As many of you probably already read, but I thought I'd post just in case, Landaluze was just acquited on his testosterone charge by the highest authority (Court of Arbitration for Sport), on a technicality. The same person who analyzed the A sample also ran the B sample, which is a violation of protocol. To me however, the "technicalities" alone in the Landis case are far, far more serious than this one. I think this all but puts to bed the verdict that many of us had been predicting - that Landis will be acquitted at the very least on technical merits and will be cleared to race. This ruling places a solid precident right before the Landis trial, and will certainly be looked at by the US anti-doping agency. Of course, Landis also has very good evidence that he is truely innocent. We all hope he wins that arguement, but at the very least he will not get any suspension and should be clear to defend his title.
What gets me though, is how a higher entity can challenge a ruling. If a murderer is acquitted, a higher court can't step in and re-try the case. Yet in cycling, the UCI can step in and appeal. But, no we have the Landaluze case. The UCI will know they have no grounds/hopes to win on appeal, although they might try just to be ******.