103-page ‘Complaint about the ASADA/AFL Joint Investigation’ document. That document includes over 500 points about wrong-doing/corrupt behaviour by ASADA and the AFL.
On 22 February 2017, I sent David Howman a 58-page document titled ‘Bruce Francis response to the 16 strands in the cable in Arbitral Award delivered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport. I subsequently updated the document in June 2017.
This document demolishes every one of the CAS’s 16 strands.
22 Likes