We will probably never know if Landis really used synthetic testosterone, but anyone with half a brain who actually paid attention to the evidence knows he couldn't have been found guilty.
Exactly what the Landis disinformation campaign wants us to believe.
Now, Landaluze was aquitted by the Court of Arbitration for Sport just for simply having the same tech work on both A and B samples. Landis has 10 times that amount of proven errors and protocol mistakes. It will be interesting since precedent and protocol doesn't seem to matter in cycling.
The following is a statement from CAS regarding Landazule:
CAS said its own panel found "that the non-compliance with this standard constituted a procedural flaw serious enough to cause the invalidation of the anti-doping test."
The court said the technician in France involved in analyzing the B sample was also involved in analysis of the A sample, in violation of the international standards for accredited laboratories.
"With respect to the issue related to the analysis procedure conducted by the laboratory of Châtenay-Malabry, the Panel has dismissed all arguments raised by the athlete, except one," the CAS panel concluded. "It has been indeed established that the person who conducted the analysis of the B sample was also involved in analysis of the A sample, thus in violation of the international standard applicable to the accredited laboratories. The Panel considered that the violation of this technical direction was likely to affect the results of the analyses. The Panel has considered that the non-compliance with this standard constituted a procedural flaw serious enough to cause the invalidation of the anti-doping test.
The three-member panel rejected other arguments invoked by Landaluze relating to the analysis procedure.
The CAS panel also unanimously concluded that although the Spanish cyclist owed his acquittal to the flaw, it did not consider the decision to be a complete exoneration.
"The arbitrators have emphasized that the staff of the laboratory of Châtenay-Malabry had acted in good faith and that the overlap of the different analysis operations performed by the staff was due to a heavy workload in the laboratory," the decision noted. "The arbitrators have also specified that even though Iñigo Landaluze benefited from this flawed procedure to be acquitted, the CAS decision does not constitute a declaration of his innocence."
Per USADA, the details regarding the T/E test are irrelevant. He failed multiple IMRS tests that apparently where correctly performed.