Wow. An arbitrator, who is described as "Landis' arbitrator" (which i assume means Landis got to "ok" him being added to the panel), was excluded from a key ruling last week.
http://www.latimes.com/sports/printe...ines-pe-sports
The excluded arbitrator, Bay Area attorney Christopher L. Campbell, vehemently protested in a written dissent that the others had not informed him they intended to confer on the matter before they issued the ruling May 1.
The "unprecedented and entirely inappropriate" action, Campbell wrote, "sends a clear message that the majority is unwilling to hear and consider valid arguments regarding a dispute."
Experts in arbitration law said Tuesday that the exclusion of one party's arbitrator from any deliberation is highly unusual and could raise doubts about the panel's commitment to fairness. "It's perplexing why the panel would not want to make sure every ounce of due process was afforded to Landis," said Robert G. Bailey, an arbitration expert at the University of Missouri School of Law.
Well, I can answer Mr. Bailey's question. Why would they exclude this guy at the risk of not appearing unbiased? Because they wanted to make sure they could include more "positive" tests to guarantee Landis would lose the case. And according to another news report, this arbitrator has been a "dissenter" in favor of an athlete a few times before. Landis is being set up here.